Will the West Lothian Question ever be resolved?

Question

Smp allowed to vote on English affairs

Answer 1

British politics is in a mess over devolution. 85% of the UK's population lives in England. England has one Parliament. Scotland has a second in Edinburgh, which has voted - for example - to provide better healthcare and free university education for Scots. Labour's Scottish MP's at Westminster, however, have voted with the government against such measures in England. Without those Scottish MP's, Labour could not push through its programme.

Meanwhile, England subsidises Scotland. Estimates vary, but ten billion pounds a year seems the most common round number. It's cheap by comparison with the EU, but it provides even fewer benefits to England. It has never won an ounce of goodwill from ordinary Scots, whose hatred of the "sassenachs" seems actually to have become worse with increasing economic dependence. Englishmen like me who love Scotland and like to visit learn to play up real or imagined Celtic antecedents so as to be treated with moderate courtesy while we are relieved of our money.

Soon it is likely that all three major national political parties will be led by Scots. Scots dominate the present cabinet and will probably dominate the next. 80% of the voters of Gordon Brown's Scottish constituency derive their income from the state, one way or another. This is fairly typical. Scotland is a Socialist "voter farm".

English anger at the "Scottish Raj" is rising to dangerous levels. Ordinary working-class English people are sick and tired of being blamed for everyone else's problems because of the alleged misconduct of their ancestors. St Georges' Day was a non-event when I was a boy with The Times snootily commenting on one occasion that "...nationalism varies inversely with the importance of the nation..." Now the flag of St George flies on that day and the long-slumbering beast of English nationalism is stirring. Debates on the England/Scotland question in the blogosphere are becoming quite disturbing in their intensity.

There is no ethnic difference between us. The DNA of the people on our islands (including the island of Ireland) is so mixed as to make the pretence of ethnicity ridiculous. We are one people, but sadly we don't feel it. Like Conan Doyle, I would like the entire Anglosphere to be politically united, but that's an idealistic dream. What Billy Connolly calls "...the wee pretendy Parliament..." will probably develop into a real one. The original West Lothian question will be supplemented with a new one; how can a United Kindgom government and parliament dominated by Scots negotiate Scottish independence with the Scottish Parliament without the English being stuffed for one last time?

We need an intermediate stage; ideally one which costs no more money and gives employment to no more wasters and scoundrels than the present set up. Here is my proposal

The present House of Commons should remain, but with fair representation for England, Scotland and Wales (i.e. fewer Scottish and Welsh MP's). The House of Lords should be abolished. An English Senate should be elected. The Welsh Assembly should become the Welsh Senate and the Scottish Parliament the Scottish Senate. The three "Petty Senates" should meet separately on issues solely relating to England, Scotland and Wales respectively as unicameral local parliaments with specific delegated powers (identical in each case, rather than the present mishmash).

The three Senates combined (the "Grand Senate") should fulfil the present functions of the House of Lords.

The appointment of judges should be delegated to the chairman of each of the Petty Senates, so that independent judiciaries can emerge over time. The Grand Senate should be charged with forming a new constitution for the United Kingdom. That constitution could include entrenched provisions (e.g. on civil liberties) which could only be amended with the consent of all three Petty Senates.

In the short term this would provide fairness and improve parliamentary democracy. In the long term it would create constitutional perforations which could later be torn to separate two or three of the nations if they so require.

I anticipate it would be England that first decides to go. At least its Petty Senate, rather than the Scots-infiltrated House of Commons, could then provide the negotiating team for the constitutional settlement that would follow.

Answer 2

The West Lothian Question is a very tricky problem that the Government don't seem to be doing anything about. There has been no plans to change this as at the moment the government has had more important things to be worrying about.
The Labour Party don't really mind the fact that the Scottish are overrepresented seeing as though they are quite well supported by the Scots and so creates double votes for them. It also is helping them to pass bills as is the case with the recent health bill. It was passed by the extra Scottish votes.
There is also the problem that it was the Labour Party's idea and creation, therefore they don't want to admit a huge flaw in it.
For the moment, nothing will be done, especially as John Prescott is trying to get the idea of Regional assemblies to increase devolution and delegate a lot of the Parliament's duties.

Answer 3

The question is twofold:

How can it be right that MPs elected to Westminster from Scottish constituencies have no ability to affect the issues of their constituents which have been devolved to the Scottish Parliament, and
If power over Scottish affairs is devolved to a Scottish Parliament, how can it be right that MPs representing Scottish constituencies in the Parliament of the United Kingdom will have the power to vote on issues affecting England (including those that don't affect Scotland), but English MPs will not have the power to vote on Scottish issues?

Oliver Heald's view:"It is not sustainable to have measures imposed on England on the back of the votes of Scottish MPs, when the same measures in Scotland are the responsibility of the Scottish Parliament."[

Lord Falconer view:"All matters — even those seemingly limited to England — impact on the Union. The funding settlement with the nations and regions of the UK means that what is decided on public funding in England, for example, affects Scotland and Wales and Northern Ireland. These are national issues for the United Kingdom and so they should be debated at the national Parliament in Westminster by all MPs, not by subsets depending on the location of their constituency.

Answer to your question: The one carrying the biggest stick will carry the day. Therefore, it will remain unresolved.

Answer 4

This absurd discriminatory move could be ended with a serious grass roots organization to vote out Alan Duncan and other Tory MPs.

Answer 5

Only if those involved get to work on it and try to resolve it. But there is no sign of interest in doing that.

Answer 6

BrianK200. You should stand for parliament in the next election. That is of course if you are not already an M.P.

Answer 7

Most People Never Hurd Of THAT.

Answer 8

If they don't like it, they can f*ck off back to Schleswig-Holstein, the Anglo-Saxon w*nkers.

Answer 9

why ???? if I had my way I'd rebuild hadrians wall and cage the scots in ..... Independence give them it I say , bitter twisted nation of people.

Answer 10

yes when we get independence from the lot in westminster.