THE NEED FOR AN ENGLISH PARLIAMENT
Lord Steel, former MP and former leader of the Liberal Democrats, and now an MSP and head of the Steel Commission, has advocated the introduction of ‘fiscal federalism’ in a new report. The Steel Commission’s report was published after 18 months of study.
There is speculation that the new report is likely to lead to a realignment in Scottish politics with the Scottish Liberal Democrats forming a coalition in Holyrood [the Scottish parliament].
The report comes at a time when even the Scottish Tories are expected to demand that Holyrood be given more control over taxation.
Lord Steel believes that Holyrood should be able to raise as much of the money it spends as possible.
However, there is little detail in the report, and the details have been left to a new Scottish Constitutional Convention to resolve.
Lord Steel said:
LORD Steel's plans for Holyrood include:
A constitutional convention to review the powers of the Scottish Parliament, looking at which taxes could be devolved.
•• A written constitution for the United Kingdom, entrenching the rights of Scotland, or a review of the Scotland Act.
•• Devolving control over energy, Holyrood's electoral system and the operation of the Scottish Parliament.
•• Considering giving Holyrood control over betting and gaming, bank holidays and broadcasting policy,
•• drug policy, asylum and immigration, firearms, employment law, mergers, Scottish national security and some welfare.
•• Giving the Scottish Parliament control over tax, with only a few specified taxes remaining at Westminster.
•• Considering giving Scotland control over all personal and business taxes.
•• Giving Holyrood the power to abolish existing taxes and create new ones.
•• An inland revenue for Scotland. The Scottish government should be allowed to borrow money, and there should be a new Barnett Formula to allocate UK money.
•• Making the Scottish Executive the Scottish government.
•• Introducing single transferable votes for Holyrood and enshrining proportional representation in the constitution.
•• Replacing the Scotland Office with a UK department of the regions.
•• Making sure the Scottish government is consulted formally by the UK government on major policy proposals.
•• Replacing the Commons Scottish Select Committee with a joint committee of Holyrood and Westminster
This is all very well, but what about England? Lord Steel merely assumes that he can alter the UK constitution and devolution settlement to suit Scotland at will. That is not so as all his proposed changes affect England.
It is completely impractical for Scotland to have a separate immigration policy, without a major change in Scotland’s relationship with the rest of the UK, as most immigrants move to the south east of England.
Devolving power over taxation is a good thing. It must surely be right that a parliament is responsible for raising the money it spends. But Lord Steel also advocates a new Barnett Formula to allocate UK money.
By UK money, he of course means English money. In other words, in reality, Lord Steel wishes to keep Scottish money for Scotland but still allow Scotland to help itself to English money as it sees fit.
THIS IS NOT ACCEPTABLE.
Furthermore, Lord Steel then advocates a new UK department of the regions. Regionalisation is a programme to divide England up into regions. The governance of England is a matter for the English and not the Scots.
It is deeply offensive for Lord Steel to be interfering in the internal affairs of England in this way.
Meanwhile Lord Falconer, a Scottish Labour peer, has pronounced that there is ‘no demand at all’ for an English parliament, that there is ‘no evidence’ that the English resent not having their own parliament [despite the Scots and Welsh having their own, and despite Scottish and Welsh MPs continuing to vote on English matters] and that there will not be an English parliament - ‘not today, not tomorrow’.
How the English react to the devolution of power to Scotland and Wales, with those countries now having their own parliaments, is a matter for the English. Unelected Scottish peers can mind their own business. The Scots and Welsh have been allowed referendums on whether or not they are to have their own parliaments, and the English are also entitled to their own referendum.
The fact is that the British ruling class, including the Tories, are brazenly content to sacrifice English interests for their own convenience. It is expedient to allow the status quo to continue. No one is standing up for English interests.
This all demonstrates why it is so important that there be the creation of a new English parliament to represent English interests. And also why it is so important that the English have their own nationalist party, as do the Scots and Welsh, in order to re-balance the political debate.
The present 3 main British political parties are more than happy to sacrifice English interests for their own political ends.
There is speculation that the new report is likely to lead to a realignment in Scottish politics with the Scottish Liberal Democrats forming a coalition in Holyrood [the Scottish parliament].
The report comes at a time when even the Scottish Tories are expected to demand that Holyrood be given more control over taxation.
Lord Steel believes that Holyrood should be able to raise as much of the money it spends as possible.
However, there is little detail in the report, and the details have been left to a new Scottish Constitutional Convention to resolve.
Lord Steel said:
‘We must build a political and public consensus around the case for new powers. No self-respecting parliament should expect to exist permanently on a grant from another parliament.
The Scottish government should be responsible for raising as much of its own spending as practical. It should have control over a number of taxes so that it can pull the levers necessary to develop the economy.
That does not mean independence. It means a new, modern settlement for Scotland in the UK based on more federal principles.’
LORD Steel's plans for Holyrood include:
A constitutional convention to review the powers of the Scottish Parliament, looking at which taxes could be devolved.
•• A written constitution for the United Kingdom, entrenching the rights of Scotland, or a review of the Scotland Act.
•• Devolving control over energy, Holyrood's electoral system and the operation of the Scottish Parliament.
•• Considering giving Holyrood control over betting and gaming, bank holidays and broadcasting policy,
•• drug policy, asylum and immigration, firearms, employment law, mergers, Scottish national security and some welfare.
•• Giving the Scottish Parliament control over tax, with only a few specified taxes remaining at Westminster.
•• Considering giving Scotland control over all personal and business taxes.
•• Giving Holyrood the power to abolish existing taxes and create new ones.
•• An inland revenue for Scotland. The Scottish government should be allowed to borrow money, and there should be a new Barnett Formula to allocate UK money.
•• Making the Scottish Executive the Scottish government.
•• Introducing single transferable votes for Holyrood and enshrining proportional representation in the constitution.
•• Replacing the Scotland Office with a UK department of the regions.
•• Making sure the Scottish government is consulted formally by the UK government on major policy proposals.
•• Replacing the Commons Scottish Select Committee with a joint committee of Holyrood and Westminster
This is all very well, but what about England? Lord Steel merely assumes that he can alter the UK constitution and devolution settlement to suit Scotland at will. That is not so as all his proposed changes affect England.
It is completely impractical for Scotland to have a separate immigration policy, without a major change in Scotland’s relationship with the rest of the UK, as most immigrants move to the south east of England.
Devolving power over taxation is a good thing. It must surely be right that a parliament is responsible for raising the money it spends. But Lord Steel also advocates a new Barnett Formula to allocate UK money.
By UK money, he of course means English money. In other words, in reality, Lord Steel wishes to keep Scottish money for Scotland but still allow Scotland to help itself to English money as it sees fit.
THIS IS NOT ACCEPTABLE.
Furthermore, Lord Steel then advocates a new UK department of the regions. Regionalisation is a programme to divide England up into regions. The governance of England is a matter for the English and not the Scots.
It is deeply offensive for Lord Steel to be interfering in the internal affairs of England in this way.
Meanwhile Lord Falconer, a Scottish Labour peer, has pronounced that there is ‘no demand at all’ for an English parliament, that there is ‘no evidence’ that the English resent not having their own parliament [despite the Scots and Welsh having their own, and despite Scottish and Welsh MPs continuing to vote on English matters] and that there will not be an English parliament - ‘not today, not tomorrow’.
How the English react to the devolution of power to Scotland and Wales, with those countries now having their own parliaments, is a matter for the English. Unelected Scottish peers can mind their own business. The Scots and Welsh have been allowed referendums on whether or not they are to have their own parliaments, and the English are also entitled to their own referendum.
The fact is that the British ruling class, including the Tories, are brazenly content to sacrifice English interests for their own convenience. It is expedient to allow the status quo to continue. No one is standing up for English interests.
This all demonstrates why it is so important that there be the creation of a new English parliament to represent English interests. And also why it is so important that the English have their own nationalist party, as do the Scots and Welsh, in order to re-balance the political debate.
The present 3 main British political parties are more than happy to sacrifice English interests for their own political ends.
posted by erc @ 8:35 pm
<< Home