Sociology Talk Sociology Talk    FAQ   Search   Memberlist   Usergroups   Register   Profile   Log in to check your private messages   Log in  The West Lothian Question- The Tory proposals are no answer Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next          Sociology Talk Forum Index -> British View previous topic :: View next topic   Author Message Robert Henderson Guest Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 5:29 pm    Post subject: The West Lothian Question- The Tory proposals are no answer Ken Clarke's "remedy" for English anger at a lack of representation is no remedy at all. There are four reasons for its failure: (1) If adopted, there would be endless wrangling over what was an English only issue. (2) the position of Wales and N Ireland is not addressed - they already have large subsidies and powers which allow them to determine important areas of policy such as health spending. (3) all the majority party whether having a majority of English MPs or not, would still have the power to initiate all legislation, all MPs would be allowed to vote on the first and second readings and there would be no legal bar to overturning English amendments made during the committee stage . (4) there appears to have been no consideration of the position of the Lords, which it seems would still be allowed to vote on all legislation despite being a UK wide assembly. RH -- Robert Henderson Blair Scandal website: http://www.geocities.com/ blairscandal/ Personal website: http://www.anywhere.demon.co.uk Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor R. Mark Clayton Guest Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 7:24 pm    Post subject: Re: The West Lothian Question- The Tory proposals are no an "Robert Henderson" <philip@anywhere.demon.co.uk> wrote in message news:aaGBTUhfS3aIFw4C@anywhere.demon.co.uk... Quote: Ken Clarke's "remedy" for English anger at a lack of representation is no remedy at all. There are four reasons for its failure: (1) If adopted, there would be endless wrangling over what was an English only issue. Hardly - such laws state the terratory. Quote: (2) the position of Wales and N Ireland is not addressed - they already have large subsidies and powers which allow them to determine important areas of policy such as health spending. NI is, Wales probably isn't as most English laws also apply to Wales. Quote: (3) all the majority party whether having a majority of English MPs or not, would still have the power to initiate all legislation, all MPs would be allowed to vote on the first and second readings and there would be no legal bar to overturning English amendments made during the committee stage . It would still be a UK parliament. Other parties and private members can initiate legislation. Quote: (4) there appears to have been no consideration of the position of the Lords, which it seems would still be allowed to vote on all legislation despite being a UK wide assembly. RH And not actually representing anyone! Quote: -- Robert Henderson Blair Scandal website: http://www.geocities.com/ blairscandal/ Personal website: http://www.anywhere.demon.co.uk Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor Andrew Guest Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 10:55 pm    Post subject: Re: The West Lothian Question- The Tory proposals are no an On 2008-07-02 13:29:19 +0100, Robert Henderson <philip@anywhere.demon.co.uk> said: Quote: Ken Clarke's "remedy" for English anger at a lack of representation is no remedy at all. There are four reasons for its failure: (1) If adopted, there would be endless wrangling over what was an English only issue. (2) the position of Wales and N Ireland is not addressed - they already have large subsidies and powers which allow them to determine important areas of policy such as health spending. (3) all the majority party whether having a majority of English MPs or not, would still have the power to initiate all legislation, all MPs would be allowed to vote on the first and second readings and there would be no legal bar to overturning English amendments made during the committee stage . (4) there appears to have been no consideration of the position of the Lords, which it seems would still be allowed to vote on all legislation despite being a UK wide assembly. RH You're probably substantially right here. The only real solution I can see that would work (other than dissolving the Union altogether) is for England to have its own Parliament, just as Scotland does. Ideally it could be based away from London. Westminister is the UK Parliament, and creating 2 classes of representative there would, I think, be corrosive to its stability. Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor John of Aix Guest Posted: Thu Jul 03, 2008 1:42 am    Post subject: Re: The West Lothian Question- The Tory proposals are no an Andrew wrote: Quote: You're probably substantially right here. The only real solution I can see that would work (other than dissolving the Union altogether) is for England to have its own Parliament, just as Scotland does. Ideally it could be based away from London. Westminister is the UK Parliament, and creating 2 classes of representative there would, I think, be corrosive to its stability. Yes but wouldn't an English parliament also be corrosive to the stability of the UK, as the Scots and, to a lesser extent, the Welsh parliaments have been? Is there not a danger that the 'UK parliament' become the focus for the attacks of the other, national parliamentarians and so the idea of the UK itself is corroded? Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor Andrew Guest Posted: Thu Jul 03, 2008 2:11 am    Post subject: Re: The West Lothian Question- The Tory proposals are no an On 2008-07-02 21:42:08 +0100, "John of Aix" <j.murphy@libertysurf.fr> said: Quote: Andrew wrote: You're probably substantially right here. The only real solution I can see that would work (other than dissolving the Union altogether) is for England to have its own Parliament, just as Scotland does. Ideally it could be based away from London. Westminister is the UK Parliament, and creating 2 classes of representative there would, I think, be corrosive to its stability. Yes but wouldn't an English parliament also be corrosive to the stability of the UK, as the Scots and, to a lesser extent, the Welsh parliaments have been? Is there not a danger that the 'UK parliament' become the focus for the attacks of the other, national parliamentarians and so the idea of the UK itself is corroded? It's possible. But one of the problems we have at the moment is that a 'pot' of finance is identifiable for Scotland, for Wales and for Northern Ireland. There is no equivalent "English" budget and this produces misunderstandings about how much is spent per capita etc. I actually don't think it is the existence of Scottish and Welsh parliaments per se have been corrosive to the UK, but the asymmetrical nature of the settlement has been. To be honest I think the neature of the UK has to change if it is to survive. A federal system might work. The status qo ante wasn't working either. Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor Robert Henderson Guest Posted: Thu Jul 03, 2008 9:36 am    Post subject: Re: The West Lothian Question- The Tory proposals are no an In message <2008070218554150073-thecroft@macunlimitednet>, Andrew <thecroft@macunlimited.net> writes Quote: On 2008-07-02 13:29:19 +0100, Robert Henderson philip@anywhere.demon.co.uk> said: Ken Clarke's "remedy" for English anger at a lack of representation is no remedy at all. There are four reasons for its failure: (1) If adopted, there would be endless wrangling over what was an English only issue. (2) the position of Wales and N Ireland is not addressed - they already have large subsidies and powers which allow them to determine important areas of policy such as health spending. (3) all the majority party whether having a majority of English MPs or not, would still have the power to initiate all legislation, all MPs would be allowed to vote on the first and second readings and there would be no legal bar to overturning English amendments made during the committee stage . (4) there appears to have been no consideration of the position of the Lords, which it seems would still be allowed to vote on all legislation despite being a UK wide assembly. RH You're probably substantially right here. The only real solution I can see that would work (other than dissolving the Union altogether) is for England to have its own Parliament, just as Scotland does. Ideally it could be based away from London. Westminister is the UK Parliament, and creating 2 classes of representative there would, I think, be corrosive to its stability. Simple solution: exclude all non-English seat MPs from the Commons and that becomes the English parliament once more. The members of the four national parliaments then sit in the federal parliament. The Lords would be abolished. RH -- Robert Henderson Blair Scandal website: http://www.geocities.com/ blairscandal/ Personal website: http://www.anywhere.demon.co.uk Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor Robert Henderson Guest Posted: Thu Jul 03, 2008 9:38 am    Post subject: Re: The West Lothian Question- The Tory proposals are no an In message <2008070222111650073-thecroft@macunlimitednet>, Andrew <thecroft@macunlimited.net> writes Quote: It's possible. But one of the problems we have at the moment is that a 'pot' of finance is identifiable for Scotland, for Wales and for Northern Ireland. There is no equivalent "English" budget and this produces misunderstandings about how much is spent per capita etc. I actually don't think it is the existence of Scottish and Welsh parliaments per se have been corrosive to the UK, but the asymmetrical nature of the settlement has been. Four separate Parliaments with Home Rule in each nation and each national to be made fiscally responsible. That would get Celtic sphincter muscles fore and aft working overtime. RH Quote: To be honest I think the neature of the UK has to change if it is to survive. A federal system might work. The status qo ante wasn't working either. -- Robert Henderson Blair Scandal website: http://www.geocities.com/ blairscandal/ Personal website: http://www.anywhere.demon.co.uk Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor Robert Henderson Guest Posted: Thu Jul 03, 2008 4:14 pm    Post subject: Re: The West Lothian Question- The Tory proposals are no an In message <486be81a$0$907$ba4acef3@news.orange.fr>, John of Aix <j.murphy@libertysurf.fr> writes Quote: Andrew wrote: You're probably substantially right here. The only real solution I can see that would work (other than dissolving the Union altogether) is for England to have its own Parliament, just as Scotland does. Ideally it could be based away from London. Westminister is the UK Parliament, and creating 2 classes of representative there would, I think, be corrosive to its stability. Yes but wouldn't an English parliament also be corrosive to the stability of the UK, as the Scots and, to a lesser extent, the Welsh parliaments have been? Is there not a danger that the 'UK parliament' become the focus for the attacks of the other, national parliamentarians and so the idea of the UK itself is corroded? Clarke's plan is designed specifically to nullify the constitutionally fissile implications of English votes on English laws. A straightforward English votes on English laws regime - leaving aside the question of what is an English only law - would produce a constitutional nonsense when a party had a majority of English MPs but a minority of MPs in the Commons. This would result in a situation where a government could be formed of a combination of English MPs and Celts which would be unable to legislate on most areas or decide spending on 80% of the total UK budget (around 80% of spending is in England on matters which are not UK national matters). As for what constitutes English laws, apart from any claims by the Celts that what England does affects them and thus is not an English-only law, there is the EU dimension. Add the 60-70% of current legislation which is EU derived to the matters which are either federal and one has to ask what would be left to be designated English only laws even before the question of what is an English-only law is addressed. The importance of the Lords should not be underestimated either. This would still be a UK wide house adjudicating on England only legislation which they could certainly delay and mutilate by amending it to death. There is also the question whether the Parliament Act could be invoked to over-ride the Lords if an English majority in English seats produced legislation which neither the Lords nor the Commons as a whole supported. RH -- Robert Henderson Blair Scandal website: http://www.geocities.com/ blairscandal/ Personal website: http://www.anywhere.demon.co.uk Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor Andrew Guest Posted: Fri Jul 04, 2008 4:30 am    Post subject: Re: The West Lothian Question- The Tory proposals are no an On 2008-07-03 05:38:23 +0100, Robert Henderson <philip@anywhere.demon.co.uk> said: Quote: In message <2008070222111650073-thecroft@macunlimitednet>, Andrew thecroft@macunlimited.net> writes It's possible. But one of the problems we have at the moment is that a 'pot' of finance is identifiable for Scotland, for Wales and for Northern Ireland. There is no equivalent "English" budget and this produces misunderstandings about how much is spent per capita etc. I actually don't think it is the existence of Scottish and Welsh parliaments per se have been corrosive to the UK, but the asymmetrical nature of the settlement has been. Four separate Parliaments with Home Rule in each nation and each national to be made fiscally responsible. Or "SNP policy", as we like to call it. Quote: That would get Celtic sphincter muscles fore and aft working overtime. RH Actually, what we've been asking for. All finances and tax receipts raised in Scotland go first to the Scottish treasury, then we contribute a proportion of the budget required for non-devolved matters on a per capita basis. Seems fair to me. Quote: To be honest I think the neature of the UK has to change if it is to survive. A federal system might work. The status qo ante wasn't working either. Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor Andrew Guest Posted: Fri Jul 04, 2008 4:33 am    Post subject: Re: The West Lothian Question- The Tory proposals are no an On 2008-07-03 05:36:57 +0100, Robert Henderson <philip@anywhere.demon.co.uk> said: Quote: In message <2008070218554150073-thecroft@macunlimitednet>, Andrew thecroft@macunlimited.net> writes On 2008-07-02 13:29:19 +0100, Robert Henderson philip@anywhere.demon.co.uk> said: Ken Clarke's "remedy" for English anger at a lack of representation is no remedy at all. There are four reasons for its failure: (1) If adopted, there would be endless wrangling over what was an English only issue. (2) the position of Wales and N Ireland is not addressed - they already have large subsidies and powers which allow them to determine important areas of policy such as health spending. (3) all the majority party whether having a majority of English MPs or not, would still have the power to initiate all legislation, all MPs would be allowed to vote on the first and second readings and there would be no legal bar to overturning English amendments made during the committee stage . (4) there appears to have been no consideration of the position of the Lords, which it seems would still be allowed to vote on all legislation despite being a UK wide assembly. RH You're probably substantially right here. The only real solution I can see that would work (other than dissolving the Union altogether) is for England to have its own Parliament, just as Scotland does. Ideally it could be based away from London. Westminister is the UK Parliament, and creating 2 classes of representative there would, I think, be corrosive to its stability. Simple solution: exclude all non-English seat MPs from the Commons and that becomes the English parliament once more. The members of the four national parliaments then sit in the federal parliament. The Lords would be abolished. RH As long as we didn't have to subsidise your English parliament, that would be fine. So, where do you fancy siting the federal parliament? (Clue - not Westminister). Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor Robert Henderson Guest Posted: Fri Jul 04, 2008 9:33 am    Post subject: Re: The West Lothian Question- The Tory proposals are no an In message <2008070400302216807-thecroft@macunlimitednet>, Andrew <thecroft@macunlimited.net> writes Quote: On 2008-07-03 05:38:23 +0100, Robert Henderson philip@anywhere.demon.co.uk> said: In message <2008070222111650073-thecroft@macunlimitednet>, Andrew thecroft@macunlimited.net> writes It's possible. But one of the problems we have at the moment is that a 'pot' of finance is identifiable for Scotland, for Wales and Northern Ireland. There is no equivalent "English" budget and this produces misunderstandings about how much is spent per capita etc. I actually don't think it is the existence of Scottish and Welsh parliaments per se have been corrosive to the UK, but the asymmetrical nature of the settlement has been. Four separate Parliaments with Home Rule in each nation and each national to be made fiscally responsible. Or "SNP policy", as we like to call it. That would get Celtic sphincter muscles fore and aft working overtime. RH Actually, what we've been asking for. All finances and tax receipts raised in Scotland go first to the Scottish treasury, That would not of course include any oil or gas revenues which are a UK resource. RH Quote: then we contribute a proportion of the budget required for non-devolved matters on a per capita basis. Seems fair to me. First rate. Then Scotchland would revert t its natural state, a churchmouse poor land on the very periphery of Europe. RH -- Robert Henderson Blair Scandal website: http://www.geocities.com/ blairscandal/ Personal website: http://www.anywhere.demon.co.uk Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor Robert Henderson Guest Posted: Fri Jul 04, 2008 9:35 am    Post subject: Re: The West Lothian Question- The Tory proposals are no an In message <2008070400332075249-thecroft@macunlimitednet>, Andrew <thecroft@macunlimited.net> writes Quote: than dissolving the Union altogether) is for England to have its own Parliament, just as Scotland does. Ideally it could be based away from London. Westminister is the UK Parliament, and creating 2 classes of representative there would, I think, be corrosive to its Simple solution: exclude all non-English seat MPs from the Commons and that becomes the English parliament once more. The members of the four national parliaments then sit in the federal parliament. The Lords would be abolished. RH As long as we didn't have to subsidise your English parliament, that would be fine. So, where do you fancy siting the federal parliament? (Clue - not Westminister). Give the Celts a choice between each building with their own money an assembly big enough to take the members and rotate the parliament or use the House of Lords. RH -- Robert Henderson Blair Scandal website: http://www.geocities.com/ blairscandal/ Personal website: http://www.anywhere.demon.co.uk Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor Nemo Guest Posted: Fri Jul 04, 2008 11:08 am    Post subject: Re: The West Lothian Question- The Tory proposals are no an Andrew wrote: Quote: As long as we didn't have to subsidise your English parliament, that would be fine. So, where do you fancy siting the federal parliament? (Clue - not Westminister). York seems to be quite a popular choice amongst some of those working toward actually getting an English Parliament. -- Nemo "Feather-footed through the plashy fen passes the questing vole" Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor Andrew Guest Posted: Sat Jul 05, 2008 3:38 am    Post subject: Re: The West Lothian Question- The Tory proposals are no an On 2008-07-04 05:33:52 +0100, Robert Henderson <philip@anywhere.demon.co.uk> said: Quote: In message <2008070400302216807-thecroft@macunlimitednet>, Andrew thecroft@macunlimited.net> writes On 2008-07-03 05:38:23 +0100, Robert Henderson philip@anywhere.demon.co.uk> said: In message <2008070222111650073-thecroft@macunlimitednet>, Andrew thecroft@macunlimited.net> writes It's possible. But one of the problems we have at the moment is that a 'pot' of finance is identifiable for Scotland, for Wales and Northern Ireland. There is no equivalent "English" budget and this produces misunderstandings about how much is spent per capita etc. I actually don't think it is the existence of Scottish and Welsh parliaments per se have been corrosive to the UK, but the asymmetrical nature of the settlement has been. Four separate Parliaments with Home Rule in each nation and each national to be made fiscally responsible. Or "SNP policy", as we like to call it. That would get Celtic sphincter muscles fore and aft working overtime. RH Actually, what we've been asking for. All finances and tax receipts raised in Scotland go first to the Scottish treasury, That would not of course include any oil or gas revenues which are a UK resource. RH Can't have it both ways Bobby-boy. You want fiscal independence then you abandon the notion of 'UK resource'. Quote: then we contribute a proportion of the budget required for non-devolved matters on a per capita basis. Seems fair to me. First rate. Then Scotchland would revert t its natural state, a churchmouse poor land on the very periphery of Europe. RH Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor Andrew Guest Posted: Sat Jul 05, 2008 3:41 am    Post subject: Re: The West Lothian Question- The Tory proposals are no an On 2008-07-04 05:35:46 +0100, Robert Henderson <philip@anywhere.demon.co.uk> said: Quote: In message <2008070400332075249-thecroft@macunlimitednet>, Andrew thecroft@macunlimited.net> writes than dissolving the Union altogether) is for England to have its own Parliament, just as Scotland does. Ideally it could be based away from London. Westminister is the UK Parliament, and creating 2 classes of representative there would, I think, be corrosive to its Simple solution: exclude all non-English seat MPs from the Commons and that becomes the English parliament once more. The members of the four national parliaments then sit in the federal parliament. The Lords would be abolished. RH As long as we didn't have to subsidise your English parliament, that would be fine. So, where do you fancy siting the federal parliament? (Clue - not Westminister). Give the Celts a choice between each building with their own money an assembly big enough to take the members and rotate the parliament or use the House of Lords. RH So where does the English parliament sit? In the Westminister buildings we've contributed to? Using the equipment we've contributed to? I don't think so. Typical English though - "what's mine is mine and what's yours is mine too". Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor Display posts from previous: All Posts1 Day7 Days2 Weeks1 Month3 Months6 Months1 Year Oldest FirstNewest First         Sociology Talk Forum Index -> British All times are GMT Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next Page 1 of 3   Jump to: Select a forum Sociology Talk----------------Sociology Talk-- FutureConstitutionBush PoliticsBritish  You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum Australian Debt Consolidation Experts medical insurance Wedding Ring Annunci di escort, accompagnatrici e massaggiatrici Swingers and Swinging Xpointer XMLNS life insurance Make Your Own Website Cheap phone calls to UAE Cleaning Service black mold UK Swingers Genuine Contacts Site Dir All office equipment Sex Bondage Sanitaire Vacuum Parts 122 Attacks blocked Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group