The New Leader Of The Opposition Party/
News0 min ago
Oh Dear, Labour Brings Out The Race Card On Every Possible Ocasion.
39 Answers
http://
/// Labour veteran Sir Gerald Kaufman, the 85-year-old Father of the House said of English votes on English laws – known as EVEL – that ‘even the title of this motion sounds racist’. ///
I would have thought it sounded EVIL.
Why are the Scots so frigtened at not being able to vote on matters that are only applicable to England?
Perhaps we should let English MPs vote on Scottish, Welsh and Northern Ireland matters.
All in the quest of equality you understand?
/// Labour veteran Sir Gerald Kaufman, the 85-year-old Father of the House said of English votes on English laws – known as EVEL – that ‘even the title of this motion sounds racist’. ///
I would have thought it sounded EVIL.
Why are the Scots so frigtened at not being able to vote on matters that are only applicable to England?
Perhaps we should let English MPs vote on Scottish, Welsh and Northern Ireland matters.
All in the quest of equality you understand?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
-- answer removed --
"Why are the Scots so frightened at not being able to vote on matters that are only applicable to England?"
The position is more subtle than that. The complaint the SNP have is that the decision over what counts as "matters only applicable to England" will be taken out of their hands. In the last few parliaments, SNP members have opted to stay out of bills that, in their judgment, had no impact on Scotland. So although the anomaly still exists in theory, it hasn't cropped up in practice.
The problem comes when there are bills that have an indirect impact on Scotland, by changing laws that impact upon funding, for example. In the new rules, apparently it would be up to the Speaker as to whether or not Scottish MPs will get to vote (or, rather, to have a vote that counts at the key stages) on these matters.
On the other hand, the SNP can try to persuade the Speaker that these bills do have an impact on Scotland, and I would be surprised if he didn't accept their position. And anyway the solution the SNP had in place, where it was their discretion, is not ideal either. It's really better either to bring the UK back together properly or to break it up properly (as a federal system or as full-blown independence). Half-way house solutions like EVEL are messy and inadequate.
The position is more subtle than that. The complaint the SNP have is that the decision over what counts as "matters only applicable to England" will be taken out of their hands. In the last few parliaments, SNP members have opted to stay out of bills that, in their judgment, had no impact on Scotland. So although the anomaly still exists in theory, it hasn't cropped up in practice.
The problem comes when there are bills that have an indirect impact on Scotland, by changing laws that impact upon funding, for example. In the new rules, apparently it would be up to the Speaker as to whether or not Scottish MPs will get to vote (or, rather, to have a vote that counts at the key stages) on these matters.
On the other hand, the SNP can try to persuade the Speaker that these bills do have an impact on Scotland, and I would be surprised if he didn't accept their position. And anyway the solution the SNP had in place, where it was their discretion, is not ideal either. It's really better either to bring the UK back together properly or to break it up properly (as a federal system or as full-blown independence). Half-way house solutions like EVEL are messy and inadequate.
-- answer removed --
As Scottish independence affects the entire UK, referendum should be held throughout the ENTIRE country. That will guarantee the yes vote next time. I'm a Scot and, like so many others, I'm heartily sick of the SNP bleating their bigotry and stupidity. Bunch of hooligans. Only 35% of the Scottish electorate voted for that lot of bullies which means 65% did NOT... yet , there they are and lead by Mugabe in knickers. They also forget, or choose to forget, that they will ALWAYS be British. Scotland is part of The BRITISH Isles. It's a geographical term, not a political term. They don't want to be ruled by London(who does?)and they want independence, yet they want to be in the EU and be ruled by Brussels(even worse than London). How is that independence?
The root cause of all this strife is the ridiculous devolution arrangements afforded by the Labour government. It was always going to develop as it has.
Scotland (and Wales and NI) have no more right to such devolved powers than have Liverpool or London. Why they were ever afforded such privileges is beyond me. They are part of the United Kingdom and should be subject ti its laws, tax regimes and everything else. Other than that they could seek full independence (which the Scots have recently declined) but I agree that such a matter should be for the entire electorate of the UK to decide.
Scotland (and Wales and NI) have no more right to such devolved powers than have Liverpool or London. Why they were ever afforded such privileges is beyond me. They are part of the United Kingdom and should be subject ti its laws, tax regimes and everything else. Other than that they could seek full independence (which the Scots have recently declined) but I agree that such a matter should be for the entire electorate of the UK to decide.
“The position is more subtle than that.” The problem is, Jim, that the usual suspects don’t ‘do’ subtlety.
When the West Lothian Question appeared here on AnswerBank a few years ago, I asked how often in the previous thirty-odd years the votes of Scottish MPs had adversely affected the wishes of English MPs as regards matters - apparently - affecting only England. All any of them could come up with were a couple of occasions when that MIGHT have occurred.
Given the fuss EVEL supporters make about new powers for Scotland and the need for English Votes for English Laws, you’d imagine such Scottish “interference” was happening every few weeks rather than twice in a generation!
Compare that with how often Scotland is saddled with a Tory government, when only one such MP holds a seat there.
When the West Lothian Question appeared here on AnswerBank a few years ago, I asked how often in the previous thirty-odd years the votes of Scottish MPs had adversely affected the wishes of English MPs as regards matters - apparently - affecting only England. All any of them could come up with were a couple of occasions when that MIGHT have occurred.
Given the fuss EVEL supporters make about new powers for Scotland and the need for English Votes for English Laws, you’d imagine such Scottish “interference” was happening every few weeks rather than twice in a generation!
Compare that with how often Scotland is saddled with a Tory government, when only one such MP holds a seat there.
Lets just not bother with the rferendum and give them independance. Build up Hadrians wall and passport checkpoints. All whining Scotts in England can choose here or there on a once-off choice.
As Scotland wont be in the EU, at least not straight away, they will need a visa to come here.
There all sorted, all parties happy.
As Scotland wont be in the EU, at least not straight away, they will need a visa to come here.
There all sorted, all parties happy.
"Compare that with how often Scotland is saddled with a Tory government, when only one such MP holds a seat there."
Yes. Also look at Inner London, Manchester, Liverpool, much of the central part of Yorkshire and Lancashire, Tyneside. All are "saddled" with a Tory government every time one is elected in the same way as Scotland is. The difference is all of those other areas are not continually harping on about how hard done by they are and how they'd be better off going it alone (because, of course, they know that they would not).
Yes. Also look at Inner London, Manchester, Liverpool, much of the central part of Yorkshire and Lancashire, Tyneside. All are "saddled" with a Tory government every time one is elected in the same way as Scotland is. The difference is all of those other areas are not continually harping on about how hard done by they are and how they'd be better off going it alone (because, of course, they know that they would not).
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.