here: Unterschied zwischen den Versionen

Version vom 25. Februar 2020, 21:06 Uhr

Comment devolution

1

Is devolution really something that should be implemented or could it be negative for the affected regions?

First it should be mentioned that the regions would become more independent and could focus on solving their own problems. Moreover the regions have the same power as central authorities and it would be equal. There are also negative points, for example that the regions do not care about the others and make decisions that affect them in a bad way. Furthermore systems like the school system could change and it would be hard to change schools and to cope with it.

To sum up, devolution could be positive for smaller regions to focus on their own problems, but only if there is still an active exchange with the other regions to avoid conflicts.

13

I would like to comment on the question if devolution is a good thing for smaller countries or if it is a bad thing. There are some positive and negative points I have found. Let’s start with the positive points.

First is to mention that the people who are living in this countries are getting treated similar because they are exactly like other countries in the world. Additionally is to say that they have a better chance to do what they really want or need. Another point is that these countries are now able to focus on their own things. At least is to mention that concepts of law could be realize. Now I am going to list up the negative points which I have pointed out. One importante argument is that these countries can get overwhelmed by the situation because they have to deal with things by their own. It could also happen that the countries loose importante connections to other big countries for example England. Additionally is to mention that these countries have to solve their problems by their own. The importance point is that challenges like climate change become more difficult to deal with.

All in all is to say that countries together are even better than alone. Additionally they are stronger and they are able to reach more goals.

15

If devolution is something good or bad is a difficult question. There are pro and contra arguments. In the following I am going to comment on this question.

First devolution is the statutory delegation of powers from the central government of a sovereign state to govern at a subnational level, such as a regional or local level. It is a form of administrative decentralization. Meaning that the regions could be more independent and make their own choices. They could decide according to their own needs. They also could get more independent with what they do with their resources. Lastly the concepts of law are getting easier, bills could be realized/passed easier because they do not need the other countries’ agreement.

On the other side do these regions have to solve their problems/ conflicts on their own without support from the country. The challenges like the climate change become more difficult to deal with and the negotiation/ trade might become more complex. Another point is that the ministers might not be as experienced as those of the Uk.

All in all one can say that there are positive and negative aspects, so everyone should decide on heir own if devolution is a good or bad thing.

10

The devolution concern the countries Scotland, Northirland, Wales and England which currently take part in the United Kingdom. The issue that is touched upon here is if the devolution should be realized is difficult to comment on because there are several positive and negative aspects which have to be considered.

First of all, it is important to consider that along the devolution the concerned countries get more independant. That means they have to solve problems and conflicts on their own without support from London what could lead to the situation that the independant countries are politically more fragile because there would be no unity as a global power. Considering the fact that concerned countries get more independant is linked to the case that they more free to decide what they do with their ressources. Additionally, the devolution effects different social aspects like less unity, less solidarity and less feeling of holding belonging together if the boundary gets broken, which can have drastic effects on the collaboration especially with global problems like the climate change. Another important point is that the devolution provokes more bureaucracy in different domains. One of them is the politically sector because there must be make lots of decisions on who is going to decide what. In addition to that there is also the econimc domain which refers to negotiation and trade what could become more complex. Another sector includes social aspects like education because in the concerned countries ( Scotland, Northirland, Wales and England ) could develope different school regulations. You also have to take in consideration is that ministers in the recently independant countries might not be as experienced and skilled as those of the United Kingdom, because they have way much more experience and responsobility if they have worked in the House of Parliament.

In contrast to that you have to consider that the decentralization enables the local governments to get more independant by deciding according to their own needs. With reference to the UK the local needs and request get lost because the central government has to handle not only those request of the different countries but also the global problems like trade and other aspects as a world power. In that context you should scrutinize why the central government in London deserve so much power although the countries of the United Kingdom would be able to lead a local government that can focus on their own needs. In context to that it is way much easier to pass or realize concepts of law or bills because the local governments do not need the other countries agreement. Another aspect is that the different countries have a chance to revolunionate their country. Politicans in local institution are able to address people direct and to handle the general public´s concern.

To come to a final conclusion, I think that the devolution should be realized because if the UK does not try the government would never know how it would turn out if they do not try. So far it might be possible to outline a temporary decentralization to gain experience and to decide if that concept should be realized over long term. And in the case the concept does not work out as expected it is still possible to remove the old system.

6

Opinions are divided when it comes to implementing a devolution move, but what is right now? Is it a progress or rather a step backwards for a country? First of all, I think that such a give off the distribution of laws makes sense, since a country has sole power over its own country. They would be independent and it spares annoying discussions due to differences of opinion between them and other regions. Thus, individual, small and family-like regions are formed, which do not have to adapt to other countries. However, this leads to a strong separation of regions within the state. Besides, the exclusive power has the consequence that there is no clear unity in one country and cooperation can be difficult. So it can lead to problems, particularly with regard to mobility in the individual regions, so the people are no longer able to travel duty-free everywhere, for example. All in all, I think that a devolution move is not a good process because it separates a country with consequences like clearance charge. I know that there are many advantages of a devolution move like the reduction of discussions and the sole power of the regions, but the risk is too high that a country gets too separated because of the isolation of the individual countries of state.