Canada and/or Australia incorporated into the United Kingdom?

[TheSevenLeggedFallyDowner]

I was just wondering if this is feasible at all and what type of POD it would require. Would it be possible for Canada and/or Australia to become an integral part of the UK on the same footing as England, Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland? I've heard this discussion about the British Raj, but that is always considered ASB for obvious reasons (cultural differences, population disparity, etc.). Australia and Canada however, have no such problems. They are both white, English speaking, and culturally similar. Also, while their populations are far larger than Scotland or Wales, they are each smaller than England, so it wouldn't have the same sort of overwhelming effect that Raj would have. In the present day (sorry, I don't know the historical stats), the UK has a population of roughly 61 million - 51 million in England, 5 million in Scotland, 3 million in Wales, and 2 million in Northern Ireland. If we add in Canada's 34 million and Australia's 22 million, that would bring the total population of the United Kingdom to 117 million.

Anyway, I don't know a whole lot about the early years of Canada and Australia, but it was just a thought that occured to me and I wondered if it were possible.

 

[pompejus]

I was just wondering if this is feasible at all and what type of POD it would require.

Earlier long range communications. It is hard to rule anything if it takes weeks for your messages/laws/rulings/etc to get through. So you give them more autonomy, which leads (or at least can lead) to independence.

 

[chornedsnorkack]

Earlier long range communications. It is hard to rule anything if it takes weeks for your messages/laws/rulings/etc to get through. So you give them more autonomy, which leads (or at least can lead) to independence.

The messages from Cornwall or Newcastle took a couple of days to reach London by rider until early 19th century. Scotland or Ireland to London, likewise.

By late 19th century, submarine telegraph cables were laid, and vital news got through in seconds.

Suppose that, after the Unions with Scotland (got 45 Commons seats and 16 representative peers in 1707) and Ireland (100 Commons seats, 28 lay peers and 4 bishops in 1801), say in 1867 Canada (then population 3,5 millions, compared to Ireland then 5,5 millions) were to get something like 65 seats in Commons, 18 lords and 2 bishops, allocated between provinces.

Who would they vote for?

 

[black angel]

well its not all of Canada, but Newfoundland, in 1934 they gave up self-rule and let themselves be run from London till 1949, the vote to join Canada almost didn't happen (the first ballot didn't have "join Canada" till the last second)

 

[Don Grey]

That would be cool but hard. Administration would be quite defficult given the circumstances. It would be only possible with the advances of comunication and transportion to work. And until that time comes they would have been quite good at running them selves like in the OTL by making this TL hard to accomplish.

 

[Julius Vogel]

Maybe this could have worked, but it would require lots of PODs.

One I think would have been a clearer constitutional framework friendly to representative federalism. So perhaps sometime in the 19th century someone, for some reason convinces the UK proper to draw up a classic federal constitutional structure (say like the US/Canada or Australia), where each state or provincial or national unit is clearly delineated and fits neatly into the federal structure. If such a thing existed then it would be a lot easier to plug in new units so rather than say a Canada or an Australia you may just get the constiuent states or provinces.

I don't know how well that would work though, given that provinces in N America, states in Australia and the nations or regions in the British Isles would all have quite different local interests that would often trump federal issues. Would we get a modern version of the HRE circles?