This chapter examines the post-WWII era where the idea of exclusive Convention Peoples Party (CPP) radicalism and Pan-Africanism rests most thickly. It argues that debates about the CPP’s Citizenship Act complexifies its pan-African credentials. Also, the CPP’s political philosophy was not radical and distinct compared to its opponents, as it fits within a broad liberal/ cosmopolitan tradition rooted in Europe and America. So-called conservatives were oftentimes more radical, as shown in parliamentary debates on the “Motion of Destiny.” Contentious discussions about whether to achieve self-government by proclamation or negotiation, are obscured by the dyad of radical versus conservative. Debates about federalism, regionalism, and unitary government remain unexplored because the grand narrative rebukes the opponents of Kwame Nkrumah’s socialist agenda, while granting him hero status. Nkrumah’s prolific writing and the squeezing out of his opponents after he became Prime Minister in 1957 are identified as the architects of Ghana’s grand narrative.

The governance arrangements of the UK, and even its borders, have developed over many centuries and will continue to be subject to change. For a long period after its creation the UK maintained highly centralised governance arrangements based upon the sovereign Parliament in Westminster. Over the twentieth century these arrangements enabled central government to introduce far-reaching measures, from state pension provision to the National Health Service and comprehensive education. Nonetheless, because Westminster is dominated by MPs representing English constituencies, its legislative output was not always constrained by the wishes of MPs representing seats in Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland. This chapter traces how discontent at the degree of centralisation in the UK has been answered by the devolution of law-making power to institutions in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. Each of these sets of devolved institutions has different powers and functions, which will be explored in turn (including an evaluation of how these arrangements have changed since devolution was introduced in 1998). Only then can we consider whether devolution has provided a solution to the challenges inherent in governing a country as complicated as the UK.