EDP vs UKIP split off thread

[cassie]

Originally Posted by harryaldridge

Our constitutional policy doc is almost completed and will support equal limited devolution, with fair distribution of expenditure where necessary. UKIP does not and will not support another layer of politicians in an english parliament, but will and does support fair devolution.

I don't know whether this will ever be enough to satisfy the ED's but it satisfies me.

It may well be if the policy applies equally to all parts of the UK. This is to ask whether the 'additional layer of politicians' devolved since 1998 in Scotland, Wales & Northern Ireland will be removed and, instead, the 'equal form of devolution' proposed for England also applied to them?

If not, why do you want to continue the discrimination against England? For example, if NICE is so wonderful, why aren't the people in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland subjected to its 'benefits'? Will students in England have THEIR tuition fees reduced to the same levels as those in Scotland? Will patients in England have free prescriptions as do those in Wales? Etc, etc, etc . . .

[tito]

Our policy does include an English parliament.

Just one composed of English MPs, who will sit in English only sessions while the Scots and Welsh go back and sit on Welsh and Scottish only sessions.

[cassie]

Originally Posted by tito

Our policy does include an English parliament.

Just one composed of English MPs, who will sit in English only sessions while the Scots and Welsh go back and sit on Welsh and Scottish only sessions.

It won't wash! Why should the fifty million people of England have less favourable treatment in this (as in other matters) than the other ten million in other parts of the UK which have three 'parliaments' between them?

There are 129 MSPs in the Scottish assembly. An English Parliament similarly constituted would amount to over 1,290 members of an English Parliament, not taking account of the AMs in Wales and members of the NI Assembly. I am not advocating an English Parliament of 1,500 members or more, but cite these figures to illustrate the difference in treatment.

The UKIP policy conveniently skips over these aspects, and very often its proponents are not English and omit to say so.

[harryaldridge]

Originally Posted by cassie

It won't wash! Why should the fifty million people of England have less favourable treatment in this (as in other matters) than the other ten million in other parts of the UK which have three 'parliaments' between them?

There are 129 MSPs in the Scottish assembly. An English Parliament similarly constituted would amount to over 1,290 members of an English Parliament, not taking account of the AMs in Wales and members of the NI Assembly. I am not advocating an English Parliament of 1,500 members or more, but cite these figures to illustrate the difference in treatment.

The UKIP policy conveniently skips over these aspects, and very often its proponents are not English and omit to say so.

But you don't know what our policy is. I have just spent a fair amount of time writing the paper and discussing with the policy group.

Devolution will exist, but it will be applied equally to all nations of the UK. The devolved parliaments will be scrapped with national MPs taking up the role. There will be no asymmetric devolution which discriminates aginst the English. Funding on devolved issues should be raised locally, but what remains national should be treated as such and funding allocated fairly.

UKIP believes in fairness, but we also believe in the Union which requires some give and take.

Also on the point about Scotland getting all sorts for free that the English do not - with devolution you will end up with different nations adopting different policies and giving their residents different entitlements, that is the point of devolution; however people get angry that it is paid for by a massive English subsidy which is out of date. We propose to redress the funding balance, but variations in policy will still exist.

[rjt]

The problem is UKIP has already stood on a platform of abolition of the Scotish and Welsh bodies and it was descively regected in the last elections to those bodies.


The Abolition of the Northern Ireland Assembly would meanr rewriting the Good Friday Agreement!! Good luck with that one.


The question that remains to be answered is how to get a fair settlement for England and I am afraid UKIP are stil not facing up to this.

[Britannist]

Originally Posted by harryaldridge

Also on the point about Scotland getting all sorts for free that the English do not - with devolution you will end up with different nations adopting different policies and giving their residents different entitlements, that is the point of devolution; however people get angry that it is paid for by a massive English subsidy which is out of date. We propose to redress the funding balance, but variations in policy will still exist.

I am not at all happy about a situation coming about whereby people in England who live on the border with Wales are (allegedly) being stopped from claiming free prescriptions in chemists just over the border in Wales where prescriptions do not cost anything (because they have a doctor in England and live in England). This sort of division is not what a United Kingdom should be all about. It is also unfair on English people. Hospitals in England but close to the border with Wales are, of course, not refusing to take patients from just across the border in Wales.

[Britannist]

Originally Posted by rjt

The problem is UKIP has already stood on a platform of abolition of the Scotish and Welsh bodies and it was descively regected in the last elections to those bodies.


The Abolition of the Northern Ireland Assembly would meanr rewriting the Good Friday Agreement!! Good luck with that one.


The question that remains to be answered is how to get a fair settlement for England and I am afraid UKIP are stil not facing up to this.

UKIP proposes that the Welsh Assembly and Scottish Parliament be abolished with MPs from the House of Commons who represent Welsh and Scottish constituents do the job at less cost by meeting regularly in different parts of Wales and Scotland to deliberate on Scottish/Welsh matters. In their absence from the House of Commons English constituency MPs would deal with specifically English matters.

All the parts of Great Britain would be governed in the same way at less cost than at present and legislation would be debated and voted on in all parts of Great Britain by the same people who sit in the Union (i.e. UK) Parliament (the House of Commons).

UKIP not getting a large vote in Scotland or Wales at the last General Election does not mean that the people of Scotland and Wales disagree with the party's policy on devolution and on answering 'the English Question'.

I would expect that that the UKIP proposals would generate much interest if they 'went mainstream' in Scottish and Welsh politics and could, one day, be put to the Scottish and Welsh people in a referendum.

[komerad]

Re: harryaldridch #20
Quote:“The devolved parliaments will be scrapped with national MPs taking up the role”Quote.


“Abolish the Wales Assembly” was the principal message of the UKIP (Wales)
manifesto for the recent Wales Assembly elections. It went down like a lead balloon.
These parliaments have been voted in by their respective electorates, when along comes UKIP, a party with no MPs who state they are going to abolish them!!
How exactly do you intend to do this? IMO It’s just party “pie in the sky” rhetoric.
Try leafleting in S. Wales with “Abolish the Wales Assembly” as your main .
item, when literally thousands of jobs directly & indirectly are connected with the Assembly. You are told many times to, how shall I put it, “Go Away”
The devolved “parliaments” of Wales, Scotland & N. Ireland are here to stay.
There is more chance of me, who voted AGAINST the Wales Assembly, being the next man on the moon, than UKIP abolishing these parliaments / assemblies.

[rjt]

Originally Posted by Britannist

UKIP proposes that the Welsh Assembly and Scottish Parliament be abolished with MPs from the House of Commons who represent Welsh and Scottish constituents do the job at less cost by meeting regularly in different parts of Wales and Scotland to deliberate on Scottish/Welsh matters. In their absence from the House of Commons English constituency MPs would deal with specifically English matters.

All the parts of Great Britain would be governed in the same way at less cost than at present and legislation would be debated and voted on in all parts of Great Britain by the same people who sit in the Union (i.e. UK) Parliament (the House of Commons).

UKIP not getting a large vote in Scotland or Wales at the last General Election does not mean that the people of Scotland and Wales disagree with the party's policy on devolution and on answering 'the English Question'.

I would expect that that the UKIP proposals would generate much interest if they 'went mainstream' in Scottish and Welsh politics and could, one day, be put to the Scottish and Welsh people in a referendum.

Sorry for the sake of clarity I should have said at the last Scotish/Welsh Assembly elections.

There is also the matter of Northen Ireland to consider where abolition of the assembly would be totally impractable.

[harryaldridge]

Originally Posted by Britannist

I am not at all happy about a situation coming about whereby people in England who live on the border with Wales are (allegedly) being stopped from claiming free prescriptions in chemists just over the border in Wales where prescriptions do not cost anything (because they have a doctor in England and live in England). This sort of division is not what a United Kingdom should be all about. It is also unfair on English people. Hospitals in England but close to the border with Wales are, of course, not refusing to take patients from just across the border in Wales.

So i take it you are against devolution then?!!