Category: Blog

Let me try to explain my idea again. This is not official Conservative policy which is still being discussed. The official Conservative policy in 2005 was to create English votes on English issues in the Westminster Parliament to deal with the worst imbalance of Labour’s bodged and biased devolution "settlement". My proposal goes further.

I suggest that England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland all have devolved assemblies settling a range of agreed issues on the Scottish model. We elect MPs to Westminster who are dual mandate MPs in every case. Those sitting for Scottish seats sit in the Edinburgh Parliament part of the time to settle Scottish matters, and sit in the Westminster Parliament to settle Union matters for the rest of their working time with MPs from the other three parts of the UK. There would no more Scottish elections for a different cast of characters to be MSPs – instead Westminster MPs elected for Scottish seats would also be the MSPs.

Those sitting for English seats would sit in the English Parliament – meeting in the Westminster building which has been the home of the English Parliament for many hundreds of years, prior to it becoming the Union Parliament in 1707. They too will meet with colleagues from the rest of the UK to settle Union matters at Westminster, which would also remain the home of the UK Parliament. It would be up to the elected English MPs to decide what office holders they wanted to carry out their business.

These proposals would

a) Restore symmetry and fairness between the different countries of the Union

b) Save money compared with a model which required yet more politicans to be elected to a new English Parliament, and compared to the present model with the current additional elected people in Scotland and Wales

c) Ensure full time use of the Westminster Parliament and facilities, and??better value from??all elected politicians.

d) Overcome some of the weaknesses of the Scottish (and English) Parliaments being the subsidiary bodies, dependent on tax and grant votes in the Union Parliament for the money they spend. If we carry on with two different sets of elected representatives, one in the each of the devolved bodies and one in the UK body, it provides every excuse for no accountability. The devolved representatives blame the Union for insufficient funds, and the Union MPs blame the devolved administrations for running things badly. No-one is to blame. if the same people carry out the devolved functions and share responsbility for the Union functions it is easier to establish accountability.

Of course the Union can only survive if enough people in all parts of it want it to. At some point we need a referendum throughout the Union on whether the settlement is working and whether the Union is still supported.

Parliament does not meet this week – we are having another nineteen day gap.

As someone who thinks there is too much legislation already I am not concerned that we are failing to produce new laws, but I am concerned that another nineteen??days pass when the government does not have to face questioning on any of its deeds or words. It also means that when we are allowed back more legislation will be rushed through with insufficient time to??examine and amend??it.??

??I am not surprised. Doubtless the government does not wish to be asked how the cash for peerages enquiry is proceeding, what influence they are having on Mr Bush’s new policy towards Iraq, how much??sway they have with Mrs Merkel who seems determined to bring back the much hated EU Constitution, or whether over the last month they have had any better thoughts on how to get some of the 5.3 million on benefit back to work.

Devolution

No, I am not proposing the abolition of the Scottish Parliament. I am suggesting that the same people that Scotland elects to Westminster should represent them in Edinburgh as well, whilst we English MPs represent people at Westminster on both the English and the UK issues. Scotland shows just how much money the public sector can spend on setting up a new devolved Parliament. England already has a Parliament building in London which should be used for the English issues as well as for the Union Parliament. Why waste money on a new building and another set of politicians?

??Railways

Yes, we should reunite track and trains on a route by route basis, and give the franchise holders greater freedom to invest in expansion of capacity. To do this a franchise holder will need more power to make decisions, and a longer franchise to make it worthwhile.

THE RAILWAYS DON’T WANT PASSENGERS

The government’s original strategy for transport was to switch people from cars to trains. They inherited a fast growing railway, where for the first time since 1950 railway managers wanted more passengers and promoted their businesses accordingly. In the late 1990s use of the railways by both passengers and freight surged.

Then came the clunking fist of renationalisation of the track network. The new Network Rail soon showed all the classic symptoms of being a nationalised industry, even though Ministers kept telling us it was a new kind of private company. It is a monopoly. It does not make more capacity available on the scale the users need. It sees it best hope of a good life lying in lobbying the government for more guarantees to borrow more money to keep it going.

So now the train companies, under the guiding hand of Ministers again, decide to put their fares up by far more than inflation where they are allowed to, sending a clear signal that the railway does not want more passengers. They gave the same feeling over the holiday period, with the railway closed on Christmas day, when my local convenience store still had its doors open for any who had forgotten the stuffing or the cream.

The UK is chronically short of transport capacity of all kinds. The inadequate road network has not been expanded in the last ten years, and there have been no new major rail projects commenced under this government. No wonder the railways can afford to act like the monopolists they are, with the effective encouragement of Ministers who do not seem to care that they have helped stop the expansion of train travel.

2007 is likely to be a year on constitutional struggle, as the bodged domestic reforms of the government together with the unwelcome advances of EU power cause friction in our body politic.

The most likely flare point will be in Scotland, at the time of the Scottish election to their Parliament. If the polls turn out to be correct, and the Scottish nationalists emerge as the largest party, they will put constitutional change very firmly on their agenda north of the border, and will be happy to incite the English to exert pressure against the current settlement in the south. The new unlikely allies will be the Scottish Nationalists, claiming Scotland does not get her fair share of cash ??within the Union, and the English nationalists, claiming she receives too much taxpayers money from English taxpayers.

??Labour’s constitutional changes were never a permanent settlement – they were always a set of tacky compromises, mainly driven by the wish to avoid conflict with the EU and??to appease??Scottish and Welsh nationalism. Paradoxically, they have created worse tensions for Labour with nationalist sentiment in both Scotland and Wales, and incipient tension with the EU when the government wakes up to just how unpopular more EU power is, and what damage it is doing to their crumbling electoral base. Angela Merkel will put the constitution back on the EU agenda, and the government will be forced to straddle its wish to be "good Europeans" with the widespread loathing of the whole idea of the constitution ??by a strong majority of the British people.

??Reform of the House of Lords is still unfinished business. Reform of local government, introducing more elected Mayors, has slowed to a snail’s pace as Labour has discovered they often cannot win the Mayoral elections. Regional government proceeds by stealth, and has to remain unelected because the people of the North east bravely and correctly rejected elected regional government as a waste of money in?? such an overgoverned country.

??There are reforms we need to right the British constitution. They are:

1. Removal of the EU’s power of veto over us, and removal of many EU rules and regulations which cramp us as a people and impede our businesses. Freedom from further incursions of EU power, whilst keeping the common market.

2. A decision of how much power the Lords should have to stop or amend government legislation, and then a decision on how to recruit the right people to carry out that role. If peers are to be elected, it is crucial that they should be elected for just one long term (say 10 years) so they do not have to raise money and curry favour in the way Commons parties have to do to seek re-election. We need people of experience and independent mind with power to hold up or amend meddlesome or badly thought through legislation, but not a replica of the Commons squabbling with??MPs??for power over our lives.

??3. Remove lop sided devolution by asking all Westminster MPs to serve both as Union MPs and as members of their own national assembly. The English Parliament would sit at Westminster on non Union days.

4. Abolition of all unelected regional government in England, with powers passed down to elected Councils or up to the English Parliament.

??Labour have brought more constitutional rows upon themselves, by forcing through so much unwanted regional government, and by encouraging the nationalists in Scotland and Wales without giving them all that they want. They have also made the EU more unpopular, by not standing up for British interests, and by failing to veto the continuing power grab by the Court, the Commission and through the Treaties of Nice, Amsterdam and the draft constitution.

?Å 

I will ask the technicians to look at the configuration of the system to help you all read it easily.

An English Parliament.

I am surprised at how many want a seperate English Parliament. That means more politicians, more advisers, more bureucrats, and many more bills for taxpayers to pay. You are already paying for English MPs at Westminster. Surely the sensible answer is to make us MPs do both jobs for our money – discussing and voting on English issues at Westminster a couple of days a week, and Union matters for another couple of days a week. If Scotland and Wales were sensible they would make their MPs work harder, by asking them to do what needs doing in the devolved assemblies when the English MPs are using Westminster as the correct home of the English Parliament. There is no need for different people to staff the Scottish Parliament or the Welsh Assembly. Whilst we are at it, it would also be a good idea to cut the number of MPs. The USA has fewer Senators and Congressmen and women than we have MPs, and they staff two Chambers of a sovereign legislature for a much larger country.

??Can you trust the Conservatives on the EU?

There is no pleasing some people. The Conservative party was whipped to vote against the Nice Treaty. It was whipped to vote against the Amsterdam treaty. It was whipped to vote for??a crucial amendment to the 1972 European Communities Act allowing us to pick and choose which laws we will accept from Brussels. It is against both the Euro and the Constitution in principle.

The disagreement with UKIP comes down to two simple issues. Firstly do you think it helps or hinders the cause of getting back powers to govern ourselves to have UKIP trying to take Conservative votes away, making it more likely Lib Dem or Labour federalists will be elected to Parliament? The second question is, does it make more sense to renegotiate our position with the EU first before asking the people if they like the revised package, or to pull out unilaterally, only then to have to try to negotiate a set of arrangements over everything from the environment to trade with former partners who have no reason to negotiate positively with us? We are much more likely to get a??good deal if Brussels sees there is a chance the UK voters may vote in a?? referendum to stay in if the package makes sense. The UK electorate would be in charge??in such a process, as the decision would be made by referendum.

??

Has no-one told Labour Ministers they are all responsible for every policy and action of their government? If they don’t like something, and they cannot persuade their colleagues in private to change things, they have to resign.

We now see Labour Ministers rushing to distance themselves from the NHS cuts that are becoming visible. As the next couple of years unfold there should be many more pressure points on public spending. The blow out years are past, and even this Chancellor and this government are going to have to?? cut the rate of increase in public spending considerably. Given the poor way they manage the public sector, that will doubtless mean cuts in those services which Labour MPs cherish. We will become used to Minister after Minister lobbying against their own government, even at times lobbying against their own department!

??It will happen because they are incapable of managing their huge?? budgets well. Because they spend so much on wasteful things, and use staff and other resources so badly, there will be more cuts, and more phoney protests against them by the very people who are responsible. They do not seem to be able to control staff numbers, propose sensible levels of pay and pensions increases, nor to be able to use private sector consultants wisely??by replacing rather than adding to staff they already employ in house to do something. They heap quango on quango, chasing headlines and trying to avert bad publicity. They use Csars to take the pressure off Ministers who have failed in a particular area, and outside bodies to take the blame.

Parliament has set a bad example again, breaking for Christmas on 19th December and not reconvening until January 8th. Now many other parts of the public sector seem to take a long Christmas break. It’s such a contrast with the private sector, where many shops opened up on Boxing Day and are open all this week, where newspapers and taxi services have been available since?? December 26th, and where milk, bread and many other goods have been supplied. My local Council is not collecting any recyclables until well into the New Year, at the very time when people have most waste. I have received a holding reply from Reading Council on behalf of one constituent, telling me there is no chance of the letter being considered until the second week of January. We thank all the nurses and doctors who kept the hospitals running over Christmas, and the police who turned out for duty. There hasn’t been much else working in the public sector, despite the large pay awards and the extra money.

The government is right to worry that children who achieve the highest standards academically are often held up or let down by state schools. I am glad they at last acknowledge there is a problem. It is??a pity that their solution of vouchers for the top ten per cent in each school is such a poor response.

??The first injustice is in taking the top ten per cent of each school, whatever the general standard. It means many children who work harder and are brighter in better schools??will not get the extra assistance which less hard working or less motivated children in poor schools will receive. If it was truly a talent based system it would seek to help all those who met a required standard, not the top ten per cent of every school.

??

The second injustice is to think they are "gifted", when quite often it is ninety percent perspiration and only ten percent inspiration. Being a successful academic is not all in the genes – much of it is reading and writing much more than others, to become good at it. Just as great athletes have to spend a large number of their waking hours training, so a high flying academic has to spend a large number of waking hours studying. The rewards should go to those who combine intelligence with great effort.

??

The third mistake is to think it can all be done in summer and week-end schools. What is needed is to remedy the defects every day in??each child’s school. We need setting and streaming, so every secondary school can have a grammar stream, where children are encouraged or required to go more quickly through the basics and to delve more deeply into the subjects.

??

Bright hard working children from poorer areas should have the chance of a place at a local grammar or independent school, paid for by the state, so they can compete on more level terms with the children of better off parents. Such an entitlement would do them far more good than summer school vouchers.

??

The grammar schools provided an excellent education for those?? who had an aptitude or a love for learning. The failure was in many of the other schools that failed to light flames for achievement in other areas of life. We should keep what grammar schools we still have, and at the very least create a grammar stream in every comprehensive, as we know grammar schools are the best way to nurture and speed the academic development of many children, from any background. They are the scholars’ comprehensives. We need more of them. No amount of summer school work for the top ten percent can make up for the loss of so many grammars, nor can I understand how?? the creator of this idea??can think it is a "less divisive" system than grammars.

??

This government has created an exam based culture where much of the effort?? goes into coaching for exams rather than into wider education. Many bright pupils now have a materialistic view of knowledge – tell me only if it can help me pass the exam. Whilst there is a need for good public exams for schools leavers of 16 or 18 years of age, there is?? no need to have so many other public exams on the way. Schoolchildren should enjoy some years when instead of cramming for exams and relaxing afterwards in the summer term, they can be encouraged to read, think and range more widely without the pressure of an immediate public test. Our education system is falling prey to a crude centralisation based on a target culture. It shows once again that when the government sets targets they can so often distort or destroy the institutions they are seeking to control.

Happy Christmas to all you bloggers. There will be no Happy Winterval on this site.

There is something for all to enjoy at Christmas, especially for children who love the Christmas story of the baby Jesus, and the folklore of Santa Claus and his reindeers. Our Christmas is a blend of pagan and Christian, Victorian and commercial. it can be enjoyed by people of all faiths and of none.

I myself love the Nine Carols and lessons from Kings Cambridge, as the voices soar in that superb setting. There is magic in such powerful words, such melodious music, such glorious architecture.?? It shows that mankind can aspire to beauty and magnificence. The search for the divine can bring faith to believers, and joy to non believers who appreciate fine art.

??May you all find some peace and??joy during this holiday season.