INDEPENDENCE FOR ENGLAND?
Since England has no constitutional or political existence of itself it could be argued that England is the last British colony. Indeed the Encyclopaedia Britannica describes England thus:
‘Outside the British Isles, England is often erroneously considered synonymous with the island of Great Britain (England, Scotland, and Wales) and even with the entire United Kingdom. Despite the political, economic, and cultural legacy that has secured the perpetuation of its name, England no longer officially exists as a governmental or political unit—unlike Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland, which all have varying degrees of self-government in domestic affairs. It is rare for institutions to operate for England alone. Notable exceptions are the Church of England (Wales, Scotland, and Ireland, including Northern Ireland, have separate branches of the Anglican Communion) and sports associations for cricket, rugby, and football (soccer). In many ways England has seemingly been absorbed within the larger mass of Great Britain since the Act of Union of 1707.' (Encyclopaedia Britannica, 2004)
The CEP has been campaigning since 1998. We have never campaigned for more recognition than Scotland was granted but at every turn we are assailed with nay-sayers who assert that England is too big for national devolution or as a part of a federal UK. Others state that they do not want another layer of politicians. We have continually countered these opponents with valid arguments quoting the UN charter of rights for nations and peoples and practical solutions, but it falls on the deaf ears of England haters.
England is too big is their mantra. So let it be. Let us accept that England is too big to be given national devolution within the current UK or as a single part of a federal UK. In that case England must have always been 'too big' for the UK. Indeed complaints of England centricity have always come from the fringes. An England that governed itself within the Union through its own Parliament would be less likely to dominate the UK. This has often been recognised by the 'fringes' and many voters in Scotland, Wales and N Ireland have no objection to a devolved Parliament for the people of England.
The main objection lies within the British government and can only be based on its unspoken desire to maintain its dominance over the rest of the UK. None-the-less I say again let us now accept that England is too big for any kind of union and so the logical conclusion is that we must have independence.
Let us also consider how many UK MPs of English constituencies (they should not be called English as that would be an unpardonable assumption on our part) have the wider interests of England at heart? Very few! At best they are conflicted -you cannot serve 2 or even 3 masters. The Party and British interests will always come first. Let them be put out of their misery and oblige them stand for England alone. Perhaps those with ambitions to tread the boards of the world stage would then say 'but England is too small'. Indeed David Cameron has said that he did not want to be PM only of England.
England has been the same size for over a thousand years and as Goldilocks said is 'just right' for us. We 'little Englanders' have never subscribed to the expansion of our boundaries. The so-called English empire was engineered by our French derived monarchs and British Imperialism was enthusiastically embraced by the rest of the then UK not least by contributing to a significant number of West Indian and African American surnames. Indeed the contribution of Scots has been memorialised in at least two books; Scotland's Empire by T M Devine and The Scottish Empire by Michael Fry. Both wax lyrical about Scotland's contribution to Empire.
Let us then free ourselves from the yoke of the UK. The game's afoot: Follow your spirit, and upon this charge Cry 'God for Harry, England, and Saint George!'
Scilla Cullen
Campaign for an English Parliament
