To the Guardian
John Harris identifies a fault line in British politics that also cuts through the EU debate: the centralisation of power. The UK is the most centralised country in Europe, behind even its smaller neighbours such as Belgium, Austria and Spain. Despite recent promises of regional devolution, citizens feel increasingly shut out of decision-making at all levels – from local government to European-wide institutions. Antipathy towards the EU, as with politics in its broadest sense, is symptomatic of this sense of powerlessness. The growing distance between the governors and the governed might move voters simply to get rid of one layer of the political elite, if given the chance.
But the recognition that power is concentrated in the hands of a few is not confined to Leavers. It is revealing that, when challenged on the EU’s democratic deficit, Remainers deflect the criticism by pointing to Westminster and our own concentration of power. This is not an adequate response, and the EU must take democratic reform seriously. But England’s own political alienation suggests that we might not feel as hostile to the European project if our domestic democracy were in better shape. To solve problems abroad, democracy must begin at home. It is a basic tenet of democracy that power should remain as close as possible to the people. This principle of subsidiarity may yet prove a remedy for both European and English disquiet. (Frances Foley, University of Birmingham)
I sbsolutely agree. The rot began with Thatcher, who neutered local government, abolishing County Councils, and removing any meaningful powers from local government. The problem is not that there are too many people involved in government in Brussels; the problem is that power is concentrated in too few, inexperienced and incompetent hands in London, constantly experimenting with new and stupid ideas, only to be replaced in in months with new placeholders who know nothing. Brussels isn’t the problem, Westminster is. Devolve again; that is the Epicurean answer.
I absolutely agree as well. In the U.S., though, which looks “devolved” because power is theoretically segmented into states, local governments, and “separation of powers.” In actual fact, those legal categories mask the reality which is that the overwhelming preponderance of power lies in the hand-in-glove relationship between corporations and the near-impenetrable Federal bureaucracies. The legal categories (state, local, county, etc.) are either subservient or buried under avalanches of power–both of money and force. Worse, they are easy prey for the unaccountable concentration of power into corporate and Deep State hands.
“Impenetrable” because corporate control of media–national and local–mouths government policies rather than challenges them and deprives the people of information they need to reform the system. So, of course, we often look like we’re a nation of ignorant yahoos when, in reality keeping people ignorant of the realities in both domestic and foreign policy, is the major goal of the powers-that-be.
Many of those who try to get at the truth–“whistleblowers”–are either in exile or in jail and ignored by corporate power. So, it seems to me that, above all, the absence of accountability of power is THE root of political frustration in the West.
Just a correction, Thatcher didn’t abolish all county councils, only the GLC and the metropolitan county councils, which tended to be run by Labour. The powers of the GLC were mostly transferred to the London boroughs, the powers of the metropolitan county councils were transferred to the metropolitan districts, now called ‘unitary authorities.’ Rural (Tory run) county councils such as West Sussex, Surrey and Devon are very much still in existence! The GLC has since been replaced by the GLA and a directly elected mayor. But like you, I think local government should have more power, though maybe not as much as they did in the 80s. At one point, many in the Liverpool council wanted the city to be independent! (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-29953611)
The only trouble with devolving power in the UK now is that it could increase support for nationalism. When Labour created the Scottish Parliament and Welsh Assembly in 1999, they thought it would negate any nationalist sentiment. Fifteen years later, 45% of Scots voted for independence. I worry that devolution would only increase regional loyalties and undermine support for the British nation.