Comments on: Devolution and the West Lothian Question

By: Little Man in a Toque » Strange bedfellows: Redwood and Elis-Thomas

Little Man in a Toque » Strange bedfellows: Redwood and Elis-Thomas — Sat, 22 Mar 2008 22:17:18 +0000

[...] on. John Redwood has a new blog: What I would like to see is the return of the English Parliament to Westminster. Everything which [...]

By: It`s in the details — eurealist.co.uk

It`s in the details — eurealist.co.uk — Thu, 13 Mar 2008 01:22:17 +0000

[...] Lord Elis-Thomas is in line with the thinking of John Redwood who also favours a part time English parliament this from Mr Redwoods new Blog [...]

By: Alan Eaves

Alan Eaves — Thu, 25 Jan 2007 08:05:35 +0000

Maybe as a first step, it would be a great move forward to have a Goverment with English Ministers sitting on the front bench – and also, occupying the majority of Junior Minister jobs – by contrast with our current position, which as we all know is dominated by Scots.

Alan Eaves

By: Masaryk

Masaryk — Wed, 27 Dec 2006 12:47:28 +0000

I read your Death of Britian. And, yes, you were right to a large extent. Nations are dynamic beings because they're made of people.

As far as I can see there's very little the UK state can do which the constituent nations couldn't. The only exception would be in the field of war. But then independence all round gives the different nations the choice of which wars to fight … and which ones not to.

As a Welshman I can't see what the English get from the Union and in any case as any Welshman and Scotsman will tell you, most people across the globe think that England refers to the UK and the whole island in any case.

A UK Federal state is an option, but why bother? In a globalised world and a European Union (even were it to be relaxed) then independence is the tidiest and offer and will stop the begrudging and whining from the constituent nation. The Czechs and Slovaks now believe that independence was the best option in 1993 even if most didn't think so at the time.

By: Ken Adams

Ken Adams — Sat, 23 Dec 2006 10:50:53 +0000

Aberdonian, has offered the best reason I have yet seen to oppose a separate English parliament, I would however suggest that, the break up of the UK can also be caused by the Scottish parliament. The SNP are standing on an independence referendum ticket, if they gain enough votes the Scottish people alone will be allowed a vote on the break up of our country. If the vote is yes the Scottish government will be mandated to move towards independence that will then be the beginning of an almost unstoppable process. The rest of us in Britian will have had no chance to vote on the issue.

By: Terry Brown

Terry Brown — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 23:46:52 +0000

Mr Redwood, like most members of his party, is very adept at the 'Ostrich stance' which is to say head in the sand and a very vulnerable part of their political anatomy sticking up in the air. Mr Redwood, Unionism is dying, yet you and your associates cling to it with morbid determination. Your power base is England, not Scotland, not Wales, not Northern Ireland. Despite this you still seem determined not to enfranchise the English. Why not? Why are we continually denied democratic parity with the, politically speaking, fringe nations? Why should we be fobbed off with EVoEM? Who will decide what matters are English, Scottish ministers! The Speaker of the House! Lord, 'voting is a privilege' Falconer! The only answer is an English Parliament, nothing less will do, nothing less will be acceptable to England. Mr Redwood, I suggest you use your undoubted political skills to persuade your party to whole-heartedly propose and support a parliament for England; Then you and your colleagues can prepare for government. If not, you will need a bigger sandpit to bury your heads in.

By: Anthony Baggett

Anthony Baggett — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 22:01:46 +0000

Dear Mr Redwood,
I wrote to you some years ago regarding an English Parliament and in your reply you rather scoffed at the idea. At least you were curteous enough to reply – thank you. However you now appear to be shifting towards the idea; wise move, I applaud you.

By: Tommy3Lions

Tommy3Lions — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 20:27:02 +0000

John.
Sir, the union is finished, it is in last moments, new labour have bought this about by their utter contempt and exploitation of the English people. There is no way back for the union, I can't understand why the Tories have not accepted this, you have no influence in Scotland and probably never will again, you need to grasp this wonderful opportunity that has been presented to you and move on. Is ot not the Scotch, welsh vote that keeps labour in power, an Independent England would give your party a better chance of election.
However I have to say that I whom have voted Conservative all my life am now an English democratic party voter, they seem to have grasped whats going on and have left your boys way behind with no idea really.

Kind regards

By: John Hutchings

John Hutchings — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 18:20:52 +0000

To put it bluntly WW will just jolly well have to accept that England must be accorded the same rights – ie an English national parliament with the same briefs and the same competencies as Scotland .

– or before too long the strains within the UK will be such that the UK will cease to exist – in which England will have her parliament and self government anyway .
It cannot be beyond the wit of even the existing British political class to grasp that there is a profound and unsustainable injustice in the governance of the United Kingdom . The solution is simple – a federal United Kingdom – just the sort of federation which the British have been instrumental in setting up across the world throughout modern history .

The fact of the disparity of size of the constituent parts of the UK is irrelevant . Once you have accepted that the rest becomes easy .

By: The Aberdonian

The Aberdonian — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 14:00:04 +0000

Terry I agree with you on that one. The main reason that Westminster/Whitehall (WW) is probably reluctant to grant a seperate English parliament and executive is the fear of the loss of power and of control.

If a federal arrangement was introduced the power of WW would be drastically reduced to only foreign policy, defence, macroeconomics, border control, international trade, trade regulation, social security and a few other things such as transport and energy planning. The rest of the departments such as education and agriculture would be husks sending out supervising edicts. Much of the British civil service would be transferred to the control of the English authority. This scares WW.

Concerning the loss of contol – if an English parliament and executive was created, it would be extremely powerful simply by the fact it would be in charge of most of the British population. The head of the English government – titled such as First Minister, Lord Protector or even a Lady Protector who hails from Grantham and whose father was in the grocery business – would be the second most powerful politician in the UK. Not the Chancellor of the Exchequer as it is now.

A British Prime Minister can sack a Chancellor – he/she could not sack the English head of government and so would have no power to deal with such a powerful political rival. If the English government demanded more power WW would be forced to grant it by sheer scale of the power of the English government. If the Scottish, Welsh or NI governments wanted more power they can be swotted like insignificant flies by the "daddies" in WW. Try that with an English government. If the English government demanded full financial powers from WW, then WW could not fight them. With Scotland, Wales and NI they can be told by WW that they will be too poor to have them and they are better off with pocket money from WW. The paradox is that by saying that Scotland, Wales and NI are poor, then WW is saying England is subsidising them and the English government can then confidently demand full control as it is their money and they can look after themselves thank you very much.

The UK is a "hub" union state where one part of the union is the hub connecting the other three. Other examples of "hub" unions are the USSR where the hub was Russia, Yugoslavia where the hub was Serbia and Czechoslovakia where the hub was Bohemia. Existing hubs include Spain where the hub is Castille. This contrasts to balanced unions such as Australia and the USA where the parts are theoretically equal (with some parts such as New York and California or NSW and Victoria more equal than others).

WW will not allow the creation of a powerful "hub" part of the union. This is more dangerous to the union than whatever Scottish or Welsh nationalists can throw at it. If England started throwing its weight around in the UK, there is little WW could do to stop it and it would drive Scotland and possibly Wales out of the UK.

To put it bluntly WW will not create something like a political Frankenstein's monster that could certainly overpower it if so chose.