Parliament of a Triple Union

[The Professor]

The premise here is that England and Scotland didn't unify in 1701 with Ireland joining 1801 but that all 3 join together in 1720s-50s.

What would be the initial composition of the Commons and Lords?

How would this change throughout time?

Is something like a semi-federal or internally devolved parliament possible? Ie where Parliament is made up of "national" blocs with some laws bloc only but others everyone?

How would development of the colonies impact this system?

 

[The Professor]

Any thoughts?

 

[AvatarOfKhaine]

It depends on how Parliament is precisely unified.

Do all the bodies meet before hand in a united advisory parliament somewhere and hash out what happens with each of their constituent countries and how elections will work and what powers all the MPs will have and what if anything will be devolved. It also depends as mentioned on the franchise as regards religion in terms of what kind of powers are seen as needing to be devolved.

It basically is something that is so divorced from OTL that its hard to fully and reasonably say in my opinion due to how much would change in these different 1700s-1720 or later in regards to internal developments in each of the three kingdoms. I can probably think of some ideas, but its hard to argue why one system would be chosen over another.

On a similar note the colonies would be hard to tell as it would depend on how the process started. If the parliaments moved together because they all voted on it themselves with the English parliament being supportive but not actively seeking it like OTL then we might see the various local assemblies of the colonies expect the same process to happen for them and to petition for it or decide they want to retain their independence. If the English Parliament pushed for it more like OTL then its hard to know how the colonies will react except for seeing how they all responded in OTL and seeing how much really changes from the colonial perspective.

 

[The Professor]

depends on how Parliament is precisely unified.

As close to OTL as reasonable. Basically the first union is delayed and coincides with growing desire to include Ireland, perhaps as a way to help offset English dominance.

Do all the bodies meet before hand in a united advisory parliament somewhere and hash out what happens with each of their constituent countries and how elections will work and what powers all the MPs will have and what if anything will be devolved. It also depends as mentioned on the franchise as regards religion in terms of what kind of powers are seen as needing to be devolved.

How did they meet OTL to unify England and Scotland? Like that but including Ireland.

It basically is something that is so divorced from OTL

Which bit do you mean?

 

[AvatarOfKhaine]

As close to OTL as reasonable. Basically the first union is delayed and coincides with growing desire to include Ireland, perhaps as a way to help offset English dominance.

How did they meet OTL to unify England and Scotland? Like that but including Ireland.

Which bit do you mean?

In terms of the timing, finding a way to get the Union to fulfill its purpose and have a situation similar to the Darien failure affect both Scotland and Ireland to make them want to be governed more directly especially as the Irish Parliament is still mostly dominating by Protestants rather than real representatives of the Irish populace.

 

[The Professor]

In terms of the timing, finding a way to get the Union to fulfill its purpose and have a situation similar to the Darien failure affect both Scotland and Ireland to make them want to be governed more directly especially as the Irish Parliament is still mostly dominating by Protestants rather than real representatives of the Irish populace.

I don't understand what you mean as regards the purpose of union, especially as Scotland and Ireland were already directly governed by their king and their parliament.

 

[AvatarOfKhaine]

I don't understand what you mean as regards the purpose of union, especially as Scotland and Ireland were already directly governed by their king and their parliament.

As in, why has the triple union turned into a political aswell as personal union. Why do Ireland and Scotland want this when it took a lot for Scotland to agree to the idea historically and when it was a decision by the English Parliament and not Irish historically to dissolve the latter.

Essentially, how do you replicate the reasons for the Union of Great Britain and the Union of Great Britain and Ireland in a different time and get reasons for both parliaments to be dissolved into the English or all three to be dissolved into a new body at the same time in a perfect confluence. This isn't impossible but it is important to understand that both unions were not made into political union by the choice of the Scottish or Irish parliaments but fundamentally the decision of the English Parliament and then British Parliament and so you essentially need a different driving agenda in the Unionists from OTL.

 

[The Professor]

both unions were not made into political union by the choice of the Scottish or Irish parliaments but fundamentally the decision of the English Parliament and then British Parliament and so you essentially need a different driving agenda in the Unionists from OTL.

That's not true, however domineering the English Parliament was, both unions required an legislative act passed by each assenting parliament. It's why each legislation is referred to as Acts of Union.

 

[AvatarOfKhaine]

That's not true, however domineering the English Parliament was, both unions required an legislative act passed by each assenting parliament. It's why each legislation is referred to as Acts of Union.

Yes but the Irish parliament was stacked and unrepresentative of Ireland, and the Scottish MPs were all but bribed to support the union.

Again, this kind of thing could be done but its hard to see how much would be different from OTL given that you're asking for 20 years of divergence (from 1700ish) to your preferred date of political union that make it hard to know who would be in these bodies though I might take a look at the rough composition if we assume no changes in any of them via a butterfly net.

Basically while I like small PoDs this one is hard to see how it would distinct without having some interesting people in this new body who would essentially be OC and it be assumed that they existed but were not noteworthy in history.

 

[The Professor]

Yes but the Irish parliament was stacked and unrepresentative of Ireland, and the Scottish MPs were all but bribed to support the union.

But it was hardly as one sided as you claim though. The unions weren't a case of the English Parliament going "let's annex the parliament of Scotland/Ireland".

Again, this kind of thing could be done but its hard to see how much would be different from OTL given that you're asking for 20 years of divergence (from 1700ish) to your preferred date of political union that make it hard to know who would be in these bodies though I might take a look at the rough composition if we assume no changes in any of them via a butterfly net.

Basically while I like small PoDs this one is hard to see how it would distinct without having some interesting people in this new body who would essentially be OC and it be assumed that they existed but were not noteworthy in history.

I'm not asking for a detailed list of MPs and Lords here nor a narrative timeline. I'm asking how a triple political union would be reasonably composed in a way consistent with the times.

 

[AvatarOfKhaine]

But it was hardly as one sided as you claim though. The unions weren't a case of the English Parliament going "let's annex the parliament of Scotland/Ireland".


I'm not asking for a detailed list of MPs and Lords here nor a narrative timeline. I'm asking how a triple political union would be reasonably composed in a way consistent with the times.

I wasn't trying to say it was entirely one sided, but I was mainly making the case that a different political union would require similar-esque circumstances.

Ofcourse not, but I'm saying your OP's limitations make it impossible to know without guestimating and assuming no butterflies and that to say anything more would be pointless as your bounds mean its impossible to know without being either too rigid to OTL or too radical.

 

[The Professor]

I wasn't trying to say it was entirely one sided, but I was mainly making the case that a different political union would require similar-esque circumstances.

Ofcourse not, but I'm saying your OP's limitations make it impossible to know without guestimating and assuming no butterflies and that to say anything more would be pointless as your bounds mean its impossible to know without being either too rigid to OTL or too radical.

Apologies if I seem defensive it's just it sounded like you were trying to say union was all England's idea and wouldn't happen ATL.

It can't be denied that Union was useful for the English Parliament and I think most offers would be acceptable to them in this period. The Irish Parliament are more likely to offer if they think it would preserve them and I think that's more likely under a reign like George II. For Scotland I think it depends on perception of English dominance and money.

How important are the circumstances of this union on its composition? I'd like to discussion the composition first.

 

[AvatarOfKhaine]

Apologies if I seem defensive it's just it sounded like you were trying to say union was all England's idea and wouldn't happen ATL.

It can't be denied that Union was useful for the English Parliament and I think most offers would be acceptable to them in this period. The Irish Parliament are more likely to offer if they think it would preserve them and I think that's more likely under a reign like George II. For Scotland I think it depends on perception of English dominance and money.

How important are the circumstances of this union on its composition? I'd like to discussion the composition first.

It's definitely worth discussing, and I'll do some reading on it tomorrow on JSTOR after I sleep tonight and give the idea a proper crack and list a couple of the assumptions first and then discuss one possible make-up.

 

[The Professor]

It's definitely worth discussing, and I'll do some reading on it tomorrow on JSTOR after I sleep tonight and give the idea a proper crack and list a couple of the assumptions first and then discuss one possible make-up.

Thank you kindly .

 

[The Professor]

Anyone else have any ideas?