alternatehistory.com

The Kilbrandon Commission
The Kilbrandon Commission (known more formally as the 'Royal Commission on the Constitution') was a lengthy commission instigated by the Wilson government to examine in detail the nature of the British constitution. Chiefly, it was concerned with the roles that the individual constituent nations of the United Kingdom played in the running of the Union and how they influenced governmental policy. It considered models of national devolution, federalism and confederalism as well as the division of the Union into seperate sovereign states. (Northern Ireland, the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man were dealt with separately from the core issue of Scotland and Wales). Running between 1969 and 1973, the final report was delivered to the Conservative government of Edward Heath and rejected independence or federalism in favoured of directly-elected devolved assemblies for Scotland and Wales. As Northern Ireland held a referendum upon sovereignty that overwhelming supported the Union, it was deemed the status quo was largely successful with only an increase in the number of MPs suggested.

Whilst some would argue that an in-depth look at the constitutional system of the Union was long overdue, others would point to the previously-unprecedented rise of nationalist parties in the years prior as a source of action. Whilst Wales would reject devolution in the years after the findings of the Commission, Scotland would simultaneously support and lose the requirements for devolution outlined by the government of the time. Would there have been a way to trigger the complete departure of Scotland and Wales into independent states at or around the publication of the Commission? It seems possible that Scotland could (under some circumstances, at least) been sufficiently inspired to support full-blown independence. Wales is a much harder task. I am thinking on the level of a Union referendum on the Commission findings; full-scale referendums in Wales and Scotland (maybe elsewhere too) giving voters the option to support the status quo, devolution, or independence. If a simple majority among voters is required - not a percentage limit such as the one set during the Scottish vote - is this possible? (The Union must fracture no later than 1980). As a further point, what would be the political, economic and social ramifications of such a drastic collapse in Unionist fortunes?
Top