To What Extent Does Multi-Level Government Increase Democracy and Bring Government Closer to the People?

The reforms of Devolution where power was transferred from Westminster to different elected bodies around the country. This makes the UK more democratic as power is no longer centralised and areas such as parts of Scotland, Wales and Ireland will not be neglected. However England itself does not have its own assembly and the fact that we cannot vote on certain things in areas of the UK, but everyone can vote in policies in England could be seen to be undemocratic. Overall this reform however has made the UK more democratic as it means areas will not be forgotten about and countries and areas within the UK can get specific things that that area may want or need more then others.

The unitary government is often described as a centralized government. It is a government in which all powers held by the government belong to a single, central agency. The central government creates local units of government for its own convenience. Most of the government in the world are unitary, Great Britain being one of them. One single central organ is Parliament it holds all the power of the British government. Local governments do exist but solely to relieve Parliament of burdens it could perform

In the UK there are three main regional assemblies in the country that have developed power: the Scottish Parliament, the Welsh Assembly and the Northern Ireland Assembly.

The levels of government are Central, (which involve the Monarchy, the House of Commons, and the House of Lords), Regional, (which involve Devolved parliaments) and Local, (which involve Local authorities, country councils and Metropolitan councils). Each level contains a variety of different organisations and branches of government which help to keep the country and the public services running smoothly and effectively. All branches of the government

Currently Scotland has its own parliament in Edinburgh which can deal with chosen devolved issues from Westminster. Originating mainly from the YES YES campaign in 1999 headed by the Labour Government. This means that Scotland has control over

Scottish Independence - Good or Bad Scotland is at a turning point. The 300-year old Union is some say no longer fit for purpose. Some say it was never designed for the 21st century world and it is well past it's sell by date and is holding Scotland back. The Scottish people voted to move forward, with a new, more Scottish approach from an SNP government. But many oppose these views saying that Scotland needs the rest of the UK and that the economic and social problems caused by independence would be catastrophic to the relationships between Scotland and the rest of the UK. In any case the government has published a white paper setting out a vision of independence and responsibility in the modern world. But is this idea beneficial to our country?

The dispersion of power in the UK varies greatly, each country having a different seat on the level-pegging of power over one another - in particular, policy areas, due to the various referendums, including ones already mentioned. This is called an asymmetrical devolution system.

The centrepiece of Labour 's programme of constitutional reform was undoubtedly devolution. This was achieved with remarkably few problems. There now seems no likelihood that the new arrangements could be reversed, even by a Conservative administration. The election on 6 May 1999 of a Parliament in Scotland, with extensive powers of primary legislation as well as tax-raising, and an Assembly in Wales, with powers of secondary legislation only, will have a profound impact on governance within the UK. In

In recent years, it has been increasingly apparent that European Parliament election turnout is on the decline, with just 35.6% of British citizens casting their vote in 2014. This is remarkably low, especially when viewed alongside other national decisions such as the referendum for Britain to leave the European Union, which received a staggering 72.2% turnout. However, this decline was not

Before devolution in Wales, parliamentary debates were unreliable and cancelled for little to no reason. Welsh MP’s worked within an outdated system that prohibited their ability to make changes. The people want to keep a devolved government even if they secede from the EU. This form of government is closer to the people and allows them to interact, or have more of a say in the decisions being made, therefore it is highly significant to a majority of the citizens.

Within the United Kingdom, a recurring issue has been raised regarding the political position of Scotland and how the Scottish Parliament could better govern the country. To establish whether the quality of life could be improved for the Scottish people, key events, devolution, and the Scottish Parliament must be evaluated and analysed. The argument for greater power in decision making and the ability to implement change for the citizens of Scotland, has been central to Scottish politics for some time.

For decades the political relationship between the sovereign nation of England and the slightly independent country of Scotland has caused much discourse for some Scot citizens. For almost 300 years the decisions that directly affected Scotland were decided from the Parliament at Westminster Palace in London. This was not changed until rather recently when Scotland voted on its own Parliament held in the capital of Edinburgh. But for some political parties and special interest groups this act of recourse is not enough and they called for a national vote to answer the question “should Scotland be an independent country?” The deciding referendum that was voted upon on September 18 of this year was the climax of the political buildup between

Devolution is the transfer of powers from a central body to subordinate regional bodies. In Scotland, Devolution was set up to restore legitimacy to a system of government that reflected Scottish preferences. The reason behind the demand for Scottish self-government is that Scotland had the historic status of nationhood before the Union of 1707 and within the Union, has a different set of legal, educational and religious institutions that reinforce a Scottish identity.

However, there was a larger decrease in the percentage of people fluent in the Welsh language and people born in Wales; disputing the increase in national identity and showing change in the make-up of the population. The 1997 devolution referendum shows a striking difference in statistics when compared to the previous referendum. Unlike the results in 1979, there was very strong support and turnout for devolution from fluent Welsh speakers. Interestingly, districts that showed the lowest levels of support and votes for devolution in 1979 such as West Glamorgan, Mid Glamorgan, Gwent and Dyfed, were also areas that recorded the highest swings in favour in 1997. This suggests that between the two referenda there has been a stark change in public opinion towards devolution proposals, possibly suggesting that the Welsh people are more unified in agreement and a stronger sense of national identity. On the other hand, the narrow difference of 6,721 votes, low turnout of 50.3% and the dominance of abstentions (49.7% of the population) reveals a possible indifferent attitude from the Welsh people towards the direction of Wales’

Devolution allocates central powers and levels of governance within a state to share decision-making. In the United Kingdom changes in the government structure had an impact in planning policy and their function; from the devolving creation of the Welsh Assembly and Scottish parliament due to the unification of England, Wales, and Scotland. The election of New Labour in 1997 facilitated devolution and it created a pressure to establish distinctive and more culturally aligned policies. Economic globalization and the growing wish to increase economical competition have driven regions and urban areas to improve their status, requiring the planning system to reorientate their role, calling the national power into question.