Comments on: English votes for English issues

by: Who do you think you are kidding Mr Prescott?

Fri, 09 Dec 2005 23:43:20 +0000

Calling all Conservative Bloggers

The new Spectator blog has a guest posting by Tim Montgomery of Conservative Home. Tim makes an interesting observation on the blogsphere

by: The Fog is Clearing

Sun, 13 Nov 2005 18:32:16 +0000

When I read this I think “Quebec.” I think I’ll scurry back to the Canadian Blogs.

by: David H

Sat, 12 Nov 2005 14:52:25 +0000

Anyone advocating regionalism as an answer to the devolution question either simply hasn’t thought the issue through or puposely wants to weaken England’s position within the Union. Regionalism will significantly weaken England’s position against Scotland and Wales - England will be divided up into bite sized chunks each one of which will be less populous than Scotland. These regions will be encouraged to compete against each other thus weakening us even further.

England only votes are a good solution to the West Lothian question - if I wasn’t already firmly in the Davis camp just this one policy proposal (and the hot air spouted by his opponent on this issue) would have me convinced. An English parliament is not the answer - we’ll be fobbed off with some Norman Foster inspired monstrosity in the Midlands somewhere while the reis of power remain in SW1 - and we’ll end up with less power than the Scottish Executive has.

Yes, this probably is a proposal which will hasten the break up of the Union, but that break-up has been inevitable ever since the Devolution Act of 1999.

by: DE

Sat, 12 Nov 2005 11:14:40 +0000

I’d be more concerned about splitting up England. Lots of policies could be said to favour the South East against the North. There is a lot of regionalism in the West too. Oddly, I’m sure I heard Cameron suggest he wanted to abandon regional assemblies.

Lets face it, no one has really thought about the consequances of running this idea up the flagpole.

by: Gary Monro

Sat, 12 Nov 2005 01:44:02 +0000

I wonder if, once enacted, such an idea would hasten the end of the Union?

by: DE

Fri, 11 Nov 2005 17:59:28 +0000

This is a bit of an attempt at “cler blue water” (i.e. Cameron won’t go here). It separates people nationally, which goes down well with the old Tory audience.

“Only English MPs could vote, let’s say, on English education policies or English health policies,”

This is clearly policy on the hoof - he hasn’t actually drawn any lines anywhere. This area is a civil service nightmare - hence it will never actually happen.

I understand the point - focus on the messy bits is not that important. At least its policy. But this is less innovative, more combative.

by: harold

Fri, 11 Nov 2005 17:27:59 +0000

I have to say that DD’s ideas about English representation fall far short of what is fair. He does not say that the Scots should abandon their parliament and vote at Westminster on Scottish matters with the exclusion of the English MPs. Why not? If he wants to avoid a whole new layer of politicos he is to be applauded, but he should also get rid of the Scottish parliament, Welsh Assembly and 300 MPs and 300 members of the Lords as well as those useless MEPs. There is merit in abolishing the Scottish and Welsh devolutionary mechanism and instead letting the Westminster Scottish MPs sit separately two days a week to govern Scotland on devolved matters, a day for Welsh MPs to run Wales and the rest for the English MPs to run England. It should not be difficult, and much easier with double sized constituencies and a half number of UK MPs, all would be able to sit on Federal government matters such as defence and Foreign affairs. Holidays for all MPs should be reduced to six weeks a year to provide the necessary working time.