Could it happen here?

Democracy is an odd beast. On one hand, it gives us all a voice, on the other it subjects us to the often unintelligent babble from those politicians that want power about what’s good for the people.

Yet for all its faults most of us in the ‘west’ couldn’t imagine a way of life without it. We could never imagine armed police beating us up because they fear we’ll vote the ‘wrong way’, we could never imagine ballot boxes being confiscated for fear of giving the ‘wrong result’, we could never imagine our leaders supporting violence against the people to prevent the people making a choice. Or so I thought…

What happened in Catalan recently was unimaginable and raises more questions than answers. Do the rights of a federation outweigh the right of an individual state? How dynamic should a constitution be? Is our individual or even collective need to identify with a group more important than economic common sense? Is democracy the worst form of government except all other forms as Churchill cited? For me the key question is could it happen here in Australia?

Before we come to that it’s interesting to compare how the British handled the Scottish question versus the Spanish handling of the Catalonian one. The former allowed the people to decide, the latter cited the constitution and literally dragged people kicking and screaming from the polling stations if they dared to show up. It’s important to note that the UK operates an unwritten constitution which means that it effectively moves with society. As our values and expectations change so does the constitution. Spain, like the US, have a written constitution which means it is what it is regardless of societal change. Of course, you can amend the document but Spain, instead of using it as a potential solution, appears to want to make the problem worse by enacting provisions to further isolate those who have been democratically elected in Barcelona.

So do the rights of a federation usurp the rights of a member state? Regardless of what is actually written in the constitution this is ultimately the question that Spain needs to answer and it looks like they are saying ‘yes’. The British clearly said ‘no’. Here in Australia we also have a documented constitution which makes it very difficult, nearly impossible, for a state to leave the federation. According to federal law a state that wants to secede it needs a referendum where the majority of other states as well as the majority of all Australians vote in favour of them leaving. Outside of federal law of course there is always the option of unilaterally declaring independence. This is far more interesting and far more complex with regards a way forward and is very similar to the goings on in Barcelona at the moment.

Here in Australia this did happen back in 1933 when Western Australia had its own referendum, without the rest of Australia, and voted to leave. They then petitioned their traditional lords and masters in London who wisely referred them back to the federation. Suddenly… nothing happened. Despite the voice of democracy speaking, and being heard, time and political happenstance negated the drive of WA to secede leaving Australia as one big happy family.

So how dynamic should a constitution be? If you are American or Spanish then apparently not very. There have been about 11,000 amendment proposals in the US and only 27 have made it, that’s less than 0.25% chance of change. In Spain, you need two thirds of the upper and lower house to agree, then have a general election where the new government has to repeat the process and then you need a referendum. Not much of appetite for change there either.

On the other side we have the British whose constitution has evolved since 1215 when the Magna Carter was written. Ironically social evolution has led the UK to have an unwritten constitution which basically means that constitutional change can be enacted by a simple Act of Parliament. Considering that the UK (Brexit aside for one moment) appears to be one of the more stable countries in the world, one might give a certain amount of credit to that approach.

Is our need to identify with a group more important than economic common sense? This is a hard one as identity is an emotive subject and can trump logic. Identity is a result of, amongst other things, shared values, history, ideology and language. Unlike Scotland for example where Gaelic is spoken by about 1% of the population, over 70% of Catalonians speak Catalan with nearly everyone being able to understand it.

There is no doubting that language is a difference between Barcelona and Madrid but what else? The values and ideology for the most part is the same, the people look the same and since 1469 they have had a shared history. To break away from Spain will mean Catalonia will have to leave the EU, create its own army, diplomatic corps and currency, take on a sizable chunk of the Spanish debt in addition to managing it’s own. Logically it just doesn’t seem worth it but ideologically… well?

Is democracy the worst form of government except all other forms as Churchill cited? Yes and this is a big problem for Spain. Even if you forget the most recent referendum, back in 2014 80% of Catalans voted for independence. In a western democracy can you ignore that even if you don’t like it? Probably not.

So finally for me the key question is could it happen here in Australia? All states have a shared language, culture, history, values and ideology. One might say that the identity of being ‘Australian’ outweighs that of being ‘Victorian’ or whatever state you live in. So I don’t think it could happen here but it’s a crazy world at the moment, who really knows?!