The West Lothian Question

[Webbo]

Who has said that the Scottish won't get what they were promised on time anyway?

[breadandcheese]

Monk seems to be talking complete sense to me.

Cameron made a promise because he was shit scared he'd ****ed up the union. Now he should stick to it and it should be a priority.

The "English" getting all uppity are pathetic.

Leaving aside who nearly f***ed up the union (it's too easy to blame this on Cameron when Labour organised and led the better together campaign due to the Tories realising their brand is toxic north of the border), I don't know anyone who's not saying Scotland should not get devoted max as promised.

Where the uppity "English" are getting annoyed, like me, is when I feel that basic fairness is lacking. An unequal relationship exists. Scottish MPs, voting on matters which do not affect their constituents, but do affect me and other English voters is unfair. Why should they be able to vote on matters of health, tax, education, etc when these will not affect their constituency? I don't know any Scottish people (with the exception of a few self-preserving MPs north of the border who think it fair). I think SNP MPs in Westminster don't vote on matters that don't affect Scotland so they see the point of fairness.

[Sir Fynwy]

The UK needs a far smaller government, 650 MPs are far too many for such a small country, cut the number to 200, devolve powered to more local assemblies, dump the dual City/County councils and add an upper chamber of 100 elected 'Lords' with the old upper chamber removed.

Do this and the UK might just reform.

[Guest]

Leaving aside who nearly f***ed up the union (it's too easy to blame this on Cameron when Labour organised and led the better together campaign due to the Tories realising their brand is toxic north of the border), I don't know anyone who's not saying Scotland should not get devoted max as promised.

Where the uppity "English" are getting annoyed, like me, is when I feel that basic fairness is lacking. An unequal relationship exists. Scottish MPs, voting on matters which do not affect their constituents, but do affect me and other English voters is unfair. Why should they be able to vote on matters of health, tax, education, etc when these will not affect their constituency? I don't know any Scottish people (with the exception of a few self-preserving MPs north of the border who think it fair). I think SNP MPs in Westminster don't vote on matters that don't affect Scotland so they see the point of fairness.

Cameron put it up for the vote, not Labour, they are not that stupid. 

 

I'm fed up of hearing some "English" whining.

 

Some things that affect Londoners don't affect Leicesterians.

 

Some things that affect city dwellers in Leicestershire don't affect country dwellers in Leicestershire.

 

Some things that affect you don't affect your wife or your kids.

 

Get yourself a bigger view of your world. You don't live in isolation and just because it doesn't affect you means squat.

The UK needs a far smaller government, 650 MPs are far too many for such a small country, cut the number to 200, devolve powered to more local assemblies, dump the dual City/County councils and add an upper chamber of 100 elected 'Lords' with the old upper chamber removed.

Do this and the UK might just reform.

 

   

[breadandcheese]

Cameron put it up for the vote, not Labour, they are not that stupid.

I'm fed up of hearing some "English" whining.

Some things that affect Londoners don't affect Leicesterians.

Some things that affect city dwellers in Leicestershire don't affect country dwellers in Leicestershire.

Some things that affect you don't affect your wife or your kids.

Get yourself a bigger view of your world. You don't live in isolation and just because it doesn't affect you means squat.

In which case, why support devo max for Scotland? The UK should stay as it is. Scotland should accept that some things affect them, others not.

[Sir Fynwy]

Cameron put it up for the vote, not Labour, they are not that stupid.

I'm fed up of hearing some "English" whining.

Some things that affect Londoners don't affect Leicesterians.

Some things that affect city dwellers in Leicestershire don't affect country dwellers in Leicestershire.

Some things that affect you don't affect your wife or your kids.

Get yourself a bigger view of your world. You don't live in isolation and just because it doesn't affect you means squat.

Why so funny, lots of countries work ok with far smaller central government per capita and a federal system

[Monk]

Who has said that the Scottish won't get what they were promised on time anyway?

By raising the west Lothian question he has pretty much guaranteed that labour will vote against any changes, because if that goes through labour will not have enough MPs to get many bills through parliament in future.

That suits Cameron as he doesn't want devolution of Scotland to stop him getting re elected. He knows the scots won't vote for him anyway so it's an easy way to save his sorry arse.

[Monk]

In which case, why support devo max for Scotland? The UK should stay as it is. Scotland should accept that some things affect them, others not.

Scotland is different for many reasons, not least that it is a cou try, not a region. It's historically been largely ignored by Westminster and the people of Scotland are politically much more left leaning than the rest of the U.K.

The Midlands is served much better by Westminster than Scotland is. That's not to say that there shouldn't be English devolution - just going back to my original point that its being used by cameron to slow things down.

[Webbo]

By raising the west Lothian question he has pretty much guaranteed that labour will vote against any changes, because if that goes through labour will not have enough MPs to get many bills through parliament in future.

That suits Cameron as he doesn't want devolution of Scotland to stop him getting re elected. He knows the scots won't vote for him anyway so it's an easy way to save his sorry arse.

the scots dont like it tough shit. Englands never been asked what it wanted we, re just expected to pay for everything.

[Guest]

In which case, why support devo max for Scotland? The UK should stay as it is. Scotland should accept that some things affect them, others not.

There was no need to offer it. I wouldn't have. the vote would still have been "no".

 

Sadly Cameron like most politicians is an idiot. He panicked and threw in the kitchen sink. His mistake but they can't go back on it now.

[Guest]

the scots dont like it tough shit. Englands never been asked what it wanted we, re just expected to pay for everything.

 

You're better than that Webbo.

[Benji]

Is this the English devolution that has been in the news for about a week, which was not even on the political agenda a month ago?

 

I wouldn't quite go that far, it has existed as an issue for almost as long devolution itself and in recent years the current Government has prioritised it as such an issue http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-14831619.

 

Whatever happens, the Government are going to piss of one or more of the Scots, English, Welsh or Irish with how long these issues are going to take / who is prioritised. 

[Alf Bentley]

You're better than that Webbo.

 

I note that Webbo's post was made at 12.16 a.m. on a Saturday night. I'm sure his normal high standards will be resumed after a brief interlude for a hangover! 

 

I do think that the West Lothian question ("English votes for English laws") needs to be addressed. However, people are right to cynically assume that Cameron is trying to manipulate the situation for party advantage. He has appointed William Hague to chair the committee responsible....would the Tories have thought it fair if a Labour govt had appointed Prescott or Mandelson to do that job?! He has also clearly tied the "English votes" question to Scottish devolution to avoid losing Tory votes to UKIP. Otherwise, why has he not legislated for "English votes" in the past 4 years?! He would probably also be quite happy for Labour to obstruct the process so that he can portray them as the ones standing in the way of both Scottish devolution and "English votes", so that he can stop his voters drifting to UKIP and win over some English Labour voters.... Just when you thought that politicians couldn't get any more cynical...

 

Or, if Labour do reject this linkage, will he be able to legislate for it anyway? That will presumably depend what stance the Lib Dems take. With 11 MPs in Scotland (about 20% of their total), I assume they'll be keen for Scottish devolution to go ahead, so will they accept "English votes" at Westminster without any proper English devolution (which they'd favour) as a quid pro quo?  

 

More importantly, should Labour even try to stand in the way of this? Both morally and tactically, I think they shouldn't.

 

Scottish devolution and English votes do not form a balanced equation. The former is a devolution of power to a particular part of the UK, while the latter is a continued centralisation of power within the rest of the UK....one that the Tories see as being of benefit to them, as they believe that they'll be able to win (or at least draw) in England more often than not. So, Labour is right to insist that "English devolution" should not be limited to Westminster votes, but should include measured consideration of devolved powers for the regions or cities of England.

 

However, I think it would be smart politics on their part to avoid Cameron's elephant trap and not end up obstructing his biased proposals. Instead, they could order their Scottish MPs not to vote on purely English issues, while supporting Scottish devolution - and a constitutional convention of some sort, taking the views of central and local government, the electorate, business and other stakeholders. Allowing themselves to be bounced into a biased settlement by Cameron and to be stitched up by Hague is not the way forward. But nor is allowing themselves to be the ones perceived to have torpedoed "devolution" in Scotland AND England, to the benefit of UKIP or the Tories....even if what Cameron is offering is NOT devolution within England, just continued centralisation at Westminster.

[Webbo]

You're better than that Webbo.

 

 

I note that Webbo's post was made at 12.16 a.m. on a Saturday night. I'm sure his normal high standards will be resumed after a brief interlude for a hangover! 

 

 

 

 

In principle I believe what I said, I wouldn't normally however phrase it so abruptly.

[Guest Bilo]

The ignorance of somebody living in France telling people living in England that their concerns about what further devolution in Scotland means for the rest of the UK is excellent reading. lol