Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

 
 
Saturday, 30th August 2008

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Tories split over plan to limit Scots MPs' say on English laws



Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 02 July 2008
A TORY task force's plans to restrict the ability of Scots MPs to vote on "English-only" laws have split senior Conservatives and drawn scorn from other political parties.
Kenneth Clarke, the former chancellor, yesterday released his long-awaited report on the West Lothian Question. At present, Scottish MPs can vote on measures which do not affect Scotland, fuelling resentment among some English voters.

In the five-page report, Mr Clarke calls for MPs with Scottish seats to be banned from voting on English bills at the committee and report stages, where most of the significant changes to laws are made. But they would still be able to vote at the final stage, allowing the government to get its legislation through, albeit in a watered-down form.

Mr Clarke insisted the proposals could help to save the Union, adding: "It's no good waiting until the English get resentful."

However, the former foreign secretary, Sir Malcolm Rifkind, whose own ideas for constitutional reform were rejected by the task force, warned that the measures would lead to accusations that the Conservatives had created "two classes of MP".

Sir Malcolm had called for an English Grand Committee to consider matters that applied only to English constituents.

He said that under Mr Clarke's plans controversial laws, such as the fox-hunting ban and the introduction of tuition fees, would still be pushed through by Scots MPs.

The plans would allow all MPs to vote on a bill at second reading, meaning that it could be approved in principle, even if it was unacceptable to a majority of MPs representing English seats.

"Thus the legislation on tuition fees, foundation hospitals or fox-hunting would still have been approved," Sir Malcolm said.

He added that restricting MPs from voting at stages of a bill would "for the first time in our history, (create] a prohibition on MPs voting in divisions that were taking place, not in committee, but in the House as a whole".

Sir Malcolm continued: "As over 100 MPs could be affected by such a prohibition, this would give rise to accusations, however unfair, of there being two classes of MP."

Some activists say the plans do not go far enough to wrest power away from Scots. But Mr Clarke has dismissed calls for an English parliament as too costly and burdensome, asking why the nation wanted to go back to its "medieval kingdoms".

The Scotsman also understands there are concerns among clerks and whips about how such a bill would be implemented and voted on.

However, the policies have the approval of David Cameron, the Conservative leader, and Nick Herbert, the shadow justice secretary, endorsed Mr Clarke's policy at the launch in London.

He warned that English resentment would increase unless a Tory government "grasped the thistle". He added: "The tragedy is that Labour have created new grievances in England. It must be right to act now to address a question which, if left unanswered, will allow English resentment to ferment."

Labour believes the Tories are seeking to exploit the so-called West Lothian Question because it underscores Prime Minister Gordon Brown's Scottishness.

But Mr Clarke said: "His unpopularity has nothing to do with his Scottishness. I do wish he would stop boring us by going on about how he loves to fly the St George's flag.

"He obviously feels he has to demonstrate his Britishness.

"It is the man, his personality and his measures which make him extremely unpopular."

Mr Clarke's proposed measures were rubbished by other parties and the government.

Jack Straw, the Justice Secretary, said the policy showed Mr Cameron would take risks with the Union.

"His official policy of 'English votes for English laws' would lead to the break-up of the UK. Ken Clarke acknowledges that 'English votes for English laws' would lead to a constitutional crisis and destroy the Union, which is why he has recommended David Cameron should abandon his anti-Union policy."

David Howarth, the Liberal Democrats' legal affairs spokesman, said: "This is a feeble non-solution to a problem best addressed by more fundamental change to our unfair electoral system."

His party colleague, Alistair Carmichael, the MP for Orkney and Shetland, said the Clarke plans would still "create a situation whereby the government of the day could be unable to implement its own policies. This is a recipe for constitutional chaos".

How the proposals would work in parliament

How would the voting rights of Scots MPs differ from the current arrangement?

MPs representing Scottish seats would not be allowed to vote on the committee and report stages of a bill if it applied to England only.

What happens at the committee and report stages of a bill?

There is detailed examination, debate and amendments. At the report stage, there is the chance to make further amendments.

What would happen under a scenario on, say, foundation hospitals, which was voted through on the back of votes from Scottish Labour MPs?

It could have still gone through. Scots would not have been allowed to vote or impose amendments at the committee stage, but their votes would have been used to pass the government's legislation at the final reading.

But if all MPs, including Scots, can vote on the third reading, won't they still influence the outcome?

Yes. The Conservatives have said the government should be able to use its majority to get its legislation through. But at third reading there are no amendments, so the government would have to accept whatever happened at committee or report stage or risk losing the Bill.

Is this the last constitutional anomaly left?

Arguably, the funding settlement distributed by the Barnett Formula causes as much of a grievance, if not more, than voting rights.

It is unclear whether the Conservatives have plans to address this and it will take even longer to resolve than the so-called West Lothian Question.

The full article contains 992 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 01 July 2008 11:43 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Conservative Party
 
1

Ken_Fitlike,

02/07/2008 00:11:04

oh dear, now the Tory's have split over the union

Labour have already split and will split further in the leadership contest

The liberal's position of vetoing a referendum that they support at Westminster is inconsistent with their stance in Holyrood, expect Calman to propose any financial powers coming to Scotland should be voted on in a referendum ......

It's bee little over 14 months since the SNP took power at Holyrood, how th world has changed.......

Only another 2 years to go until an Independence referendum.



2

ThomasP,

02/07/2008 00:14:01
The Political Union shared by Scotland and England becomes less important after each day.
3

Peter,

SNP for me! 02/07/2008 00:27:17
I agree with Ken let's have an end to this nonsense of having Scottish MP's at Westminster simply as observers for most of the time and instead leave Westminster to the English and simply have four sovereign parliaments with a Council of the Isles to decide on UK issues.

Ken, that makes a lot of sense old chap, don't ye know.

I really prefer if we all just went it alone and teamed up at the EU when required; be a dashed sight more effective than the present mess where Scottish fishing quota is swapped for some German deal that is good for South Coast of England fishermen by the good ol' UK Government with out the Scot's getting any say so - definitely not cricket Ken, old man.

Would your cunning plan stop that sort of thing from happening? Thought not!
4

Scotindy,

Los Angeles 02/07/2008 01:06:18
It will not matter anyway, SCOTLAND will become INDEPENDENT in 2009 and those SCOTTISH MP's will have to find a constituency in SCOTLAND, but where I wonder when all slots are already filled with MSP's ????
5

bring them on,

02/07/2008 01:45:44
This is great stuff.

"You're no getting to vote, because it's mine.."
6

Edward,

02/07/2008 02:17:47
If anyone has found themselves watching Scottish questions at Westminster (usually on just before PM Questions) will note that they have nothing of any real substance to talk about. They invariable stray into subjects that are devolved and dont concern them.
The opposition benches are usually padded out with 'interested' english MP's , after all David Mundell would be a bit of a lone figure, if he didnt have the curious sitting around him. The usual missing MP is the one for Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath. Perhaps he is being realistic in realising that there really is nothing to debate about!
I wholly agree that no Scottish MP's should vote or even debate on matters that are purely English matters
Their only task that they have now is to debate and vote on non devolved matters , such as defence and foreign policy, thats IT!
7

Traquir , Alba,

02/07/2008 03:38:06
You guys are not going to believe this
but today's Herald has come up a
feature/opinion article which provides
a good answer to this constitutional nightmare.

"The Union? Let’s call the whole thing off"
see - tinyurl.com/3nq374

You better be fast before Dougie Fraser spots it
and has it removed. The article even allows comments
which will really have Pravda Fraser fizzing :)
8

Castaway,

02/07/2008 03:50:16
This report on the West Lothian Question highlights the question what have our Scottish MP's actually done at Westminster since since devolution apart from one MP asking silly questions:
Scottish MP attacked the SNP in Westminster yesterday, asking Tony Blair: "Do you share my concern that it [cannabis] can lead to mental health problems? Does he [Mr Blair] know how to grow dope - plant a Scottish nationalist ?" 2 May 2007
Same Scottish MP: Did not proportional representation give Germany Adolf Hitler? To a lesser degree, we have been given the hon. Member for Banff and Buchan (Mr. Salmond). Can that be a good example? 23 May 2007
Anyway apart from those untypical questions.
What have Scottish MPs done since devolution? A lot less work;
Scottish MPs take part in less than half the votes in Westminster, their workload in scrutinising government has plummeted since the Scottish parliament was set up.
Scottish MPs' participation rate in House of Commons votes, which hovered above the 50% mark in 1999-2000, fell to 48% in 2001, the year of the last Westminster election. That compares with a Welsh voting record at 63%, which was slightly above even that of English MPs.
The number of oral and written questions asked by Scottish MPs has more than halved since the creation of the Scottish parliament. Time for monthly Scottish questions at Westminster has been halved to 30 minutes, and rarely extends beyond the second or third query on the order paper. The Sunday Herald, Jan 26, 2003
9

donald,

glasgow 02/07/2008 06:19:34
End (the majority)of English MPs outvoting us on Scottish Affaars - Independence. Nothing Less!
10

Ninian Reid,

Edinburgh 02/07/2008 06:32:00
As Tam Dalyell spreads the marmalade onto his thickly buttered toast, he must surely allow himself a wry smile. He has proved to be the greatest patriot of them all by posing a once-notorious question that how quickens the hearts of Scottish and English Nationalists alike . We will soon be breaking free from the chains of Westminster servitude thanks to his dogged persistence...They're made of strong stuff in West Lothian !
11

Black & White Triumph,

Greenhill road....soon 02/07/2008 06:33:14
Banning Scots MP's from purely English issues, when you speak of purely English issues there is barely an Englishman concious that does not think this actually means Bristish issues anyway, so no change then apart from banning Scots MP's from voting on british issues, do that and we will independence for sure so I support it wholeheartedly.

A council for Britain now there s a good idea.
12

Yok Finney,

Ross-shire 02/07/2008 06:40:28
"(English) politics are yesterday's (West Lothian) answers to today's questions."
13

Rodster,

Glasgow 02/07/2008 06:44:46
I am a Nationalist ,always have been , never voted anything else , and not likely to till post independence.
However of all the unionists Ken Clarke is one I respect ,do not agree with most of his politics,but unlike ANY labour politico north or south of the border Ken is honourable, decent and honest man.
Acting in good faith he has come up with this policy.
The problem is,as with any of these "stop the Nats" policies they only ever make the SNP stronger (god bless em)
They keep trying to stop us instead of solving the problem .

Easy set up a English devovled parliament ,but no that would be too simple, and too obvious, and of course make the most exclusive gentleman's ( thats a laugh) club in the world redundant.
Would also mean an equal union but hey can't have that either ,so a dilema for Ken and all those Tories ,be that the Tories led by Cameron or the Tories led by Brown (meantime).
Tough titties boys but great fun watching you lot help independence along.
14

Rulesbutnotrulers,

Federation, not separation 02/07/2008 07:07:44
A federal solution ends the West Lothian problem.

Ken Clarke opposes federalism saying it will destroy Britain's unity. He is wrong, as the UNITED states of the america proves.

A United States of Great Britain should be tried. Only if it fails should independence be considered.

Divorce should be the last thing to be tried in a failing marriage.
15

TerryH,

England 02/07/2008 07:13:36
"Easy set up a English devovled parliament ,but no that would be too simple, and too obvious, and of course make the most exclusive gentleman's ( thats a laugh) club in the world redundant."

Got it in one! England needs her own Parliament. If the Union ends as a result, even more reason to have one!
16

Rodster,

Glasgow 02/07/2008 07:28:47
14 & 15 at last some common ground and some agreement amongst us without the historonics.
From a Unionist perspective federalism is the only delaying tactic left on that you are correct .
Divorce is inevitable Rulesbutnotrulers,in using that pejorative Unionist theme.
It is like the previous generation of husbands ,where the male always kept his pay poke as his business and doled out whatever he thought was correct to his missus to keep the house and pay the bills while he never ever let her find out his true income.
He went to the pub whenever he wished , always expected his meal on the table whenever he deemed it fit to return to the family abode definetley HIS HOME , His name on the door .
if the little lady ever threatened leaving he would trot out all the old favourites... They are ALL my friends ... you are too poor to stand on your own two feet .... who else would have you .... you are too ugly etc etc.
Well those submissive little wives fortunately do not exist anymore .
in political terms it is the same with Scotland,we will no longer be bullied , no longer believe that we are somehow inferior ,devoid of friends or ability to stand on our own two feet .
Better to be out of a rotten one sided marriage than remain in a one sided and out of date attitude.
17

Makem,

02/07/2008 07:34:29
Can someone answer this, why have Scotland, Ireland, and Wales, got their relative parliament assembly etc yet the English have not?
What is wrong with the English having their own parliament?
18

Rodster,

Glasgow 02/07/2008 07:41:31
Makem answer nothing wrong ,problem is they all thought they already had it in the shape of Westminster.
Problem is the pesky Scots ,Welsh and Ulstermen now have a say in their own affairs and it highlights the very bad rule of Westminster not only in the devolved countries and province but also the HQ in England.
The main problem is outdated and extremly innefficient beast called Westminster .
A medieval building with 18th century rules , traditions and inefficiency.
update westminster and you would rid most of the travaila affecting the union .
19

Rulesbutnotrulers,

Federation, not separation 02/07/2008 07:41:36
#16 Rodster.

The Union is fragile? Agreed. Divorce is the immediate/only solution? Disagree.

The federal option does, like marriage guidance counselling, deserve our best efforts. Only failure after genuine efforts warrants the final solution. (Which is anyway no guarantee of ultimate happiness as many a divorcee will tell you).
20

Rodster,

Glasgow 02/07/2008 07:47:55
Rulesbutnotrulers, not totally disagreeing with your analogy , however in counselling it will only work if ALL viewpoints and grievances are discussed .
Let us say calman is our guidance man , we both go and list our grievances , however in conjunction with the percieved or otherwise bullying husband he does a c deal with Calman and will not allow discussion on my biggest grievance eg we can discuss anything you like except the "I" word .
hardly fair counselloing is it??
Why would anyone agree to go to arbitration if their own viewpoint was not to even be acknowledged let alone debated?
The other party has a different counsellor who is willing to debate all and every matters , however the husband does not agree because this might not suit his outcome .
The irony is his counsellor eg claman is being paid out of his wife's allowance.
in that scenario all fair minded people would suggest that the husband was being somewhat disengenious in is offer of mediation n'est pas??
21

Phil MaGlass,

Holland 02/07/2008 08:11:26
Funny I thought it was the British Government not the English oh dear I may have been mistaken for all of my years.
22

connaughtboy,

stonehaven 02/07/2008 08:13:52
This is a gift to supporters of independence. The nasty Tories proposing to take away the voting rights of Scottish MPs. The perfect storm will arrive in 2010, in the shape of a David Cameron Government, followed closely by a referendum on independence. How scary for all Unionists!
23

Tweedmouth,

Coldstream 02/07/2008 08:14:49
#3 Peter:
"I really prefer if we all just went it alone and teamed up at the EU when required; be a dashed sight more effective than the present mess where Scottish fishing quota is swapped for some German deal that is good for South Coast of England fishermen by the good ol' UK Government with out the Scot's getting any say so"

The sentiment is good but the political reality is a non-starter. The SNP are essentially 'Euro-socialists' and the ONLY prospect of independence working for Scotland is the prospect of a large, heavily laden trough of Euro subsidies. A vote for 'independence' from the UK is merely a vote for 'dependence' on a much larger and far more distant set of masters in Brussels. you would in effect get rid of Gordon Brown as your elected Scottish Prime Minister and accept the unelected Peter Mandelson - who as EU Trade Commissioner would rule on all matters regarding Scottish trade. As far as fishing goes I think it's a German EU Fisheries Commissioner currently?

If the UK - as the fourth largest economy in the world -cannot get a better deal for UK fishermen (and it can't without withdrawing from the EU) what chance Scotland - which would be over a barrel with the EU for any subsidies it could beg. A vote for independence is a a vote for EU serfdom.
24

Thistledhu,

02/07/2008 08:19:03
If such measures came about i take it England would in turn not to expect to have any say in the matter of Scotish domestic produce; Hydro electric power and Nuclear stations and oh yes Oil.
25

elizabeth the first ,

02/07/2008 08:21:23
Well done Ken Clark,why should scottish mp's vote on things that do not pertain to them,or their constituencies,do English mp's get to vote on scottish only affairs!
26

MisterN,

Scotland 02/07/2008 08:24:10
19

If a Federal option is the best then why do you keep avoiding answering the question of who,s Federation it is we should join? would Scotland no be better off in the best Federation around rather than pretending to be a Federal state within what is still only the union of Kingdoms?
Why dont so called federalists like you not opt for Scotland to become the 51st state of the US or are you just a devolutionalist and not a federalist at all?
Where are your federalist credentials?
And why should Scotland give up its nationality in order to gain more powers within the union? your form of devolution still leaves Scotland a minority within a greater power only without its national identity.
More powers for officially becomming an English region.
You are not a Scot not in a million years.
NOR A FEDERALIST.
27

elizabeth the first ,

02/07/2008 08:24:45
25.Excuse me, do you not have a scottish parliament for your domestic affairs.
28

Thistledhu,

02/07/2008 08:26:59
Yes but for some reason aspects of domestic scotish industry are reserved to westminster now why is that?
29

LEAL,

02/07/2008 08:35:29
24 Tweedmouth

Scotland post independence will be a wealthy oil-rich country,with the benefit of an abundance of other natural resources.The Scottish people will decide if Scotland should stay in or withdraw from the EU.Scotland will not give her resources to the EU for little return.We have given them to London for generations with little or no benefit,and certainly wont be doing the same for the EU.Note Norway.
30

Dougie Douglas,

Brisbane 02/07/2008 08:37:22
Bring it on I say.

An English Parliament would be the death of the labour party as well they know.

Pure self interest from Labour - sod the country (whichever you are talking about) - it is all about self-preservation.

The labour party cannot get there pea-brained heads around why Scottish votes on English only matters causes more frcition. It is unconscionable for Scottish MPs to vote on English only matters, the SNP don't do it - Labour do.

When the union crumbles history will show that it was because of the self interest of the labour party as much as the SNP

31

Thistledhu,

02/07/2008 08:37:26
29 cont for example the plan to build more nuclear power stations when scotland produces more Energy than it needs at present (bar the odd yorkshire windfarm all of the uk's renewable energy sources are scotish).

imposition of crippleing tax on the whisky industry

and of course the billions of pounds of oil revenue we get no say over or get a sniff of (the most heavily subsidised part of the UK under the Barnet formula is London followed by south east England)
32

larryt,

02/07/2008 08:38:09
This downgrades the westminster parliament as some members will be more equal than others and will not be the british parliament any longer but a minor assembly. If they really want some kind of devolved body to deal with their affairs there's a tried and tested process: they should ask for it for years and years (say 60), eventually be offered it in a swinge-ing kind of way, have a refurendum deciding in favour but not in favour enough, suffer a punitive government for almost 20 years then have another referendum. If after all that they still want it then they can have their Ken Clarke solution.
33

Jacqueline Hyde ,

02/07/2008 08:44:03
This is just political manouvering at its worst and not worthy of Ken Clarke. Reserving English matters for English MPs only would upset the whole voting system in the Commons and make government unworkable.

The only possible answer to the West Lothian question is an English Parliament and to devolve powers equally to each of the UK component nations - instead of the current raggle-taggle.

As matters stand, why should I pay the same as someone in England towards the enormous cost of running that massive government machine in Westminster when only a fraction of its output has any relevancy to me but all of its output is relevant to that person in England?
34

Drum Major,

Brisbane, Australia 02/07/2008 08:44:35
They still have not worked it out that they need aqn English parliament and a separate British parliament. These Poms are so slow and as thick as 3 short planks.
35

MisterN,

Scotland 02/07/2008 08:47:18
It seems the Tories have found out it is no longer profitable for them or us to be British anymore now they see an advantage to be what they have always been at heart the English national party.
Its like a gay outing himself for the first time they now feel free to be themselves and no longer hide in the closet.
Bring it on.
36

Rulesbutnotrulers,

Federation, not separation 02/07/2008 08:52:54
#21 Freedom etc.

You are wrong! Of course all Britons could vote in a referendum for a federal system! We can vote for what ever we wish to vote for. Who is to stop us?

#27 Mister N.

Your question is absurd. Whose federation? Why, ours, us Brits, of course. We will create one and solve this guddle.

You say I am not a Scot. What valid proof do you offer? None, of course. And even I'm not a Scot (and I'm definitely not a traitorous Scotti since I am a Briton), so what? How does that alter the truth? Do argue sensibly, please.
37

elizabeth the first ,

02/07/2008 08:58:59
So, what most of you on this thread are saying is "Scotland can vote on it's own affairs,but england can't",i'snt that a little unfair,why should a scottish mp vote on say english education,when an english mp cannot do the same.
38

Thistledhu,

02/07/2008 09:04:34
38 not saying that at all. I am saying that english/westminster mps should in turn have no say over any aspect of domestic affairs in scotland. they still do
39

TerryH,

England 02/07/2008 09:12:02
MisterN, I wish you were right when you say the Tories are the Party for England; I really do.

Unfortunately, the Tories, like Labour and the Lib Dems are up to their ears in the Westminster trough and they're not going to ask for it to be taken away.

Look at Cameron's "better an imperfect Union than a perfect divorce" (1) WTF?

...and Straw's "an English Parliament would split the Union" (2)

They're all happy to see England get the "Brown end" of the stick, so long as they get to stay on the gravy train. A pox on both their houses (or maybe just the Westminster one).

1 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/7415780.stm
2 http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/politics-news/2008/05/14/jack-straw-english-parliament-would-split-union-91466-20905877/
40

MisterN,

Scotland 02/07/2008 09:14:25
41

What politicians say and what they believe are day and night you should know that by now
41

thinking,

Scotland 02/07/2008 09:14:44
There seems to be three choices
1. We are a united Britain with a central parliament and each area represented by an MP as it was
2. We are devolved with MPs meeting in 4 localities (including England) for local issues and then spending a couple of days in Westminster covering national issues
3. Britain splits up into the little kingdoms that used to be here and become a world nonentity instead of a world power
With any of the options above we should not need all the MSPs we have now as there are far more than the number of MPS we used to have. That will save the taxpayer a lot of money
Mind you, none of this matters as long as we are in the EU because they make sure we are a nonentity anyway!!!
42

Raj Persaud's ghost writer,

02/07/2008 09:17:46
As an SNP supporter I think it only fair they vote on their own issues. The Scottish parliament has done well shaping local legislation for Scotland why not for England.

But what to do with all those excess Scottish MPs that are increasingly irrelevant to the ways Scotland, England, Wales and Northern Ireland now work?
43

Jock MacTamson 2,

Highlands 02/07/2008 09:19:16
#38 elizabeth

As far as I am concerned it is wrong for a Scottish MP to vote on a matter that affects only English people. If the government cannot get it through with the correct numbers it is obviously the wrong law.

The only party to use this method are Labour. The Torries have no support in Scotland so this would also increase their options after 2010 even with a small majority. It would also be interesting to note how much time is spend dealing soleyw with English only matters. We could also reduce the Pay of Scottish MP's. That would start the greedy little swines seeking independence.

Westminster as an organisation and culture is totally opposite to Scottish idea's of behaviour.
44

MisterN,

Scotland 02/07/2008 09:21:29
37

There is no British federation possible within a union of Kingdoms without first desolving the union and renegotiating a new order where all "NATIONS" agree to give up their individual "NATIONALITIES" in order to become seperate "REGIONS" within one "BRITISH NATION" how many times does this have to be repeated to you before it sinks in?
And if Scotland were to vote to disolve the union and decide to become a federal state within a Federation then it would make more sence to join the best biggest and most profitable federation around rather than tie themselves to a at best third rate federation dont you think?
What you propose is nothing more than total devolution and the disolution of nationality.
You are a unionist devolutionalist nothing more so you can stop your stupid posturing it convinces nobody.
45

Bermuda Bie,

Edinburgh 02/07/2008 09:21:32
I always thought the house was a debating chamber and therefore the more involved in the debate the better. Consider what is happening in Scotland with the Numpties in charge, so no debate any more. I think the biggest word most of the SNPs know is marmalade so how can we get any substantial debate?
46

Raj Persaud's ghost writer,

02/07/2008 09:21:41
#43 -thinking? - as the United Kingdom of Great Britain we are allready a world non entity. Even the great nuclear missiles we have are leased from the US. Look at other countries, South Korea, Saudi, Sweden, Russia, China, etc.

We are about 15 on the world scale.

At least with Independence we can now drop the pretence of a great loss and move forward seperately but in cooperation.



47

Jock MacTamson 2,

Highlands 02/07/2008 09:21:55
#16 Rodster

It is like a marriage that is breaking down. Except it was an arranged marriage by our forefathers and an abusive marriage and some abuse is really hard to forgive even over long periods of time.

In a way scotland has waited until the physical abuse has stopped before being brave enough to try to leave.

All this time our dear husband England thought we loved him....
48

MisterN,

Scotland 02/07/2008 09:23:32
43

Name one single developed nation on the planet which is a "non entity".
Another idiot.
49

Flash67,

Edinburgh 02/07/2008 09:25:02
I agree that there has to be an 'English Parliament' but understand their concerns over cost etc. Simple solution is for MPs elected from English constituencies to automatically also become MEPs (Members of English Parliament). Devolve all English-only matters to there and have these MEPs voting on them. All MPs then remain equal. I know it's a matter of semantics, but it is a feasible solution...
50

Displaced Scot,

UK 02/07/2008 09:25:36
The problem could be solved with a gentleman's agreement, in which MPs who represent Scottish seats would not vote on English matters.
This problem is likely to go onto the back burner after the next election, when we are likely to have a Tory Government with a sizable majority. It may even supprise you how many Scottish Tory MPs there will be too.
51

wattie>x 1,

PLYMOUTH 02/07/2008 09:27:19
England's Establishment - the'Land of Dope and Gory'- have always made the decisions for over three hundred years on how the people of Scotland were compelled to live their lives.
What Scots are surely only seeking is the self same right for them to decide 'what is good or bad for them' inside their own nation without any interference from anywhere, either within, or outside.
Surely we should have the same right to have a 'free democracy'in our own country which New Labour has sent many young Scots service personel to faraway Iraq and Afghanistan to forcibly install.
52

MisterN,

Scotland 02/07/2008 09:27:27
52

No the only real solution is the complete break up of the union it makes more sense than any other proposal or temporary fix.
53

Mikey,

02/07/2008 09:27:35
I've just thought of a solution that doesn't mean splitting up the UK. Because it's the most democratic option, I expect it to be howled down by the federalists.

If we really MUST have a federal system, how about recognising that Scotland, England and Wales have equal input to the central government? That would easily entail just six members co-opted from the governement of each country, meeting somewhere to thrash out federal law. That would mean that one country could not lord it over another.

Too democratic? Then independence it is!
54

Raj Persaud's ghost writer,

02/07/2008 09:34:35
http://www.theherald.co.uk/features/featuresopinon/display.var.2373819.0.0.php
55

Denis,

02/07/2008 09:39:37
This might have worked if it had been brought in at the same time the Scottish Parliament was set up; similarly the English Grand Committee might have worked if it has been brought in from the start; or even if all the MPs elected in Scotland had decided to behave honourably and copy the SNP MPs by abstaining from votes on England-only laws. But it's probably too late for any of these now; it probably has to be the much more straightforward but also much more expensive option of a separate Parliament for England, like that for Scotland. As for "two classes of MPs" - well, a typically self-centred politician's view. Better to have two classes of MPs than two classes of citizens (or actually four, taking into account the Welsh and NI Assemblies).
56

Drum Major,

Brisbane, Australia 02/07/2008 09:45:10
#55 No!!! You need a British parliament over the other 4 parliaments to cover Defence, Forign Policy etc. The way you have an even say is by an ELECTED House of Lords with an even number of Lords from England, Scotland, Ireland & Wales. With such a democratic system in place England would no longer be able to run roughshod over the other countries of the union. It would make a stronger union. Ireland has a large number of people who want to be British. They have an even larger number who want a united Ireland. Eire came about because they were sick of being run by England. When you have a truly democratic system you might invite them to join of their own free will as an united Ireland. Only then will you be Great Britain again.
57

MisterN,

Scotland 02/07/2008 09:49:00
58

In other words a mini EU parliament?
And we know how well that works dont we?
58

danielrober,

02/07/2008 09:56:31
I manage to organize several very different tasks each day. This is made far easier for me and my Dad than for my Granddad and Great Granddad, with the help of computers. This is the 21st centuyr.

I should think the same simple modern manegement processes could be applied to parliment. This would help make KC proposal workable. Glad to see some sensible action.

This proposal could also buy time for other reforms to come online. After all sooner or later the regions of England, outside of London will want equity with London. This will also stop holding back the Lib Dems, which is just unfair. The story of the Lib Dem contribution to modern UK is not given the respect that its deserves.
59

camster,

east kilbride 02/07/2008 09:58:32
The Scottish Conservatives are far from dead and we are gaining strength every day in the polls. The solution is not an English Parliament but setting up proper regional assemblies. Westminster ignores Newcastle and Cornwall as much as it does Glasgow.

Westminster can then focus on getting big things right such as negotiations with Europe, equipping the army and a tax system aimed at sustainable economic growth.
60

Alfie the OK,

Occupied England.... 02/07/2008 09:58:43
Blimey, yet more Tom Foolery from the Gloucester Old Spots at Westminster. They'll propose anything to keep their snouts in the trough, won't they.

Listen up all you pillocks at Westminster - THE ONLY WAY TO ADDRESS THE DEMOCRATIC DEFICIT IN ENGLAND IS TO GIVE US OUR OWN NATIONAL PARLIAMENT!!!! (Oh, and our own national anthem would be nice as well... and can we please have 'BBC England' and can we rename the British Museum as the 'Museum of England' and can we have recognition of our own English culture rather than it being buried under a British ident.... )

England is the only country in Europe without a national legislature - we must have our parliament restored. Contrary to what several Scots Labour MPs, the current status quo - ie my democratic emasculation is NOT a price worth paying for the preservation of the union. If the creation of an English Parliament means the end of the union then it cannot be worth saving in the first place.

To be honest, I don't care about the union - I care about mine and 50 million other democratic rights.

The longer those wallies at Westminster try to duck the issue, the worse it will get..... FREEDOM, FREEDOM, FREEDOM.... ENGLISH PARLIAMENT NOW!!!!!!!
61

Guga II,

Rockall 02/07/2008 10:01:26
The easiest way to solve this problem is to give the English their independence. In any event, they are a burden on the Scots, and it is time we stopped having to subsidise them.

62

The Tin Man,

02/07/2008 10:04:30
#62 Alfie

Thanks for the chuckles :-)
63

MisterN,

Scotland 02/07/2008 10:04:56
61

The Tories had absolute power in the UK for decades and did F*ck all right by the majority. They already have a proven track record which is why they are so unpopular with the majority of voters in the UK.
You post as if the Tories are going to get in for the first time.
We already know what the tories stand for More taxes, Higher taxes, Privatisation of everything including the NHS, PFI, increasing the North South divide, increacing overall poverty and even more taxation.
We have been there seen it done it and had to live through it.
We dont want it again thank you.
64

Red Tower,

Dunoon 02/07/2008 10:12:39
I think Alec Salmond should make Kenneth Clarke an honorary member of the SNP.
65

Rodster,

Glasgow 02/07/2008 10:14:26
65 The Tories had absolute power in the UK for decades and did F*ck all right by the majority. They already have a proven track record which is why they are so unpopular with the majority of voters in the UK.
You post as if the Tories are going to get in for the first time.
We already know what the tories stand for More taxes, Higher taxes, Privatisation of everything including the NHS, PFI, increasing the North South divide, increacing overall poverty and even more taxation.
We have been there seen it done it and had to live through it.
We dont want it again thank you.

And from Labour it was in ANY way different????
Same shi@e different badge
66

MisterN,

Scotland 02/07/2008 10:16:50
67

Who's arguing?
67

camster,

Est Kilbride 02/07/2008 10:23:36
All political parties in the end reach their sell by date. We like to complain but on the whole our politicans have not done a bad job over the last 20 years. However it is time to move on and that is the discussion we are having.
68

MisterN,

Scotland 02/07/2008 10:27:31
69

Yep and Independence is the direction we would like to take while "moving on".
Our alternatives are the Tories again as stated above or the Tories disguised as a used to be Socialist party with the same goals and outlooks.
69

M.Corleone,

2nd Vatican State....Coatbridge 02/07/2008 10:34:18
Independence for England I say......They've had to carry us lot for far too long anyway.

How is Ken doing now that's he's resigned from B.A.T ?
70

Publius,

Girvan 02/07/2008 10:38:02
Interesting story and interesting posts. Herewith some facts
(1) West Lothian question is relevant only during Labour government. A Tory government is pretty nearly certain to have a majority of the English MPs.
(2) Only twice has something been imposed on England without a majority of English MPs, i.e. carried only because Scottish Labour MPs voted for it. These were (a) imposition of tuition fees on students at English Universities; (b) creation of foundation hospitals. Tuition fees created English resentment at the time, but Tories now accept tuition fees. Foundation hospitals passed more or less unnoticed.
(3) Tories won't need special committees to get legislation for England only passed. But creation of special committees may make it difficult for a Labour government (if there ever is one).
71

Gunn,

02/07/2008 10:38:21
#16 Quite right! As the adage goes, the grass always looks greener on the other side of the glen.
72

Stuntman Mike,

02/07/2008 10:39:58
#70 Mister N writes: Our alternatives are the Tories again as stated above or the Tories disguised as a used to be Socialist party with the same goals and outlooks

I honestly thought you were taking a swipe at the SNP, but then remembered you're a Nat. Just wait and see how poll tax 2 goes down in Glasgow East and you'll see that I'm not the only one who thinks this way...
73

danbob,

02/07/2008 10:48:09
LEAL 30# Your talking sentimental tosh. Alex Salmond has said numerous times that he wants Scotland to be a big part of the EU.
74

connaughtboy,

stonehaven 02/07/2008 10:53:05
#38 elizabeth

Not so. I am quite happy for England to vote on its own affairs. Independence for all!
75

The Spook in Leith,

02/07/2008 10:55:46
#74

If your referring to the LIT? well i think more people in Glasgow East will be more concerned about the abolition of the 10p tax so i cant wait to see how this will go down in the east of Glasgow. I hope the SNP remind the locals what Labour has done to the lowest earners, bring it on!!!

As for Scottish MP,s voting on English only matters, its so confusing to the English this one. They see Scotland has a nationalists administration in power and yet they see this as some sort of connection to Scottish MP,s voting on English only matters?

Maybe its high time they thought about this..It is Scottish Labout MP,s who interfere with English issues and it was the Labour party who set up the Scottish parliament that now has an SNP administration so if the English have any resentment well boot out Labour but as i would say, tuff luck..
76

Alan B,

02/07/2008 11:02:21
This is a cop out by Clarke and does not offer any solution.

A much more important issue for scotland is calman. Will calman deliver significantly more power for scotland and most importantly will it give more fiscal responsibility to scotland and effectively abolish barnett.

Clarkes proposals are based on a weak scottish parliament. What if calman delivers a strong scottish parliament.

It will alos be interesting to see where labour position themselves in holyrood if the tories win the next general election. Labour at holyrood will then have to choose whether to back every tory decision at westminster or argue that tory decisions are not in scotlands interests and play into the snp hands.

Labour have already made a mess of their position regarding the clarke commission. they have portrayed it as anti scottish and now will have to justify if it is introduced why scotland should put up with this situation of having what they term a 2nd class mp.

While it is clear independence is the best way forward for scotland. If the union is to continue the best way would be to turn westmisnter into an english parliament and elect a president for the pulled issues. With fiscal autonomy for scotland, this should mean defence, currency (which already has an independent setting of interest rates),eu membership and foreign policy. The rest should be devolved.
77

subrosa,

02/07/2008 11:03:30
Before Ken Clark or anyone else tinkers with the edges the number of MPs at Westminster should be reduced to suit the new political landscape. A serious reduction in Scottish and Welsh MPs is called for. If that's done now then it will save time and money when we claim independence.
78

Alan B,

02/07/2008 11:06:19
#Stuntman Mike

Seriously why do u refer to LIT as poll tax 2. I can see nothing in common.

- one is a flat charge, the other an extention of the widely implemented income tax. If u disagree with LIT in principle then u must ideologically disagree with income tax in principle.

- poll tax was locally set. critism of lit is it is not.

- lit is to a large extent based on the ability to pay. poll tax was not
79

Hamish Scott,

02/07/2008 11:07:52
#24
"f the UK - as the fourth largest economy in the world -cannot get a better deal for UK fishermen (and it can't without withdrawing from the EU) what chance Scotland - which would be over a barrel with the EU for any subsidies it could beg. A vote for independence is a a vote for EU serfdom."

Tweedmouth:

Total fish caught by metric ton

UK Denmark
1970 410,775 528,127
2002 295,367 1,249,656

These figures clearly show that Denmark, a country with the same population as Scotland, has ensured the prosperity of its fishing industry. This is in contrast to the UK's use of our fishing industry as a bargaining chip towards other ends.
80

Alan B,

02/07/2008 11:08:32
#subrosa

"A serious reduction in Scottish and Welsh MPs is called for."

Why? Westminster remains powerful over so much that effects the running of scotland.

Independence yes. But while we remain within the union in its current form no.
81

Alan B,

02/07/2008 11:11:55
Do not understand how clarke can reject an english parliament on cost when they could simply abolish the house of lords instead.
82

Stuntman Mike,

02/07/2008 11:15:22
#77 Spook: I’m surprised to read that the SNP have been installed as favourites for Glasgow East by one set of bookmakers, in view of the fact that another separatist party with mass appeal in Glasgow has pledged to stand: it is Solidarity of whom I speak.

The SNP are probably closer to the Lib Dems than any other party in their non independence related policies and I just think that the presence of Solidarity will make this glaringly obvious to the voters of Glasgow East who, incidentally, will be reminded at every opportunity that personal allowances have now been increased to compensate for the abolition of the “10p”, with the result that those on lower wages should not lose out. Voters in Glasgow East are a very different cup of tea to the “Tartan Tory” types in typical SNP heartland seats and the Nats are going to find this out to their cost.

I’m not saying that the Nats won’t increase their vote substantially, I’m just saying that I don’t see them actually winning (which they really should be if we’re to believe all their piffle about “the union” being dead in the water etc etc.) Btw, are you missing your wee cyber pal kimba? I haven’t seen the girl from Stockton around for some time!
83

EddJas,

Nairobi 02/07/2008 11:20:18
I'm an exile, but then what's new about that. Devolution can work - see how much better things are in Spain now, for example, with the Catalans, Galliegos and Basques having their degree of autonomy. (Yes, we know there are problems too!). The Andalucians too have their Junta - not so scary as it sounds, it's just the regional government - with, by the way, high-speed trains from Madrid to Malaga. Look them up, and wonder what went wrong here with the railways in the UK, and blame the Tories, and New Labour for not fixing it.

I've always been in favour of independence for Scotland within the EU, and talk of being a "nonentity" is just rubbish. Look at how the Irish have benefited from EU money and are now holding up the Lisbon Treaty! And "independence" - because we're all interdependent - is no barrier to proper cooperation. Look at the high-speed train links from Paris through Brussels to Amsterdam.

As for the honourable SNP position of not having SNP members in Westminster vote on "English only" legislation - is that "English only", "England-and-Wales only", or does Northern Ireland get included) - well, I remain quite sure that the various bits of England need some regional devolution too - London's got it, after all, what with Red Ken and his evil twin Mad Boris - although the English voters are obviously and understandably chary about adding yet another layer of government, which they already see as oppressive (local government reforms in all our countries have always missed the point about "If it ain't broke, don't fix it". Sorry for the Americanism, but it says what I mean.

The difference between Scotland and the regions of Spain is that Scots on the whole want to be an independent nation again. Of course, we'd be a smaller fish in a larger pond, but I'd rather we have the right to make our own mistakes rather than someone else's.

I've been away for a long time, but do I keep in touch. I left, by the way, because of Margaret Thatcher, and I've n
84

subrosa,

02/07/2008 11:22:25
#82

Alan, I'm sure someone far more into numbers than me, will let you know that percentage of our laws that are now made by the EU and not Westminster. So we have all these MPs hanging around doing little except worrying about not receiving exorbitant pay rises. I should have, of course, included a reduction of English MPs in my last post.