After having a great conversation with Pobbie about this subject over MSN last night/morning, I wanted to get the opinion of other British, especially English, forumers on this topic.

After discussing this with Pobbie, I have come to the following conclusions.

Problems with the Status Quo

1) That in 2005, there is no recourse for England but Westminster for England to get what she needs.

2) Because of devolved power to Scotland and Wales, these two nations already are given a much greater share of local autonomy that any of the English regions

3) Because the English regions have no local authority, Westminster, composed also of Scottish and Welsh MPs has large authority to determine the local development of England with very little local input.

4) By not having regional autonomy in England, there is no formal mechanism or body to lobby Westminster for English local needs, as inherently exists in the form of the Scottish Parliament and the General Assembly in Wales

What could be done

1) To simply create an English parliament in the form of a separate elected body or "Westminsiter sans scots and Welsh" would not really solve the problem, as this would still not allow for local control, given that over 8 of 10 British subjects are English

2) One English parliament would still not address one of the frequent complaints of those living in England but not the South East: that London's voice is heard more often then the rest of England

3) So, I would think that the creation of regional assemblies or even parliaments, on the order of 8 or 9, with identical powers to the Scottish Parliament would be the way to go. Liverpool for example could have power to develop its own transport projects, fund education as it saw fit, and help to influence how the NHS runs in the city. Liverpool via the assembly would lobby Westminster on Liverpool's behalf directly as opposed to waiting for long winded Commons debate to maybe getting around to liverpool.

What do you guys think? :)

Just for more info, I am using as my frame of reference the Spanish Kingdom. I think that Spanish nation serves as a great comparison for several reasons.

1) Spain, like the UK, was formed not by takeover, but my the merging of the two most powerful regions on the Iberian peninsula, Castilla and Aragon. This is similar to England and Scotland uniting, VERY different from the unification of France.

2) Spain, like the UK, was a union of separate kingdoms with their own parliament. In the case of Spain, it was very fragmented, with the kingdom of Aragon having separate parliaments in Barcelona, Valencia, and Zaragoza.

3) Spain, like the UK, dissolved regional assemblies/parliaments for the sake of one Cortes representing the Spanish nation in Madrid. This is similar to the previous dissolution of the Scottish parliament to make way for the transfer of sovereignty to Westminster.

4) Spain, like the UK, is a member of the EU, an international organization that is consolidating areas previously considered the realm of the sovereign states, making for a debate about the fear of loss of local control.

5) Most importantly, Spain has historically distinct regions. While England forms the core of the UK, and Castilla that for Spain, there are very distinct ethinc groups sharing the same country in both countries. Spain even has its own set of Celts in the form of Galicians.

----------------

Obviously, the comparisons are flawed. For example, other languages are more prevalent in Spain then say Welsh or Scotch Gaelic in the UK. However, given the other similarities, it is interesting to compare Spain and the UK

Spain: 17 autonomous communities each with their own parliaments
UK: one parliament representing Scotland, and other Wales, but with no other regional parliaments (I am ignoring the complicated case of Northern Ireland).

England shouldnt be treated like Wales and Scotland in terms of devolution, because its much larger in terms of space and population. It should be a 2-tier system of devolution.
English regions are a good idea (although the existing ones are shit) but it should not stop there. There should be a tier in between Westminster and the regional assemblies, an English government which handles England-wide matters.

Woooooooooooooooo! 10,000th post! :tongue:

Woooooooooooooooo! 10,000th post! :tongue:

:banana: I am honored that it was in my thread :)

That sounds like a good idea to me. After all, the idea of local legislatures has worked very well in the past. (I think Switzerland was first in trying the idea of local legislatures which is where Rousseau got his idea for direct democracy from.)

Good timing, it has been confirmed today that the population of England has risen over the 50 million mark.

The Kingdom of Spain is a good example to use as both are constitutional monarchies with simular types of democracies and regions / countries within the country.

Personally I would go for a simple option of more power for local councils and on issues affecting the United Kingdom then Scottish, Northern Irish and Welsh MP's can sit and on matters which don't effect the other countries, then it is English only MP's.

This could mean the next Prime Minister Gordon Brown might not be able to vote on his own laws as his consituency is in Scotland. This would be fairer though as more people in England voted Conservative than Labour.

Just my :2cents:

I really couldnt care less about the issue and think most English people may feel the same way.

In principal the satus quo us unfair but in practice I think it works fine- mainly beacuse England is so large and the UK's capital is so far into English terroritry.

There have been votes on regional assemblies and the north east vote (the furthest from Westminster) voted against such assemblys.

Infact it was a massive no vote landslide, with 90% voting no.

In principal the satus quo us unfair but in practice I think it works fine- mainly beacuse England is so large and the UK's capital is so far into English terroritry.

This is because you are a closet right-winger who loves tuition fees and foundation hospitals or because you are self-hating and believe that the English should suffer and you do not believe that politicians (those Scots voting on English Issues) should be accountable to the electorate. You do not believe in some of the basic principles of modern representation democracy.

I agree with Lostboy on this one. We should have our own parliament. It's unfair that the Scottish and Welsh get to vote on English issues.

Nah, it's not entirely fair, but another parliament would be not worth the money.

regional mayors seem to do the trick much better anyway.

Nah, it's not entirely fair, but another parliament would be not worth the money.

Celtophilebhoy,

In your opinion do you believe that the Parliaments of Aba and Cymru are a waste of money, and therefore not exist, regardless of the will of those people for devolution.

DonQui,

There are several ideas of what England is and what it should be. I've outlined the main ideologies below: -

1/ Status Quo

This is the view Rigadon has and it isn't uncommon though I find that sad in a way. The was the UK works now is with a central government located in the confines of the Great Wen and various local governments throughout the UK. Some areas have a sole unitary aithority ie Liverpool City Council. Others have two tier ie Chester City Council is under Cheshire County Council. It's the same in Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales except their counties/regions have been abolished and replaced with a 'nationwide' authority. Despite the fact it has more powe than the rest of the UK, the Scottish Parliament is basically just a single Scottish region, or more blatently and possible offesively, a large British county with significant powers. It's powers can be taken back by London with a click of their fingers as can any other authority in the UK. It's not federalism, the UK is still a centralised country. The thing is, powers devolved to Scotland are more than those to the Welsh Assembly which has more influence than English local authorities. As a result, SMPs decide on legislation regarding Health & Education in Scotland and UKMPs from Scottish constituencies can influence legislation on Health & Education in England as Westminster remains responsible. Of course, there are less Scottish MPs than English MPs, but there are more English people to represent. People who believe in the status quo believe that due to this gulf in demography, it doesn't effect England enough to be a concern. I don't agree with this, particularly as Scottish MPs have been the deciding factor in issues such as top up fees. Such people tend to think the UK is England, and look on the likes of Scotland, part or all of Ireland, and Wales as conquered lands. This is what nationalists in these parts of the British Isles play on.

2/ Nations and Regions

This is what the British government subscribe to. It's a sort of 'one country two systems' Peoples Republic of China style where Northern Ireland, Scotland & Wales are equivalents to Hong Kong & Macau, with England being the mainland and it's regions being the equivalent to mainland provinces. The basic underpinning of this ideology is that we are all British. However, the 'nations' have special cultural differences from Britain proper. The current British government uses this to counteract natonalist movements in the 'nations', which are largely (but not totally) absent in England. The regions are simple a compromise for the English so they feel that they're not missing out. The government, and their respective quangos, want the local English person to believe that a regional assembly will be as powerful and influencial as the Scottish Parliament. There are several things this ideology ignores which resulted in the 90% no vote in the north east. Where does England and English fit in? It doesn't. New Labour politicians have been quoted saying there is no such thing as English. Anyone who says they're are English or display an English flag can often be accused of being National Front. The other problem is the fact that the boundaries ae largely artificial. For example, people in Liverpool, generally, don't like the idea of 'Granadaland' becoming a political reality. Devon & Cornwall see themselves as separate from the Bristol area. Then there are the home counties, pretty much London commuter belt, who, as a result of London becoming a region of it's own, have been split between East Anglia and the south coast. Then there's the fact that they don't and won't have nearly as much power as the Scottish Parliament and therefore doesn't answer the problem of Scottish politicians influencing non-Scottish issues. The reality is that the British government don't really want to let England go. If the union was to ever break up, they'd still have England.

3/ English Parliament

The idea is that England has equality with Scotland and is recognised as a nation of equal status. This ideology may take shape in the form of creating a devolved institution like that in Scotland, or creating a federal relationship like that of the United States. An English Parliament would create parity and solve the Scottish MP problem (West Lothian Question). Some see the English Parliament based in another city, such as York. The problem the English Parliament doesn't address is that it doesn't bring significant powers to a more local level.

4/ Regionalism

This is authentic regionalism, not the half hearted 'nations & regions' stuff that central government surf up. The belief here is that all the regions of England should have the same powers as Scotland. This solves the West Lothian Question. It also devolves power more so than an English Parliament would. However, we're still left with largely arbitary states that hardly no one relates to culturally. There's also no England, and many English notice such things.

5/ English only readings and votings at Westminster

The idea behind this is that when English only legislation is passed (or English, Weslh & Northern Irish), Scottish MPs would not be allowed to attend parliament. This answers the West Lothain Question. The downside is that it doesn't do anything else, such as devolve power locally, or recognise the concept of England in anyway. It's seen as a basic compromise by many, but New Labour will not agree due to their relience on Scottish MPs for vital votes on legislation.


There are others such as countyism and English Independence campaigners, but these are very marginal. I personally believe in a federal union between all nations. Any further devolution in England would be decided by the English Parliament. I beleive due to it's size, England should have two tier local government whether that be county, region or metro.

As DonQui said, we've talked all night about this. Can't be arsed going over it all again! :crazy:

However, we did agree that political & cultural boundaries should be mutually exclusive. Political unity and cultural diversity is my basic principle.