Rise up, Englishmen, to save the Union

Liam Byrne says the English must be less apathetic about the United Kingdom, and about the threat of Scottish independence that looms in next week’s elections As another celebration of our patron saint passes and the Scottish elections loom, now is the time to hear a few more English patriots raising a glass not just to England but to our United Kingdom.

It feels a little odd at times that we do not hear more English voices speak out against the error of Scottish independence. We know the Union is hugely important to Scotland. Two and a half million Scots have relatives in England; hundreds of thousands work south of the border and the ‘Union dividend’ is worth some £10 billion.

But the Union is of fundamental importance to England too, not just economically but for English society. There is perhaps no better illustration of our economic ties than the UK’s huge financial services powerhouse. The UK has rapidly consolidated its global leadership of the industry in the last decade. But £8 billion pounds of the business is based in Scotland, 90 per cent of which is linked to the rest of the UK.

But the Union is more than a cash nexus. It is fundamental to our national identity, of which Englishness is part. When the countries of the Union came together, the state of England was transformed from a middleranking power playing on the stage of Europe to a world-beater.

On St George’s Day this year, the Home Office proudly flew the Union flag, and I popped along to Southwark to witness the swearing in of 60 new British citizens amidst the civic finery of London’s oldest borough (motto ‘United We Serve’). Such occasions, when ministers are invited to say a few words, are always a good moment to collect a few thoughts about why we are so proud to be British.

I keep my message simple. We may not have a manifest destiny codified in an American Dream, and we may not be animated hour to hour by a Continental joie de vivre but we have something else in this country, which is an indomitable spirit. What is its anatomy?

Well, it is partly the sense of adventure that drove Brits to scale Everest first, and to sail round the world faster than anyone else, and which the Union can trace back to its earliest imperial explorers. It is partly our native inventiveness, an inventiveness that has conceived everything from gravity to penicillin to the world wide web. And it is partly our sense of decency mixed with courage that inspired our stand against Continental dictators, and which today leads us to deploy more peacekeepers abroad than any other country bar the United States of America.

I can think of few who would argue that the English could take all the credit on this balance sheet. It is fundamentally a spirit born in the alchemy of the Union, and today we owe that spirit an extraordinary debt.

Britain has emerged from the last two decades of globalisation as one of the world’s most successful societies. A higher share of our GDP is devoted to trade than any other nation in the OECD. Uniquely, we are members of the UN Security Council, the OECD, the G8, the EC, Nato, the Commonwealth and the Council of Europe, and we have a track record of leadership on the international stage on issues ranging from peacekeeping, to climate change to ending Third World debt. We are one of the world’s largest and richest economies.

Could England have achieved this on its own? Could we maintain this on our own in the years to come? Unlikely. So why on earth could we consider now messing around with our DNA?

Today, it is a commonplace to declare that in modern Britain each of us marshalls a multiplicity of identities. I am the grandson of Irish immigrants. But I have three generations of family from Birmingham where I live today. I spent years growing up in Essex and a bit of me will always be proud to be an ‘Essex boy’ (indeed I still drive an Escort, although I’ve just lost the white socks). When I go to Europe I feel European. As a Catholic, part of me is naturally defined by over two millennia of ecclesiastical history. But I am British and proud of it.

The point is that Britain is a diverse place, yet my citizenship links me not just to England but to my country. When I talk to new British citizens fresh from swearing their oath, I am always struck by how deeply moved even the cynical become. I’ve seen old men weep buckets of tears from beginning to end.

And what often moves new citizens most is how, before our flag, lots of different people, from all walks of life, from all parts of the world, who have fled wars, or moved for love or work, have all chosen to swear one allegiance to one country, its values and its sovereign. It is that expression of unity and common purpose between people who are so very different that is so very inspiring.

Surely our task in Britain today is not to plan a separation, but to combine better a Christian, Muslim, Hindu, Jewish, atheist, English, Welsh, Scottish and Northern Irish Britain into one United Kingdom.

Part of how we do this must be to find new ways of ensuring that citizenship gives better expression to what we have in common, across our diversity rather than what sets us apart. The citizenship ‘deal’, of course, has to be right. Citizenship is not about just what you get. It’s about what you give. So we should look afresh at whether newcomers should ‘earn’ their citizenship other than by simply being here, working and paying tax.

We should ask whether we have the right balance of privileges between settlement the right to be here permanently — and citizenship. Are the incentives to become a ‘citizen’, as opposed to a ‘settler’, sufficient? But what would it say about England if we chose to separate from a country with which we have so much in common?

I recently republished the book on British life on which we test everyone applying for citizenship — and from this month, everyone applying to settle permanently too. Throughout its pages, you see the history, values, economy and what Churchill called ‘the long continuity of our institutions’ intimately entwined.

An English argument for dissolving the Union would be a lamentable admission that, in this age of diversity, we were unable to master the task of marshalling, combining and celebrating what is in common between our modern plurality of identities. It would be an appalling resignation — and frankly a dangerous augury of the future.

The United Kingdom would be tragically diminished if Scotland sued for divorce. And in a torn UK, our sense of England our past and our future — would shrink. So as polling day in Scotland hurtles towards us, I am one proud Englishman who will be standing up for the Union.

Liam Byrne is the Minister for nationality, citizenship and immigration.