Sounds like an accusaton to me.

That’s because it IS an accusation, you twonk!

David Wildgoose:

Why is it acceptable for Scottish and Welsh MPs to vote on matters that only affect England, but there is no corresponding right for English MPs to vote on matters devolved to Scotland and Wales?

It isn’t. This whole thread began by me saying it isn’t.

The Barnett formula distributes money based upon nationality, not need. If the money were distributed fairly then Cornwall, Merseyside, South Yorkshire, the North East and probably Wales for that matter would all receive more money.

But it’s not distributed according to need, but according to nationality.

And that’s why, IF YOU FUCKING READ WHAT I WROTE, I said the number one priority should be reform of the Barnett formula. Having an English Parliament wouldn’t end the Barnett formula, which is in the hands of the UK Government.

I was a founder member of the Liberal Democrats, and stood as a Parliamentary Candidate on 4 occasions incluing a Parliamentary By-Election. And I am ashamed that the Party I supported is so bigoted towards me and mine simply because we are English.

And attacking English devolution, attacking the English as “xenophobic little Englanders” is just throwing fuel on the flames, and quite frankly driving people into the arms of the far-right.

No-one’s making you go there. It’s where you choose to go.

Alfred Smith - thanks for making me laugh. I assume that was a spoof? I particularly loved:

JUST WAIT TIL WE GET OUR PARLIAMENT WELL HAVE YER

Gavin Ayling:

Cynical though it may seem, there are lots of reasons for suggesting that there is advantage for a left-wing party (the LibDems and Labour) to stop the English being represented separately. An English Parliament, for example, would be more likely run by a Conservative government than is the UK Parliament.

Balls. In 2005 the combined Labour/Lib Dem vote in England was 58.3%; the Tories got just 35.7%. In order to form a government in England, the Tories would have had to had a deal with either the Lib Dems or (more probably) Labour.

wonkinsane:

The size of England in relation to the rest of the UK doesn’t matter one bit.

It does if the argument is whether it would form an asymetrical Federation, it would.

As I said, regional government under an English parliament would probably be acceptable to the English people but not under a British parliament.

Oh, come on. You can come up with more useless tiers of government than that? How about another two? How about five? Let’s spend all that money we currently give to the Scots on pointless bureaucrats, shall we?

And this doesn’t remind you of the UK now?

Yes it does. That’s why I support regional devolution.

As it will only be dealing with matters affecting the whole of the UK then there is no reason why England should have more of a say in that federal government.

Yes there is: there are 10 times as many of us as there are of them! Why should, for example, the decision to sign important international and EU treaties be made with Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland having a combined total of 75% of the votes. I presume ALL you English Nats feel the same way about this? Sheesh!

Okay, bored now. Here endeth the thread.

This also has benefits for the other devolved nations because the UK parties will deal with UK matters, and their manifestos will limit themselves to reserved matters.

At the moment UK parties have policies on matters that are devolved to Scotland and Wales, and pressure is bought to bear on the devolved Scottish and Welsh parties by the UK party machines - also the executive and legislature of Scotland has to bear in mind what legislation it inacts with respect to what the UK Government is doing. It’s all very sloppy and doesn’t make for good devolution. We always see the galling spectacle of parties urging the Scottish electorate to vote for them on issues reserved to Westminster during elections to the Scottish Parliament, and it’s no wonder, asymmetric devolution has resulted in a shambolic mess.

We need English parties with English manifestos. To be fair the Lib Dems did this on paper for the last general election (they were the only ones to have a separate English manifesto) but in effect it did not work because it was just a cosmetic exercise, and given the West Lothian Question and lack of English government it was fairly pointless.

As I said earlier devolution was given to Scotland and Wales because ‘devolution is power retained’. It always will be like that until an English parliament is introduced to offer everyone, not just the English, true devolution and divergence of policy on this island, and hopefully fiscal autonomy to boot.

You said:
I know it because it is a simple fact that can be verified if you happen to posess a pocket calculator. England contains 85% of the UK population. A federation of Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland and England would be asymetrical. Where’s the argument?

My response:
The size of England in relation to the rest of the UK doesn’t matter one bit. An English parliament will deal with devolved matters, the federal UK parliament with reserved matters. The size of England should have no bearing on the federal government because their areas of responsiblity would be mutually exclusive.

I said:
An English Parliament would only deal with devolved matters.

You said:
But it wouldn’t be very devolved, would it? From the POV of the average Englisher, it would be just as centralised as what we have now.

My response:
No it wouldn’t. The English parliament would be English whereas the British government is British. We wouldn’t have unaccountable MP’s elected outside of England running English departments and it would be MP’s elected in England and answerable to English constituents that would be making legislation for England. As I said, regional government under an English parliament would probably be acceptable to the English people but not under a British parliament.

I said:
In the US, California has the most money, Florida has the most people and Texas has the most space. None of them dominate the federal government because they all have equal representation in it.

You said:
All states in the US have equal representation in the Senate, but not in the House of Representatives. This gives the smallest states a grotesque amount of power at the expense of the larger state and gives the Republicans an inbuilt advantage. No thank you!

My response:
And this doesn’t remind you of the UK now? All the MP’s in the UK have equal rights in England but not in Scotland or Wales and Scotland and Wales have a grotesque amount of power at the expense of England which also gives Labour an inbuilt advantage. Are you a closet CEP supporter?

I said:
The same would apply in a federal UK. If each home nation is given equal representation - say 10 representatives each - to the federal government then what’s the problem? How representations are made to those federal representatives would be down the the individual parliament to decide. The 4 home nations could easily be divided up into 10 federal constituencies.

You said:
Quaequam Blag! This really is nuts! Are you sure you aren’t secretly Scottish, Mr Wonk?

So, instead of a situation whereby England has 83% of the votes in Parliament to decide UK matters, you want us to have just 25%? How on Earth does that solve the problem?

My response:
I believe that everyone in the UK should have the same access to democracy and political representation. I think that in a federal government, the four constituent nations should have equal representation. Scotland, Wales and to a lesser extent Northern Ireland, have more power in Westminster than England. The number of representatives in Westminster from those three home nations is disproportionately high and because most of the legislation in Westminster only relates to England, the Labour whip is easily wielded. When (not if) and English parliament is established, the day to day running of England will be taken away from Westminster which will become the federal government of the UK. As it will only be dealing with matters affecting the whole of the UK then there is no reason why England should have more of a say in that federal government.

Cynical though it may seem, there are lots of reasons for suggesting that there is advantage for a left-wing party (the LibDems and Labour) to stop the English being represented separately. An English Parliament, for example, would be more likely run by a Conservative government than is the UK Parliament. While this is vehemently and rightly not the argument of the CEP, anyone concerned about being overtaxed (by a Chancellor who’s legitimacy post-devolution is questionable at best), as you purport to be, should welcome an English Parliament as the best tool to bring that about.

Yes, that could be achieved by a smaller devolved unit, but there’s no suggestion in anyone’s policy of devolving the same powers to Regions…. I’ll write more later!