UK Lords: piecemeal approach to devolution places union under threat

The report states that the UK government should identify which public responsibilities are essential to the effective functioning of the union and which therefore need to remain at all times the responsibility of the UK Parliament and government. These core functions should then be protected in any further discussions regarding devolution settlements.

The committee said any future proposals for devolution should always be published alongside a detailed “Devolution Impact Assessment”. That should include an assessment of the proposals against core UK responsibilities to ensure that they will not have a negative impact on the union.

It should also address whether and how the proposed powers would lead to better outcomes for citizens in the region or nation in question, and what the impact would be on citizens living in other parts of the UK.

The report sets out a number of principles that should underpin any future consideration of devolution. These should help ensure that any further demands are considered in a coherent fashion, rather than proceeding in the “haphazard manner that has been evident to date”. The principles, which are explained in the report, include: solidarity; diversity; responsiveness; consent; subsidiarity and clarity.

Lord Lang of Monkton, chairman of the committee, said: “We must stop taking the union for granted. Since 1999, devolution has been largely demand-led and piecemeal. The committee saw no evidence of strategic thinking about its cumulative impact on the union as a whole.”

He added: “UK governments have failed to adapt to devolution. We urgently need ‘a new mindset’ within government. Devolved competencies now cover so many areas of public responsibility that the delivery of government policies often requires collaboration between the UK and devolved governments. This is not yet being done effectively.

“Instead of the ‘devolve and forget’ attitude of the past, the UK government should be engaging with the devolved administrations across the whole breadth of government policy.

“Not interfering, but co-operating and actively managing the cross-border and UK-wide implications of differing policy and service delivery choices. Shared and overlapping policy areas need to be handled sensibly, with each administration conscious of the interests of the others.”