Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 29 of 29

Thread: English Parliament/independence.

  1. #21
    Newbie
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Durham
    Posts
    4

    Default

    English Parliament Independent. YES FROM THE SCOTCH, WELSH & NI

  2. #22
    Trusted Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    6,943

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Avon View Post
    English Parliament Independent. YES FROM THE SCOTCH, WELSH & NI
    Avon

    It is one of the core beliefs of the SDP that the United Kingdom should remain united.

    The SDP want an English parliament established but within the UK.

  3. #23

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SDP View Post
    Avon

    It is one of the core beliefs of the SDP that the United Kingdom should remain united.

    The SDP want an English parliament established but within the UK.
    I understand the concern about the so-called West Lothian question, whereby MPs from the other nations can vote in Westminster on issues that only affect England, while the other national Parliaments decide these matters for their respective nations.

    However, the idea of an English Parliament within a remaining United Kingdom needs to be thought through very carefully.

    First, would this English Parliament simply be the Westminster Parliament shorn of its Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish MPs and peers, or would it be an entirely separate body? What body would continue to exist, to legislate on all-UK matters?

    Scotland, Wales and NI have their own executives, as well as parliaments/assemblies. Would England also have its own government?

    The arrangement would essentially be a federation. How would the different nations be represented in the federal Parliament? Traditionally, this is done by having two houses - a lower house with states represented in proportion to their population, and an upper house in which states have equal representation.

    This would mean that in an upper house, England, with 80% of the UK's population, would have just 25% of the seats.

  4. #24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PeterSDP View Post
    To the writer`s dying shame I wasted twelve years of my life actively promoting the anti E.U. cause in U.K.I.P. Why! I even designed the logo. How I wish now that I had copyrited it. Along with another decamped Social Democrat we came up with the current colour`s.
    ...
    In 2008 I was skimming around on the net and came across a very tired looking SDP web site ( It has not changed much)
    Peter, I've mentioned elsewhere that I think the SDP website looks very dated. Perhaps you should offer the party your proven design skills to create a more up-to-date logo and website?

  5. #25
    Trusted Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    6,943

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Plutonium View Post
    Peter, I've mentioned elsewhere that I think the SDP website looks very dated. Perhaps you should offer the party your proven design skills to create a more up-to-date logo and website?
    Plutonium

    Have you looked at out new website that has been discussed on anothere tthread in this section ?

  6. #26

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SDP View Post
    Plutonium

    Have you looked at out new website that has been discussed on anothere tthread in this section ?
    Yes. Might I direct your attention to this post.

  7. #27
    Junior Member Red Zed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    27

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SDP View Post
    The SDP is a party that supports the working class. The SDP believes in socialism. Socialism is a system of government that aims to help the working class.

    This distinguishes the SDP from UKIP. None of the leaflets that UKIP produce ever talk about helping the working class. UKIP also steer clear of the subject of unemployment. UKIP are careful never to make promises about tackling unemployment. UKIP certainly do not have the ambition to return to full employment.

    If you want to know the essential difference between the SDP and UKIP, it is the SDP's support for the working class and its aim to get back towards full employment.
    If you want to get back to full employment you need to nationalise major industry and to and invest in manufacturing and the public sector to create jobs. Better to invest in a massive public works programme than laying people off. If you want to support the working class you need to support a living wage of £8 rising to £10 an hour. you need to support workers in their struggles in the workplace. The SDP sound like a eurosceptic wing of new Labour than genuine socialists.
    Struggle Solidarity Socialism

  8. #28
    Trusted Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    6,943

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Red Zed View Post
    If you want to get back to full employment you need to nationalise major industry and to and invest in manufacturing and the public sector to create jobs. Better to invest in a massive public works programme than laying people off. If you want to support the working class you need to support a living wage of £8 rising to £10 an hour. you need to support workers in their struggles in the workplace. The SDP sound like a eurosceptic wing of new Labour than genuine socialists.
    Red Zed

    Where I agree with you is in relation to the motor industry. Every country needs a motor industry but the private sector cannot seem to make profits for car manufacture. Britain was quite happy to let the British owned car industry go bust. Compare that to the USA where they launched a massive bailout for General Motors. It seems to me that car manufacturing will aways need suppport from the government. Some people would call that socialism.

  9. #29
    Trusted Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    6,943

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Plutonium View Post
    I understand the concern about the so-called West Lothian question, whereby MPs from the other nations can vote in Westminster on issues that only affect England, while the other national Parliaments decide these matters for their respective nations.

    However, the idea of an English Parliament within a remaining United Kingdom needs to be thought through very carefully.

    First, would this English Parliament simply be the Westminster Parliament shorn of its Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish MPs and peers, or would it be an entirely separate body? What body would continue to exist, to legislate on all-UK matters?

    Scotland, Wales and NI have their own executives, as well as parliaments/assemblies. Would England also have its own government?

    The arrangement would essentially be a federation. How would the different nations be represented in the federal Parliament? Traditionally, this is done by having two houses - a lower house with states represented in proportion to their population, and an upper house in which states have equal representation.

    This would mean that in an upper house, England, with 80% of the UK's population, would have just 25% of the seats.
    There are many different ways to set up and English parliament. The SDP believe in the principle of having and English parliament. The SDP equally believe that the UK should remain united. So the setting up of the English parliament should be done within be within United Kingdom. This is required to deal with the West Lothian question.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •