ukiprule

Although UKIP is strongly opposed to the centralization of power and political union in Europe, it is a strong supporter of both centralization of power and political union in the UK. Arguing that, within the UK itself, all political power should reside in Westminster.

UKIP therefore both opposes the notion of a devolved English parliament and argues that the Scottish Parliament and Welsh and Northern Irish Assemblies should be abolished, with all parliamentary powers returning to Westminster.

Without such abolition, UKIP argues that England should be treated on the same basis as Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland with English constituency MPs sitting in Westminster 10 days a month to debate matters similarly reserved to the Scottish Parliament and Welsh and Northern Irish Assemblies, such as health, education and transport. UKIP believes Scottish MSPs and Welsh and Northern Irish AMs should be abolished. Their role should be performed by the elected Westminster MPs who would return to sit in their respective devolved legislatures for the 10 days per month that English MPs would debate English matters at Westminster. (The devolved legislatures currently sit only 10 days a month as it is).

Northumbrian

The fatal flaw in your argument is that the people of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland all voted for their parliaments/assemblies in a public referendum.

Why would I support someone who doesn't believe in democracy?

Britannist

Welcome the forum, UKIPrule.

I have explained UKIP policy on this many times on the forum and believe that the UKIP proposals on devolution/the English Question are among the most interesting to have been put forward so far.

Britannist

Not a majority of people though - if you include those entitled to vote who did not do so. The devolution referendum result in Wales was extremely close and the europhile fool Blair had to rush to Wales to plead with people to back his Assembly plan (serving Prime Ministers do not, by convention, appear personally in Parliamentary By-Election or referendum campaigns and Blair broke this convention).

I think it is possible that the people of Scotland, for instance, could be persuaded to get rid of the current Scottish Parliament with Scottish constituency MPs in the House of Commons meeting in Scotland regularly to legislate on internal matters instead.

It could strengthen the Union of the UK having dual-purpose MPs sitting in both the National Parliament of the UK (the House of Commons) as well as legislating in separate structures in the different parts of the UK. The same MPs would be in both - providing a link between the two.

Northumbrian

The only interesting thing is that they may p*** off the Scots so much that they really might want independence. Go on, take a chance!

Northumbrian

[quote=Britannist;486861]
I think it is possible that the people of Scotland, for instance, could be persuaded to get rid of the current Scottish Parliament with Scottish constituency MPs in the House of Commons meeting in Scotland regularly to legislate on internal matters instead.
QUOTE]

Not a chance!

Britannist

If the people of Scotland wish to stay with the status quo (i.e. that they want the present Scottish Parliament to continue and that they do not back the UKIP dual-purpose MP proposal) then there is no alternative but for England to have a Parliament of her own to match the powers of the Scottish Parliament.

England and her people must have equality with Scotland within the Union of the UK.

Both the UKIP policy of dual-purpose MPs and the English Democrat party plan for the establishment of an English Parliament within the UK would give England and her people equal status in the Union of the UK (something - thanks to this Labour shower in power at Westminster - we do not have at the moment).

Northumbrian

The only problem with your policy is that so few people share the idea. No one at Westminster has a desire to reverse devolution. You're wasting your time.

Britannist

No one at all?

I think the UKIP policy is about amending and not reversing devolution in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland and about getting equal status for England within the UK.

I have always said that Labour should not have brought in devolution and we should have remained the Unitary UK we were before Blair messed things up.

Now that devolution has taken place I want equal status for England with the devolved parts of the UK.

Britannist

Very few people are aware of the UKIP policy on this.

Blair hopes that the status quo (i.e. devolution which he sees as his project) will remain. He thinks that everything he has done on devolution is now cast in stone and cannot be altered.

It is not cast in stone, of course, and changes will be made. For a start, we have never had a constitutional referendum in England on any matter ever (the EEC referendum in 1975 was, of course, a pan-UK vote). Other parts of the UK have had at least one exclusive constitutional referendum and some have had two and demands for an English constitutional referendum are going to increase.

As I wrote earlier, England must have equal status with Scotland within the Union of the UK - and the UKIP and English Democrat policies (although different) both offer that.

There are many who take the view that there is a strong case that various constitutional alternatives (within the UK) to the current devolved Parliament in Scotland be looked at - many people in Scotland are very unhappy about the cost of the current Scottish Parliament and only a minority of those entitled to vote backed it being set up in the first place.