Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

 
 
Sunday, 6th July 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.

Towns united by a name but divided over Scottish 'bias'



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:
21 November 2007
MY husband said we should move to Scotland because they get everything for free," said Lesley McCauley, a 34-year-old business administrator from Blackburn in Lancashire.
Ms McCauley is one of the growing number of ordinary English people who are increasingly resentful of what they feel is Scotland's unfair advantage.

They don't know anything about the so-called West Lothian Question (WLQ), they know little about public-spending differences or the democratic deficit caused by devolution. But they have a feeling that Scots appear to be getting the better deal and they want something done about it.

Ms McCauley summed it up by saying: "They seem to be getting the best of both worlds." She lives in a town which, together with a Scottish town of the same name, has come to represent the embodiment of a political conundrum which has loomed over the UK's constitutional debate for almost 30 years.

And it is that seemingly intractable problem which is causing the feeling of unfairness which she is aware of in Blackburn, England, today.

In 1978, Tam Dalyell, then the MP for West Lothian, questioned the wisdom of Scottish devolution - a measure which, he claimed, would allow him to decide domestic matters for Blackburn in Lancashire but not for Blackburn in West Lothian.

The WLQ was born and, to give Mr Dalyell credit, he raised it time and time again.

Now the WLQ is back on the political agenda. This time, the perceived inequalities of Scotland's devolution settlement are being stirred up in England by the Conservatives, and some in the Labour Party, for their own political advantage.

The issue of democratic accountability remains at the heart of the WLQ, but it has become blurred by other arguments over the amount of money Scotland gets - £1,500 more per head per year than England - creating a general feeling in some parts of the country that England gets a raw deal.

The two Blackburns are similar in that they lie between two big, powerful cities (Edinburgh and Glasgow, and Manchester and Liverpool) but they are different in almost every other way.

West Lothian's Blackburn has a population of just 4,800. This nondescript town appears full of 1930s housing. It has one small shopping centre with just one pub and several fast-food outlets nearby.

By comparison, Blackburn in Lancashire has a population of 100,000 and all the facilities, shops and infrastructure that go with it, including a Premiership football team.

A survey by The Scotsman on the streets of both Blackburns found that the term "West Lothian Question" is, indeed, just for political anoraks.

Only one person - and that was in West Lothian - knew what it was about, although several others in Blackburn, West Lothian, did guess that Mr Dalyell, their former MP, had something to do with it.

Bernard Molloy, 49, from Blackburn, West Lothian, knew what the question was and what it was about.

"My view is the same as Tam Dalyell's - Scots MPs should not be allowed to vote on English matters," he said, warning of growing English resentment over the issue.

"I have got English mates and they are texting me all the time, going on about what the Scots have got; they resent having a Scots Prime Minister as well."

Marion Owen, who is from Edinburgh but was visiting Blackburn, said: "I know the WLQ is to do with Tam Dalyell but I don't think we should be too worried about it."

THOMAS Gray, 77, from West Lothian, was more blunt.

He said: "[The WLQ] has something to do with Tam [Dalyell], but you could put the English in the bottom of the Channel - I couldn't care less about them."

But showing his negativity wasn't just confined to his neighbours south of the Border. Mr Gray added: "I don't care for independence, either."

Understandably, the attitude to the WLQ in Blackburn, West Lothian, was muted. After all, they have MSPs looking after their domestic affairs, MPs looking after their national interests and there is no democratic deficit there.

Also, there is little reason for any resentment in England over Scotland's advantages from devolution to spread north over the Border.

However, some did link the current debate over voting rights and finance to the wider issue of independence.

Ikram Ul Haq, 50, who runs a small supermarket in the West Lothian town, said: "West Lothian Question? No. I don't know [what it is]. But I think the English should have their own parliament. There is enough revenue coming from Scotland from whisky and oil to allow Scotland to stand on its own two feet. I would like to see independence."

In England, attitudes are clearly different. Instead of the couldn't-care-less view taken by many north of the Border, there is real evidence of a vague feeling of being unfairly treated.

Helen Maden, 59, a probation-service worker who lived in Castle Douglas for many years, said she thought Scotland got a better deal when it came to representation.

"They get two bites of the cherry," said Mrs Maden, referring to Scotland having its own parliament and also being represented at Westminster.

She added: "Whether Scotland gets a fare share of public money, I don't know, but they certainly spend it more wisely."

Edward Waghorn, 45, a security officer, said he disagreed with Scottish MPs being able to vote on English matters and not the other way round.

"It just seems like everyone is playing by different rules," said Mr Waghorn, who didn't believe Scotland would "manage" if it didn't get money from London.

Emma Randles, 30, a youth- justice worker, said she had heard of the debate but didn't know it was called the West Lothian Question.

"I think it should go to a referendum, north and south of the Border," said Miss Randles. "Scotland, according to something I read, gets more than its fair share [of funding], although I don't know what it is spent on."

One message that did come across was that the real facts about how much Scotland gets, what it is spent on and how each part of the UK is represented, did seem to have been obscured by a feeling that England is losing out because of Scottish devolution.

BETTING shop manageress Lesley Dewhurst said that, because "we are all one" at the moment, it should be equal rights for all parts of the UK.

"If they can vote on our issues we should be able to vote on theirs," she said. "I've never thought about money for Blackburn but I believe they get free national health and education that we don't get."

What is clear is that there is a growing difference in attitudes north and south of the Border.

Scots do not tend to get too worked up over the issues of representation, democratic accountability and Treasury finance - principally because they have plenty of all three.

In England, however, there is a feeling, however indistinct, of unfairness.

Nobody really knows the details but they know the theme and, as that feeling grows, so will the campaign for change in the UK parliament.

English-only votes for MPs will strengthen the Union


SIR MALCOLM RIFKIND

I AM an unapologetic Unionist. In putting forward proposals to allow English MPs to have the last word on English business in the House of Commons, I do so in order to strengthen the United Kingdom. If I thought otherwise, or if I believed that any legitimate Scottish interest would be damaged, I would support the status quo, however unfair it has become.

When Scotland and Wales won their own parliament and assembly, it was argued by the government that this devolution was essential if the Scots and Welsh were to remain in the United Kingdom. Otherwise, we were warned, the Union would be weakened.

Now the same government is declaring that if England is given a significant degree of devolution, the Union is doomed. This is arrant nonsense. They cannot have it both ways.

Who in Scotland is going to be indignant that their MPs at Westminster will not vote on schools, hospitals or roads in England when English MPs no longer decide these matters in Scotland?

Nor will there be any shortage of work for Scottish MPs to do at Westminster. The Commons is still responsible for all the taxes people pay throughout Britain, all the public expenditure that is spent by both the British government and the Scottish Executive, all the pensions and social security payments we receive.

In the Queen's Speech, there were 29 bills announced. Of these, 18 apply throughout the United Kingdom, only 11 mainly to England. In any event, I cannot remember a Scottish MP choosing to speak in a debate on purely English matters. Quite sensibly, they concentrate, as do all MPs, on the issues which affect their own constituents.

Unlike in the past, the one part of the UK where there is growing resentment with the current constitution is England. This is not anti-Scottishness, but a feeling that the way Westminster now operates is unfair and needs to be reformed.

There is nothing that Alex Salmond and the SNP would like more than for this resentment in the south to be ignored and to grow to the point where the English became disillusioned with the Union.

Of course, we all understand why Gordon Brown and the Labour Party are frantic in trying to preserve the current unfairness. They fear that, because of their weaker political position in England, they might not be able to force through English-only legislation that does not have the support of a majority of English MPs. To which I say, too bad. That is what devolution and parliamentary democracy is all about.

An English Grand Committee for English business would not stop the government being able to govern, It would mean, as when we have had hung parliaments as between 1974 and 1979, that the government has, occasionally, to compromise with other parties in order to get its business through.

It is what American presidents have to do all the time if they do not control Congress, as at present.

The precise method we choose is less important than to deal with this unfinished business of devolution. When we have done so, the Scots, English, Welsh and Northern Irish will feel that the system is fair and responds to their interests.

That way, and that way only, will the Union be strengthened for all the people of these islands.

• Sir Malcolm Rifkind is a Conservative MP and former Scottish secretary.

IN QUOTES

Blackburn - West Lothian

"Scots MPs should not be allowed to vote on English matters"

Bernard Molloy, 49

"I would like to see independence and the English having their own parliament"

Ikram Ul Haq, 50

"You could put the English in the bottom of the Channel. I couldn't care less"

Thomas Gray, 77

...and Blackburn - Lancashire

"We should move to Scotland because they get everything for free"

Lesley McCauley, 34

"At the moment, Scotland seems to be having its cake and eating it"

Simon Farnsworth

"If they can vote on our issues, we should be able to vote on theirs"

Lesley Dewhurst

"Whether they get a fair share, I don't know, but they spend it more wisely"

Helen Maden, 59

The full article contains 1896 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 20 November 2007 11:55 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: The union
 
1

,

21/11/2007 01:08:50
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason: Scotsman Import, Original comment id: 1160837, Article id was mapped to record!
2

Maisie from Morningside,

MORNINGSIDE 21/11/2007 01:14:36

The English with their built in majority of several hundred voted on Scottish matters for 200 years and didn't feel unduly put out (and neither did Unionist toady Tam Dalyell for that matter).
So now it's problematical for Scots to have a small say in English matters but it was OK for the English to dictate on all matters to the Scots???
Isn't it odd how democracy works, and how Tam Dalyell's only thought was for those poor Englishmen?

3

Very Rev Ian Paisley,

21/11/2007 01:17:52

Could you please remove Thomas Grays' comment.

Or is the Scotsman wanting idiots to start spraying this on walls, houses etc?

The editor should be ashamed for letting this in - sack him

4

Cincinnatus,

The Capital 21/11/2007 01:20:12

Well said dowager Maisie:-)

5

Ard Righ,

The Rock of Edinburgh 21/11/2007 01:20:21

Oh no keep them out, man the borders.

6

Kung-Half-Fu,

Cathay Soporific 21/11/2007 02:02:11

#1. L¡a

Why the North East? Blackburn (England) is in the North West. Dalyell's WLQ will be simply solved with independence, then everybody will be happy. Or not.

7

Maisie from Morningside,

MORNINGSIDE 21/11/2007 02:08:33

For those wondering why Tam Dalyell is so interested in English affairs....
Dalyell is one of those 'pretendy' Scots (like the Queen Mother) who was actually born in England and did the usual English toff things like attend Eton.
His ancestors went south in the train of James VI and brown nosed their way into a top government job with plenty of perks (nudge, nudge) and have been filthy rich ever since.
He knows what side his bread is buttered on
or as he would probably say "one knows on which side one's bread is buttered."
To anticipate any other attitude is like expecting minor royal Princess Michael to support abolishing the monarchy.
As T Dalyell is well aware the answer to the west lothian question begins "There shall be an English parliament"
and continues ...'let it be situated in Carlisle or Newcastle, somewhere civilised...'

Westminster is the UK parliament, if the English want an English-only one then they can follow our example.

8

,

21/11/2007 02:20:13
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason: Scotsman Import, Original comment id: 1160950, Article id was mapped to record!
9

,

21/11/2007 02:21:16
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason: Scotsman Import, Original comment id: 1160953, Article id was mapped to record!
10

,

21/11/2007 02:29:23
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason: Scotsman Import, Original comment id: 1160961, Article id was mapped to record!
11

james 1st,

nz 21/11/2007 02:39:33

the lady above who would consider moving to scotland because they get everything free should consider the mortality statistics and the poverty statistics, she might then decide to stay in north east england.scotland may have oil but the union will ensure it stays poor. england doesnt need its own parliament it has one at westminster and there are really so few scottish mps

12

Castaway,

21/11/2007 03:02:44

In the Queen's Speech, there were 29 bills announced. Of these, 18 apply throughout the United Kingdom, only 11 mainly to England.

Does this mean less work for our Scottish MPs ?

Scottish MPs take part in less than half the votes in Westminster, falling far below the levels even for their Welsh counterparts, while their workload in scrutinising government has plummeted since the Scottish parliament was set up.
The think-tank research, based on House of Commons statistics, also found the number of oral and written questions asked by Scottish MPs has more than halved since the creation of the Scottish parliament.
Sunday Herald Jan 2003.

13

Jimbo2,

21/11/2007 03:29:10

Didn't Gordon Brown, whilst chancellor, a couple of years ago subsidise councils in England in an attempt to keep council tax down whilst the same tax in Scotland continued up through the roof?

Scotland generates £49 billion in taxes and the Scottish government received £30 billion in return from Westminster to run the country. There is no reason why, if a Scottish government working with this pittance they receive from Westminster can do it, that the government can't do it for England also. Let's face it, they're off to a flying start with the subsidies they receive from Scotland.

The Labour party are beginning to treat England in the same way they've treated Scotland for the last fifty years. England would be really better off being shot of them. Probably the best solution would be an independent England run by a party who are as competent as the SNP.

14

,

21/11/2007 03:29:23
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason: Scotsman Import, Original comment id: 1161011, Article id was mapped to record!
15

,

21/11/2007 05:28:39
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason: Scotsman Import, Original comment id: 1161073, Article id was mapped to record!
16

W Smith,

Middle East 21/11/2007 05:43:32

#7 Maisie
Well said - pretendy Scot right enough!

1) General Dalyell slaughtered covenanters, men women and children for the crown. He also introduced the thumb screws to Britain from Russia.

2) Millionaire Tam's wealth was inherited and to give himself some street crediblity he likes to talk about how he was a teacher at a tough school - but not for long.

3) Tam's dad spoke arabic and worked for the British colonial government in Kuwait.

4) Tam himself was on talking terms with President Nasser of Egypt who brought about the Cairo agreement in 1969. This allowed Palestinians to set up refugee camps in Lebanon - which did could not be policed by the Lebanese!

Only recently the Lebanese army have flexed their muscles after getting fed up with Palestinian troublemakers on their own soil.

With his connections in the Middle Easst, this could explain why he seems to have so much 'insight' when it comes to muslim terrorists who are actually 'innocent' - according to Tam.

5) Tam had the cheek to say he had never known about the McCrone Report, although his mate Dennis Healey got a copy, but he always has 'inside information' on every thing from the sinking of the Belgrano to the Lockerbie bombing.

Funny that.

6) Norway, Singapore, Qatar and Kuwait have 'sovereign funds' which are basically state controlled investment agencies that try to secure the nations wealth for future generations. These countries are sitting on hundreds of billions of dollars and Scotland has sweet FA.

The fact that Scotland is slipping behind other nations doesn't concern our Tam.


Forget the 'West Lothian Question' - it has always been a bit of red herring when there are other issues to be sorted.

Tam has retired and lets face it like so many politicians he will not be missed!

17

Guga II,

Rockall 21/11/2007 06:07:59

I've said it before, and I'll say it again. Give the English their independence, and let them get on with it - even though they'll have to struggle withour getting subsidised by Scotland.

Never mind moving to Scotland, get your own independence, and leave Scotland alone. We'll even give you people like Maggie Broon and his Darling, and, of course, Malcolm Rifkind, to help you run your country.

18

Boy Wonder,

21/11/2007 06:19:55

I completely deplore the anti-English sentiment expressed in the article and in the comments. I have family in England, have travelled extensively through in and have never felt at odds with any English person.

Having said that, my argument is with Westminster, and the MPs being there who have lost touch with their constituencies and constituents. Nowhere is this more apparent than with New Labour in recent years.

Here in Scotland, the Labour, Libdumb and Tory parties have continued to outdo each other in not listening to the voters and making secret deals with each other. I'm fed up with all of them.

I agree with Independence for Scotland and also for English Independence.

Yes, I think we'll get on better with each other if we seperate entirely. Because then we'll be relying on each other as equal entities seeking mutual trust in everything.

19

Rulesbutnotrulers,

Don't blame me, I didn't vote for any of them. 21/11/2007 07:05:35

Oh tae see oorselves as ithers see us!

20

Cappo Del Monte,

21/11/2007 07:16:41

I love the way the title of the article says towns united by name, strange how the article doesnt mention that Blackburn in Lancashire is one of the most racially divided towns in England.
I would love to see why the Scots are getting a better deal after we have been bled dry in most respects for over 200 years, as for the oil, England and every forthcoming government will halt any move that will give us independance as long as there is revenue in the North Sea.

21

Scotsman in Dublin,

21/11/2007 07:22:01

This is nothing but anti Scottish racism coming from England stirred up by rags such as the telegraph and Scotsman. I'm sick of hearing comments from English people about England subsidising Scotland. There is no question of Scotland getting a leg up, its just being goeverned differently. If we spend money on health or education it just means its not being spent on something else that it is being spent on in England. All the talk of what public money is being spent doesnt take into account that there is a higher cost associated with public services in more rural areas like Scotland and neither does it consider natural wealth created by virtue of Goverment and most UK institutions being based in the south.

22

Tracy C,

21/11/2007 08:16:54

[quote]Who in Scotland is going to be indignant that their MPs at Westminster will not vote on schools, hospitals or roads in England when English MPs no longer decide these matters in Scotland? [quote]

I really like that bit - English MPs no longer decide these matters in Scotland. If it hadn't been for the English Tories then nothing would have been passed in Scotland including the Poll Tax!!!

23

Plodjfriss, Hammer of the Numpties,

21/11/2007 08:20:47

"A fare share"? Oh, come on.

24

JayJay,

Right here 21/11/2007 08:29:19

I am not really sure who is driving this news agenda, but at times I firmly believe wee Alex Salmond has somehow managed to become editor of every news outlet across the UK.
This is an utter non-story, and has advanced the cause of independence more than the SNP could ever have hoped to achieve through debate. The laugh is that, rather than us casting them off, it will be the other way round.
The good people north of Watford should reflect on such matters as Olympics, Domes, £800m train stations, road and rail improvements and ask where all their money is actually heading. Five minutes up here for your average Yorkshireman, edging along the M8, or shelling out fortunes for a train ticket on a train that will most probably be late and choked full, and they'd wonder what all the fuss was about! All this talk of Scotland as the land of milk and honey is just bollocks from the Evening standard, general paper talk and bunkum.

25

Nikostratos,

21/11/2007 08:29:54

given the Westminster Parliament is Dominated by Political parties (and has been for over 300 years).And M.Ps vote overwhelmingly along party lines and not I repeat not on the basis of location. Why do some persist in this nonsense over the West Lothian Question.

Does anybody seriously argue that in the unlikely event of an Independent Scotland. The Scottish Government would fail to 'Obey' European law which takes precedent over UK and Scottish law. And which through EU Majority voting could and will completely disregard any Scottish Government interventions.


This is called the Question of the sovereignty of an Independent Scotland within the European Union.


Any answers please

26

Rulesbutnotrulers,

Don't blame me, I didn't vote for any of them. 21/11/2007 08:35:13

#26. Your penultimate sentence is an oxymoron.

27

Logon no.6 and counting.,

21/11/2007 08:44:19

26

Well right now we have absolutely no power of intervention anywhere over anything not even in Scotland so even a scenario as selective as yours is still a big improvement on the situation we are in now dont you think?
And arent all the countries within the EU all in the same boat? the EU can disregard interventions from any of them including the UK.
The difference is the voice we will have in europe will be Scottish pushing Scottish interests and not British/English pushing British/English interests above ours.

Yer post Smacks again of unthoughtout scaremongering and desperation to me.

28

Gregor Addison,

21/11/2007 08:54:53

Scotland has its own parliament with responsibilities over certain devolved issues. If we want to keep that parliament we should stop whingeing whenever we follow policies that aren't identical to those followed by Westminster. Wasn't that, after all (after the poll tax), one of the main reasons for the establishing of such a parliament? It is because Labour are keen to show the SNP as deliberately trying to so dissent that we get so much about the differences between policy north and south of the border. It is also the fault of the Tories who see the opportunity to score points against Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling simply because they are Scottish. If Labour were in power in Holyrood and the Tories at Westminster we'd be praising ourselves for such differences.

29

Nikostratos,

21/11/2007 08:55:25

#28 Logon no.6 and counting.

And when the "the voice we will have in europe will be Scottish pushing Scottish interests and not British/English pushing British/English interests above ours"

Is completely ignored what will the Scottish Government do ?

30

Gregor Addison,

Scotland 21/11/2007 08:57:09

Oops! I meant 'sow dissent'. Or is it 'sew dissent'?

31

ennerdale27,

sale cheshire 21/11/2007 08:58:55

It's a pity that our erstwhile friends in London arn't as keen on rolling back the frontiers of Thatcherism as Alex Salmomd and his merry men ( and lasses).
As to the cost - tax the multi-nationals and stores of wealth -as opposed to income.

32

SEUMAS,

Tain 21/11/2007 09:09:02

Good post from W. Smith Middle East.
Dalyell also sat on the secret committee which altered Scotlands continental shelf in favour of England, something which is rarely mentioned

33

Nikostratos,

21/11/2007 09:11:38

Getting fed up with all the Negativity generated by the snp Drones so here is more inspirational story

http://politics.guardian.co.uk/scotland/story/0,,2214505,...
"Scottish breakthrough in ending pupil illiteracy"

34

arrakis,

21/11/2007 09:14:32

"Everything for free"

Many English people do seem to have this opinion...

.. they can come and pay my Edinburgh Council Tax any day.

35

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

21/11/2007 09:17:16

The West Lothian question is based on false assumptions and as such is a complete red herring.

It firstly assumes that English MPs have no say over what happens in Scotland. That is not true - the Westminster Parliament still controls the budgetary purse strings. It is they who have kept the Barnett formula; it is they who have the power to decide Scottish expenditure - all the Scottish Parliament is doing is prioritising how that expenditure is made.

A second assumption is that there is such a thing as "English-only" legislation. In my opinion there can be no such thing - any legislation carried out in England will have an effect on Scotland in politically, socially and economically. At the very least all legislation would involve spending decisions - why should England only decide what England gets yet it is the whole UK that decides what Scotland gets?

The real question is not the West Lothian Question but the Westminster Question - why is power still so centralised in the UK Parliament?

36

Allen,

Glasgow 21/11/2007 09:19:27

Lets get this straight- We pay in Scotland more in Council Tax than our counterparts in England.

If you look at the band rating in England compared to Scotland you will find a serious disparity- We are conned in Scotland -Ask your local Councillor and MSP to investigate.

FACT

37

Redlancastria,

Warrington 21/11/2007 09:20:35

Small point. Westminster parliament is the parliament of England. Scottish MP’s are invited to sit. And can and should be thrown out.

38

TerryH,

England 21/11/2007 09:23:07

# 21 Scotsman in Dublin said "I'm sick of hearing comments from English people about England subsidising Scotland. ...If we spend money on health or education it just means its not being spent on something else"

No Scotsman, it isn't, it really isn't.

Ask yourself why this is directed at Scotland and not NI? NI is subsidised up to the hilt but no one seems to care.

They do care when Scotland gets the second largest handout (33% more than England) when it is the third richest region (out of 12). It has nothing to do with who subsidises whom, it is who gets to spend it and do they deserve it.

Since devolution we have been broadsided by a plethora of offensive issues (tuition fees; care of the elderly; Sunday shopping; better pay for nurses; eleven top drawer cancer drugs unaffordable in England but feely available in Scotland; two Parliaments for the Scots and a bugger’s muddle for the English, et al ad nauseum).

That’s not anti Scottish, that’s anti incomplete devolution.

39

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

21/11/2007 09:26:33

An English Grand Committe will not work.

Gladstone tried to implement a policy of stopping Irish MPs voting when dealing with Irish Home Rule - it was found to be completely unworkable.

Gladstone’s solution to the problem of Irish parliamentary was for an “in and out” answer - he argued for it passionately. But under the detailed examination of the committee stage the proposal disintegrated. Among the various flaws he found was the impossibility of discriminating between “Irish” and non-Irish (described as “Imperial”) issues. Despite trying hard to find a means of doing so, Gladstone was finally forced to concede that:

“it passed the wit of man to frame any distinct, thorough-going, universal severance between the one class of subjects and the other,”

Even the SNP and Tam Dalyell recognise that some so-called "English-only" legislation does have a knock-on effect - that's why they voted on the Higher Education Bill.

Their reasoning was that changes in expenditure on higher education in England and Wales would impact on Scotland’s block grant—and thus on the level of public expenditure in Scotland. This had previously been explicitly recognised by the Royal Commission on the constitution, which stated that:

“Any issue in Westminster involving expenditure of public money is of concern to all parts of the United Kingdom since it may directly affect the level of taxation and indirectly influence the level of a region’s own expenditure.”

One reason why any piece of legisaltion would have an effect beyond England is because of the dominance of England within the Union. It has over 80 per cent of the UK population, over 80 per cent of the GDP and over 80 per cent of the seats at Westminster.

English MPs effectively set the level of public expenditure in other parts of the UK, and levels of taxation too (apart from council tax and the currently unused Scottish parliament three pence in the pound tax supplement).

40

Ninian Reid,

Edinburgh 21/11/2007 09:27:18

I'm delighted to be living in a so-called free, giveaway society modelled along compassionate, Scandinavian lines.Instead of moaning , those in the south who rightly question Mr Dalyell's infamous query and the apparent fiscal advantages that come our way should demand similar concessions from their MPs.I predict the call for an English Parliament will become deafening.Meanwhile, Scotland leads the way when it comes to caring for its people - young, sick and old.

41

,

21/11/2007 09:30:33
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason: Scotsman Import, Original comment id: 1161457, Article id was mapped to record!
42

Linda,

21/11/2007 09:31:25

# 7 Maisie

"Tam Dayell" was actually born the Rt Hon Thomas Loch and a direct descendent of the Duke of Sutherland's notorious factor at the time of the Highland Clearances.

Council Tax and Business Rates are much higher in Scotland and independence is the only answer.

43

Queen D,

Glasgow 21/11/2007 09:31:46

Does this chap write for the Telegraph?

Let these poor English folk come and enjoy all the freebies we Scots enjoy!!
If their ignorance was'nt so sad it would be laughable!

44

Sgritheall,

Switzerland 21/11/2007 09:32:56

# Haggis the Great, if that is the sound of independent Scotland, I don't know I care very much for it. Pity Pol Pot is dead, he would be a suitable leader for such as you

45

Mr Henderson,

Edinburgh 21/11/2007 09:40:58

The nub of this matter is that the Labour Party relies on Scotland returning approximately 50 MPs at every election. Without those members their hopes of winning a Wesminster election would be significantly reduced.

The Tories are dogmatically unionist and do not want to do anything that is seen to be splitting the union. Although I see that changing as they recognise that independence for Scotland will give them an advantage in England. Sir Malcolm's proposal is just a fudge. It's quite a conundrum for them.

There will certainly be no change whilst a Scottish MP is PM. Tam Dalyell's opinion is irrelevant.

46

Logon no.6 and counting.,

21/11/2007 09:44:22

31

What does the UK government do when its voice is ignored in Europe? what does any of the other countries in Europe do when their voices are ignored?

47

Logon no.6 and counting.,

21/11/2007 09:45:28

35

Your the one pushing the negative scary stories.

48

Nikostratos,

21/11/2007 09:45:32

#39 TerryH


Why do you Mistakenly believe if Scotland gained independence any more monies would become available in England for spending on social issues.

When the probability as the conservatives anti-Scots strategy rely's on is a conservative Government. Who would first dismantle the welfare state and second create mass unemployment for an economic revival.

You Remember p#ss poor wages and no welfare starve the poor and drive them into low paid long hours jobs with no employment rights

I do believe it was called 'Thatcherism'

49

Ananurhing,

21/11/2007 09:50:19

What is obvious from the public comments in this story is that, the anti Scots sentiment being put out there by some in westminster and sections of the English press, and the self loathing being purveyed by this rag, is working.
I'm paraphrasing, but comments like ' I don't know anything about it, but I know the Scots are getting more than their fair share........because I read it somewhere'.......... are testimony to that.

After yesterdays performance from Westminster, and more and more of Brown's ineptitude being revealed, it is becoming clearer by the day that Westminster is bereft of any vision, and is teetering on the brink of an economic disaster.

As 16# W Smith says, Scotland has nothing to show for the wealth it has generated.
Simple two question referendum required. Do we,...
A) Continue to bale out Westminster,...
Or
B) Bale out out of the Union.

50

DaveK,

Edinburgh 21/11/2007 09:53:37

"You could put the English in the bottom of the Channel. I couldn't care less"

Thomas Gray, 77

I would have thought a man of his years would have fought against the Nazis rather than become one - racist!

51

Scotsman in Dublin,

21/11/2007 10:02:33

#39, TerryH, where do you get this rubbish from, the Telegraph? Lies, lies and damned statistics. For all the statistics you provide there will be alternative set to show you that for example the poorest areas in the UK are in Scotland. The anti-Scotland mob love to point to public money and talk about subsidy but thats exactly where Westminster have been keeping Scotland. You dont see money being drawn from the public purse to fund an olympics in Glasgow do you? What about the private money generated by London being the financial centre for the UK? What about the money being generated by London being the seat of goverment and all UK wide organisations being based there? You lot have short memories, after Scotland being under the boot of many succesive Westminster goverments it suddenly gets a bit of autonomy and the bitterness exlodes in England.

52

Fred Forsythe (not the),

ENGLAND 21/11/2007 10:05:17

"THOMAS Gray, 77, from West Lothian, was more blunt.
He said: "[The WLQ] has something to do with Tam [Dalyell], but you could put the English in the bottom of the Channel - I couldn't care less about them."
But showing his negativity wasn't just confined to his neighbours south of the Border. Mr Gray added: "I don't care for independence, either." "

Well said that man! The whole ethos of the question answered by a child of 77yrs.
I hate the English but I don't want separation.
Now what do you think that says.
Something about not being weaned from dependency. Go rot but gimme ya cash.
I am the other way inclined. I have no hate for the Scots but am desperate for independence and would have no objection if they took a couple of billion out of the Barnett to achieve it.
Alex Salmond out classes all of the Wallaces, Bruces and Beavehearts. I just wish he was English and down here showing us the way.

53

Paula,

21/11/2007 10:07:35

So according to this English people are thinking of moving to a place they obviously despise full of people they don't like because they think we get everything for free?

Glad the English people I know and have met, none of them have had the rather stinky attitude of Ms McCauley. As far as I have heard the ones I have spoken to, am friends with, worked with love Scotland and wanted to move here because of that. The Scotsman bleat about supposed SNP anti-English bias that doesn't exist and then comes out with an article like this.

If the English want a taster of being controlled by another country then there are a hell of a lot we could cast up to them. However I don't think that many English think so badly of us. I may be wrong, I hope I am not and if anyone like Ms McCauley lives up here then by all means go elsewhere.

54

Scot-free,

Somewhere on tour with a free electric band 21/11/2007 10:09:04

Ok

Let us take the big jump and FINALLY stop blaming the English for our mistakes. Independence means a fresh start, dumping recriminations and standing on our own two feet. Perhaps it would be beneficial to introduce compulsory Scottish (and objective!) history in all schools. This would allow us as a nation to look at the past with a reasoned and honest appraisal of events and at the same time face the future with a broader and richer understanding of our own turbulent and troubled history. Without the union and a defeat at Culloden for the Highland Mafia Scotland would have 'developed' into a northern European Albania.
While certain people may not want to or cannot stomach believing this I am strongly of the persuasion that all our problems can be traced back to our thieving and greedy lairds and rulers from the past. Do all those kilt wearers and English haters even no Jack about tartan and its history?
You want freedom you got but it comes at a price you may not want to pay!

55

TerryH,

England 21/11/2007 10:16:48

#42 Federalist

I am only talking about spending. I am not saying England subsidises Scotland, but I am saying it gets 33% more than England and that is not based upon need.

I have read the article before and it uses slight of hand in some of its conclusions. The only way they could get London spending to be higher than Scotland's was to include all the UK civil servants' pay and expenses. This is because London is the admin centre for the Uk and because Londoners were geting a better deal.

56

Scotsman in Dublin,

21/11/2007 10:20:27

#58, AM2, you are being two faced again. Nationalists dont whip up resentment, thats a long running unionists tactic.

57

TerryH,

England 21/11/2007 10:21:02

# 45 AM2

If an English Parlaiment had voted for Tuition Fees and the Scots' Parliament votined against them it would be fine by me.

However, all the "offensive" isssues I mentioned were as a result of either a. the UK Parlaiment using its 23% of non English MPs to force an unpopular measure onto the people of England or b. a Minister with a seat outside England using executive powers to force an issue on England that did not apply to their own constituents.

58

rodm,

Durham 21/11/2007 10:24:09

This seems to be a story, floated just to get a reaction,(it suceeded!) As a scot living in the North East of england, I have never, outside of the media
chatterers.Heard any negative reaction to the action of the Scottish Government, it just does not come up at all. the people I work with just get on with life, the complexities of the WLQ and the barnett formula are of no relevance.As for moving to a place because things, are free, how about Cuba?
I bet this person does not really exist.

59

Yes We Can,

Ayr 21/11/2007 10:24:24

Comment #55 - I fully agree with you!

I have great faith in the potential of an Independent Scotland and I harbour no ill feelings towards the English.

What I do despise are the irrational arguments of people like Thomas Gray (77).

Its always wrong to stereotype, but I'm guessing that he is a dyed-in-the-wool Labour voter.

60

TerryH,

England 21/11/2007 10:28:23

Scotsman said TerryH, where do you get this rubbish from, the Telegraph?

No I didn’t.

Regarding Scotland’s wealth the Chancellor (Scots seat natch) said only a few days ago “…Scotland has the highest income per head in the United Kingdom outside London and the South and East of England.”

http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/newsroom_and_speeches/press...

With regard to spending, I took the Government’s figures (see figure 9.2 spending per capita in the main report) that showed Scotland received more money than EVERY SINGLE ENGLISH REGION (and Wales) in 2005/6 and will do for the projected 2007 figures.

http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/economic_data_and_tools/fin...

61

Norman,

21/11/2007 10:29:17

Politicians are just stirring it up for their own selfish ends. And as usual it's the normal punters who pay for it.

Scotland might get more per head, but has anyone seen the deprivation and health issues around here? What happened to social compassion?

62

Scotsman in Dublin,

21/11/2007 10:30:30

#57, I dont know where you get your evidence for your fantasy vision of Scotland without the union. I would love Scotland to be able to honestly appraise its history, something we have be unable to do in the past because of pro-union bias in the education system. I too would love to not have someone else to blame and independence would force us to stand on our own to feet, but the fact remains that in the past someone was to blame, not the English people but the Westminster goverment made up not just of English but also unionist Scots who many times have sold out their own country starting in 1707.

63

Nikostratos,

21/11/2007 10:39:12

#61 TerryH

Please define a non-English M.P is that by birth or constituency.


Oh and how did the non-English M.Ps force any unpopular measure on the English. Grasp around them throat and push them up against a wall.

To be honest I (a) do not believe your English (b) your a snp troll

64

Scotsman in Dublin,

21/11/2007 10:40:20

TerryH,
#61, your 23% figure is a disgrace to your self and your argument. There may be 23% non-English MP's in parliment but they are not all Scottish and they are not all Labour. In fact only about 6% of Westiminster MP's are Scottish Labour, while it is wrong that they vote on English matters its hardly a huge impact.
#64, you are like a broken record talking about public spending, still only talking about part of the story.
Aside from this, why are you TerryH in England on a Scotsman newspaper board in the first place if not to stir up resentment? I dont agree with all the unfair bias that has went against Scotland over the years but i dont go to English newspaper websites to bitch and moan about it? Sounds like you and people like you need to go and concentrate on sorting things out in your own country rather than bleating about it on here.

65

Flash67,

Edinburgh 21/11/2007 10:43:01

#59 Terry -
Looking at the article, I see it looks at ALL Govt. spending per head of population - the only fair way to do it. Anyway, London does benefit the most, since most of the money pays for civil service and Govt. jobs for those living in and around London. They receive the benefits, we ALL pay for it.

Notwithstanding that, although I agree that the current situation is similar to the democratic deficit that Scotland suffered for centuries, two wrongs do NOT make a right. If England wants a seperate parliament, go for it. This should be a seperate body, elected seperately and with the same powers as the Scottish Parliament. Westminster should keep powers over tax, defence, foreign policy etc etc that it currently reserves from Scotland. This would avoid the type of 'stalemate' that we see in American politics where the president and Houses often block each other - keep UK and country (Scotish, English etc) parliaments TOTALLY separate.
The current situation is unsustainable - we need to go the whole hog to a federal UK, or keep this simmering resentment, which does no-one any good.

66

Scotsman in Dublin,

21/11/2007 10:43:01

#67, Nikostratos, is that the new unionist tactic is it? When some objectionable Scots hating person comes on to the board he must he a nationalist in disguise? You are running out of ideas now surely.

67

Scot-free,

Somewhere on tour with a free electric band 21/11/2007 10:45:58

#58

I am not in the habit of whipping up resentment I am just sick of listening to anti-english rhetoric. If you ask me there is nothing wrong with the UK. Not only that but some of the worst gasbags on independence are expats! All I am worried about is who is going to pay the piper when the (english) subsidies dry up? Of course you could remind me of 'our oil' which is a favourite argument of the seccessionists but have they never heard of withdrawing investment in the face of nationalist rhetoric?
I am proud of Scotland and we already have a vibrant recognisable and uniquely 'independent' identity. The future if it contains independence could I fear unleash political and regional infighting which could irreparably damage us for decades to come. Once we leave the UK there will be no coming back. This is not living with your parents and always having the key in case of an emergency, out is out!

68

Bob Christie,

Fiefdom of Broon 21/11/2007 10:47:01

We in Scotland owe it to the English to help THEM get their independence too. After all they have done a great job in assisting us get ours!
I wonder which of us will get there first?

69

I'm no really here,

21/11/2007 10:50:02

"At the moment, Scotland seems to be having its cake and eating it"
Simon Farnsworth

No Simon - WE WANT YOUR CAKE, we'll keep our own till later.

70

scotinexile OZ,

AUSTRALIA 21/11/2007 10:50:56

D'ya know she's right we are spoilt we got the POLL TAX first and we got to keep it a year longer and we never even voted for the Tories, her countrymen did!
How spoilt I feel!

71

Keir Hardie,

Inverness 21/11/2007 10:54:15

We also have old firm sectarian rubbish that is the centre of our sporting heritage and stories we're not allowed to comment on, lucky scotland

72

Scotsman in Dublin,

21/11/2007 10:56:44

#72, it has always been in unionists interests to keep Scotland divided, a divided Scotland is always kept in check. Unionists are constantly stirring up resentment by trying to suggest that nationalists are anti-English, compare them with Nazi's and other favourite tactics which is pretty poor when the Scottish independence movement is one of the most law abiding peacful movements of its type in the world.

73

I'm no really here,

21/11/2007 10:57:33

I would have thought by now that everyone would have realised that HP Sauce, Mini-Me, the other Alexander Brother, Darling, Browne, Rifkind, Cameron, etc, etc are ALL SNP undercover agents. Everything they say and do furthers the Independence cause.

I suspect it also applies to AM2, Royster, "an English Voice...", etc, etc.

Keep it up lads and lassies, Sir Ek is proud of you.

74

Fred Forsythe (not the),

England 21/11/2007 10:58:04

Rifkind is wrong.
His suggestion is but a fudge to retain the status quo. He is yet another Scot trying to manipulate English affairs to his own national and political agenda. He epitomises the problem. The money is but a small issue compared with the real war. There is a cartel of Scots at Westminster who started their infiltration during the 50’s. They knew well their agenda and most have since signed the ‘Scottish Claim of Right’. I have asked for that document under the freedom of information act but the response excluded 24 signatures that were "unreadable".
Now if a document such as that, signed in 1989 has unknown signatures I for one will be absolutely amazed. It is strange that all of the signatories where well known personalities whose signatures I presume are both well recognisable and still the same today. Perhaps Sir Malcolm will enlighten us and state whether his hand wrote one of these unintelligible signatures.
The Scots whinge on about Thatcher but how would they react if they had a leader that had made public pledge to put his own people first, surrounded himself with people who had signed the same pledge, infiltrated every institution with like minded people and then gone on to honour that pledge by nepotism, and whole scale transportation of jobs, contracts and services to his own country at the expense of the 85% that he has pledged to put last.
Don’t be fooled by the Barnett formula it is the tip of a very big and dirty iceberg and the debate about it is designed to obscure the real war.
If you couple the above with Brown’s intent to obliterate English culture, history, and nationality by the fragmentation of England into small regions that will not be in any position to oppose the wholesale looting that is intended at the time of Scottish independence you have a glimpse of the real problem.
He insists that England fly the Union rag whilst his own country flies the Saltire, he calls Britain the “Na

75

AJ of Fife,

21/11/2007 11:01:01

Isn't it about time England grew up and to responsibility for it's own governance? It is quite frankly, pathetic the way they cling on to Scotland.

76

Flash67,

Edinburgh 21/11/2007 11:01:37

Terry #64 - And if you look into the figure in depth, you notice several issues that makes the figure for Scotland higher than for England - eg, "For example, water supply is a public sector function in Scotland and Northern Ireland, but is in the private sector in England and Wales" (9.17)

77

Fred Forsythe (not the),

England 21/11/2007 11:02:26

LAST PART OF THE ABOVE POSI#83
Rifkind is part of that cartel. He and his ilk need out of England in the same manner that any English authority has been driven from his homeland.
Malcolm, when you were booted out of Scotland you said that you “Still looked longingly to Edinburgh” go there and take the rest with you, then firmly close the door behind you.
You need to read this post fast as somehow I don’t think it will last long.

78

Scot-free,

Somewhere on tour with a free electric band 21/11/2007 11:08:12

#77 AM2

No problem!

79

Flash67,

Edinburgh 21/11/2007 11:09:02

#83 and #86 - If you ask most people in England about their identity, you will get a huge proportion of them saying they are 'Yorkshiremen' or 'British' - why blame Scottish politicians for that 'fragmentation'.
You sound as if you would ban all non-English politicians from UK Govt posts? Seems a bit of a racist rant to me...?

80

Ananurhing,

21/11/2007 11:12:37

73# Scot Free.

I think you'll find that Scotland has been the parent
in this relationship. Outnumbered by a household of demanding teenagers who feel they have an automatic right of access to your wallet.
And you're afraid of losing English subsidies?
What subsidies? Where have you been?

I think you're either at the wind up, or maybe you need to read up a bit more on the subject, and rely a little less on intuition.

81

Flash67,

Edinburgh 21/11/2007 11:20:57

#83 and #86 - ps- My how the worm has turned!
In case anyone doesn't know what the seditious 'Claim of Right' says -
The Claim of Right reads-

"We, gathered as the Scottish Constitutional Convention, do hereby acknowledge the sovereign right of the Scottish people to determine the form of Government best suited to their needs, and do hereby declare and pledge that in all our actions and deliberations their interests shall be paramount.
We further declare and pledge that our actions and deliberations shall be directed to the following ends:
To agree a scheme for an Assembly or Parliament for Scotland;
To mobilise Scottish opinion and ensure the approval of the Scottish people for that scheme; and
To assert the right of the Scottish people to secure implementation of that scheme."

Obviously this is treasonous and seems best to take all the Scots who have signed this, out to be shot at dawn!

82

Scot-free,

Somewhere on tour with a free electric band 21/11/2007 11:24:49

If we could channel all this anger and rhetoric into a positive search for a new definition of Scottish identity then to paraphrase Sam Cooke; 'what a wonderful world this COULD be'!
This anti-Englishness is no longer relevant or funny it is just plain RACIST!. Of course all the pointy-heads will be out in force again tonight in support of Croatia. Pathetic narrow-minded and shameful and YOU ALL KNOW WHO YOU ARE. By the way do thier children also have to listen to this racist bilge day after day? Well done just what the 21st century needs more racism. Teach your children well!

83

Scot-free,

Somewhere on tour with a free electric band 21/11/2007 11:25:28

Excuse the spelling mistake on their!

<