English Votes for English Laws

[callan]

Council leaders across England have joined forces to demand Westminster gives them more powers to run their own affairs.

The cross-party group of 119 leaders say voters in England will not accept greater devolution to Scotland unless there is a similar redistribution of power south of the border.

On the one hand whilst this sounds eminently fair, are we in danger of cutting off our nose to spite our face?

 

[Jam_Man]

No, it was discussed at the time of the referendum and makes perfect sense.

If Scotland want to vote on their own affairs they can't expect to vote on what happens exclusively south of the border.

 

[callan]

No, it was discussed at the time of the referendum and makes perfect sense.

If Scotland want to vote on their own affairs they can't expect to vote on what happens exclusively south of the border.

The issue as I see it, would be that if Labour were to form a minority government, then they would not have an effective voice (assuming their scottish contingent stay Labour) over the largest part of the union being England.

So in effect they would be wholly ineffective over anything other than uk matters, now I don't like Labour particularly... however isn't there a danger that we end up with ineffective Government with many issues becoming dead locked?

 

[Jam_Man]

That is certainly a problem for Labour which will make them ineffective to an extent, but if they want to have effective power in England they need therefore need to win more votes from the English.

Imagine what would have happened to their chances of getting elected had Scotland voted Yes!

 

[Benfleet A1]

That is certainly a problem for Labour which will make them ineffective to an extent, but if they want to have effective power in England they need therefore need to win more votes from the English.

Imagine what would have happened to their chances of getting elected had Scotland voted Yes!

According to many pundits, Labour could well be facing complete wipe out in Scotland on a scale that the Tories suffered back in 1997. I'm more concerned with what is it going to cost if Labour attempt an coalition with the SNP. I personally think it would be very, very bad for England and democracy as a whole.

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

Council leaders across England have joined forces to demand Westminster gives them more powers to run their own affairs.

The cross-party group of 119 leaders say voters in England will not accept greater devolution to Scotland unless there is a similar redistribution of power south of the border.

On the one hand whilst this sounds eminently fair, are we in danger of cutting off our nose to spite our face?

IMO it sounds fair in theory but in practice it's just carving up the UK and creating new tiers of beaurocracy. Rather than keep changing how we vote and notions of responsibility why not use that time and money and manpower to do something constructive. The government has a matter of months to do as much of their great works as they can and may not have the opportunity after May - why are they letting themselves be distracted by such things?

 

[Yorkshire Blue]

IMO it sounds fair in theory but in practice it's just carving up the UK and creating new tiers of beaurocracy. Rather than keep changing how we vote and notions of responsibility why not use that time and money and manpower to do something constructive. The government has a matter of months to do as much of their great works as they can and may not have the opportunity after May - why are they letting themselves be distracted by such things?

For me as a voter my number one issue is now constitutional reform.

The West Lothian question, the EU, PR, the House of Lords, devolution, the Human Rights Act/Bill of Rights - it all needs sorting once and for all.

So I'd urge the politicians to address the issue of constitutional reform as a priority. Do that, and give yourself the democratic legitimacy and basis to then address the other issues.

 

[Neil_F]

why are they letting themselves be distracted by such things?

governing is hard; politics is fun. I would suggest that is why.

To be serious, Yorkshire is right. This country has had two domestic wars over constitutional issues with tax as the catalyst - the English civil war and the American war of independence. I'm not saying there will be a war, there clearly won't be, but let's not ignore the circumstances a third time.

if Scotland earns taxing rights, as has been proposed, then Scottish MPs would be able to vote on taxes for England and Wales without any impact on their constituents. It would be similar to giving the UK a vote on French tax policy.

If we have a Labour led government in 2015, either an overall majority or a coalition, they will almost certainly not have a majority in a England and Wales. That would mean a choice of pushing through laws using Scottish votes or five years of paralysis.

this is an issue that needs resolving.

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

For me as a voter my number one issue is now constitutional reform.

The West Lothian question, the EU, PR, the House of Lords, devolution, the Human Rights Act/Bill of Rights - it all needs sorting once and for all.

So I'd urge the politicians to address the issue of constitutional reform as a priority. Do that, and give yourself the democratic legitimacy and basis to then address the other issues.

If that list was going to be dealt with properly (and the Monarchy was added) then I would agree, but it won't. This has come about because Cameron offered a referendum in Scotland on the basis that the outcome was a foregone confusion. When he realised it wasn't he started giving away sweetners. If the sweetners then get passed around further the Union is less and less of a union. This is not part of a grand plan it is just lurching from one ill thought out plan to another. If you look at the way they have dismantled the structure of education and created lots of mini beaurocracies and invented a fake parental democracy - would you trust them to fix our entire democracy?
They can't even set up commissions without them falling apart or failing to report or having their findings ignored.

If I lived in a house that was a bit **** and I told my wife I am going to pull it down and build a new one that incorporated everything a modern home should incorporate she would like the idea in theory but point out I didn't even manage to wallpaper the front room properly.

mending democracy would be great but that is a massive task that would be way beyond the abilities of the politicians of any / all of the parties. What we are being offered is a kneejerk gimic.

 

[Neil_F]

This has come about because Cameron offered a referendum in Scotland on the basis that the outcome was a foregone confusion.

It was Gordon Brown that bounced the party leaders in to it. Just as it was Gordon Brown who set the whole train in motion with devolution. Cameron agreed because he saw a wider political advantage for his party. It was fairly cynical given the wider instability it will cause.

If you look at the way they have dismantled the structure of education and created lots of mini beaurocracies and invented a fake parental democracy - would you trust them to fix our entire democracy?

I rather like the free school programme. Given how over subscribed they are, I would suggest parents like it too.

mending democracy would be great but that is a massive task that would be way beyond the abilities of the politicians of any / all of the parties. What we are being offered is a kneejerk gimic.

You've gone from describing constitutional reform as effectively trivial to an issue too big and important for politicians in two posts. Regardless of who is the addressing it, an issue is either important or it isn't. I happen to think this one is, but it isn't the most important than the economy for me.

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

It was Gordon Brown that bounced the party leaders in to it. Just as it was Gordon Brown who set the whole train in motion with devolution. Cameron agreed because he saw a wider political advantage for his party. It was fairly cynical given the wider instability it will cause.





I rather like the free school programme. Given how over subscribed they are, I would suggest parents like it too.



You've gone from describing constitutional reform as effectively trivial to an issue too big and important for politicians in two posts. Regardless of who is the addressing it, an issue is either important or it isn't. I happen to think this one is, but it isn't the most important than the economy for me.

If Gordon Brown takes responsibility for any constitutional changes as a result of the Scottish referendum that would be truly scary. If the current government set up a referendum the result of one of the options of which would split the union - would they then really allow the opposition to dictate the terms? I really hope that is not the case, that would be the ultimate in weak government. Surely Gordon Brown was just a poster boy for keeping the union. If he was he should go in and promise whatever he felt would ensure a no vote - Jesus!

Constitutional reform if it is singularly the English laws thing then I see it as trivial in its intentions and disruptive and costly in its outcome. Nothing more than a PR distraction. Was this featured in anyone's manifesto? The overhall of our entire democratic process would be of immense importance if it was taken on but I don't see any politicians that I would trust to take that task on.

The problems I have with Free Schools are firstly that they can and often are set up by people with little or no experience in Education. Toby Young - the man who wrote a book about what a **** he has been is the person most associated with Free Schooling. They are set up not necessarily based on need for a school in that area but because a small group of parents decided they want to run a school. There have been numerous cases of a school license being granted for schools that have no building. They are allowed to employ unqualified staff. The staff turnover figures are alarming. Funds are being diverted from the building improvement budget of established schools to fund them.
Forced academies is a bigger deal for me - I mentioned before but my kids school was forced into becoming an academy then the DofE awarded the contract to the private company that gained 8% of the parents support rather than the 92% who wanted a tie in with a local school. This is how much they value democracy.

 

[callan]

Constitutional reform if it is singularly the English laws thing then I see it as trivial in its intentions and disruptive and costly in its outcome. Nothing more than a PR distraction. Was this featured in anyone's manifesto? The overhall of our entire democratic process would be of immense importance if it was taken on but I don't see any politicians that I would trust to take that task on.

Yes Labours.

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

Yes Labours.

That they were going to split Parliament so some MPs would be barred from voting on certain policies?

 

[callan]

That they were going to split Parliament so some MPs would be barred from voting on certain policies?

Absolutely.

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

Absolutely.

Got a link?

 

[callan]

Got a link?

There you go.

http://www2.labour.org.uk/uploads/TheLabourPartyManifesto-2010.pdf

This link sums up perfectly Labours current situation.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol...s-a-problem-former-cabinet-minister-says.html

I think its important to remember that we have been on the road to devolution since 1999.

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

Got a link?

There you go.

http://www2.labour.org.uk/uploads/TheLabourPartyManifesto-2010.pdf

This link sums up perfectly Labours current situation.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol...s-a-problem-former-cabinet-minister-says.html

I think its important to remember that we have been on the road to devolution since 1999.

Thanks, but 2010 Labour manifesto I can't see any mention of any restriction on voting in the Houses of Parliament....

 

[Neil_F]

If the current government set up a referendum the result of one of the options of which would split the union - would they then really allow the opposition to dictate the terms?

The three main parties agreed on more devolved powers for Scotland but there was no detail. Gordon Brown bounced them on "Home Rule" and the timetable. The three leaders tried to row back from it in the vow they jointly published, which promised "extensive new powers" for Holyrood, not the same as Home Rule.

this is why the SNP are kicking up such a fuss over the recent report - Scotland will get new powers but not the home rule Gordon Brown offered.

Constitutional reform if it is singularly the English laws thing then I see it as trivial in its intentions and disruptive and costly in its outcome.

You may change your mind next year. Consider the outcome of the next election. The polls point to another hung parliament with Labour losing seats to the SNP, the Tories losing seats to UKIP and the Lib Dems losing to everyone. It is impossible to see how anyone can win. What are the possible options for forming a government:

- Tory minority - The SNP don't currently vote on English only matters in the Commons. If they stick to that then we have EVEL in practice anyway. If the SNP did vote down a Tory income tax measure for England and Scotland only it would be unjust and would accelerate calls for full federalisation.

- Labour minority - plus the rump Lib Dems, greens and anyone else they could find ( I still can't see a majority out of this). This grouping could propose english only law, for example on education, yet wouldn't have a majority in England. What is their democratic mandate in such circumstances?

- Labour led coalition with SNP - this will be a total catastrophe first of all because the SNP's price will be abolishing Trident and another referendum. How could the government justifiably pass laws on taxes for England and Wales using Scottish votes?

what is worse, the Fixed Term Parliament Act means we will have five full years of this shambles.

Was this featured in anyone's manifesto?

page 93 of the 2010 Conservative manifesto promises a commission and resolution to the West Lothian question.

The problems I have with Free Schools.....

I'd be very happy to debate free schools but I don't want to hijack this thread.

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

So in negotiations on a vote that could split the Union an old grandee but now minor member of the opposition was allowed to dictate government policy?








Amazing.










The West Lothian question was in the Tory manifesto in 2010 and a few months before their term of office comes to an end they suddenly try to rush through constitutional change. This really is a shoddy way to govern.

 

[Carry On Shrimping]

Amazing but true