Johnny Hates Jazz

http://www.dailyreckoning.co.uk/article/170820064.html

Lord William Rees-Mogg - Other articles
Thu 17 Aug, 2006

The Conservative Party is becoming more and more the English party. At the last General Election, the Conservatives won only one seat in Scotland and three in Wales. They won 194 in England, with a narrow overall majority of English votes. If they are to win an overall majority of seats at the next General Election, they will plainly have to do it in England. There are only a handful of Scottish and Welsh marginals for the Conservatives.
This disunited kingdom: Tories at the centre of Scottish antagonism

In Scotland, it is particularly damaging that the Conservatives are seen as the English party, since quite ordinary Scots have become much more hostile to England. “Anyone but England” was a standard response of Scottish viewers of the World Cup. That is in contrast to English sporting loyalties which indeed put England first, but after that support the other national teams of the United Kingdom.

In electoral terms, it is the Liberal Democrats who have benefited; Scottish voters put them third in votes in 2001, but they were second in votes, with eleven seats to the Conservatives’ one, in 2005. For most patriotic Scots it is no longer acceptable to vote for the English party, but it is perfectly respectable to vote for the Liberal Democrats, who form part of the Scottish Government.

It is frustrating for the Conservatives that they may be locked out of power at the next election by the Labour and Liberal Democrat majorities in Scotland, all the more so as devolution has given the Scottish Parliament quite wide powers over domestic policy. Gordon Brown, who is seen as the archetypal Scot, exercises very great influence over English social services, but cannot influence Scottish policy which is decided in Edinburgh.
This disunited kingdom: English devolution easier said than done

Conservatives think that there ought to be some sort of devolution for England, that English Members of Parliament ought to be free to decide those issues for England which Scottish voters can decided for Scotland. This is easier said than done. The problem is that England is so much larger than Scotland or Wales. England has a population of over 50 million, comprising 84% of those living in the UK. It dwarfs the population of Scotland (5million), Wales (3 million) and Northern Ireland (1.7 million).

An English Parliament would swamp the Scottish Parliament, or Welsh Assembly. The English Parliament might become the dominant Parliament of the United Kingdom. If there was an English Prime Minister, who had a majority of English seats, and a United Kingdom Prime Minister, who had a majority of United Kingdom seats, the English Prime Minister might be seen as the dominant figure.





In any case, the Scottish electorate would be very sensitive to this balance of power. There is already a potential for conflict between Westminster and Edinburgh, but an English Parliament, or separate English voting on English issues, would make a further separation much more likely.
This disunited kingdom: Divide and conquer plays to EU federalists

There are also European and regional dimensions to this constitutional problem. Brussels has already tried to develop the European regions as separate partners in a federation based on the idea of the United States of Europe or on the German Federal model. This has obvious attractions for European federalists. The United Kingdom would be broken up into Scotland, Wales and the English regions. Instead of the European Commission having to deal with nation states, the Central European bodies would deal directly with regional authorities of the size and influence of the German Lander. Wessex would have to deal with Brussels, as one of perhaps fifty regional states, like Bavaria, only less powerful and with no national tradition.

The only serious attempt to create such a region was made by John Prescott in the North East. The scheme was defeated in a referendum. Perhaps the London Assembly, with an elected Mayor, should also be regarded as one English region, at least in embryo. It is however very obvious that the English see England as a nation in its own right. Great Britain is three nations joined in one, not a collection of regions.

The English may continue to accept the advantages that devolution has given Scotland as the price England has to pay for the United Kingdom or as a counterbalance for the power England enjoys as the largest nation within it. Scotland may end up by preferring to deal with London - the devil they know – rather than substitute Brussels for London.

However, there are inequities in our present constitutional arrangement. In theory, the United Kingdom ought to be a federation, with three national parliaments, a degree of national devolution, and economic, foreign and defence policy reserved for the federal parliament. Like the Reform of the House of Lords that may never be achieved.


Regards,

Lord William Rees-Mogg
for The Daily Reckoning

__________________
English Democrats SAY NO To European Union

English not British not European
- It's time to decide at the 2009 European Elections

arden forester

He's right to raise the subject, but makes the mistake of thinking that England would be dominant. California is not dominant over Wyoming or South Dakota. Federations, confederations and commonwealths all have parts which are not equal. Tasmania is not the same size as New South Wales.

The argument should be based on intention not equality of size. If the four Nations wish to enter into a Federation then that is an intention. Obviously safeguards can be built in to protect each one.

The Conservatives devolution answer is to have a dog's dinner instead of Blair's pig's breakfast! :shock:

Waka

An incredibly bad pun. The British Paedophisles is better.

arden forester

I don't think so! :shock:

__________________
www.ardenforester.blogspot.com
www.westminster-whispers.blogspot.com