BBC Home

Explore the BBC


19th October 2019
Accessibility help
Text only

BBC Homepage

Channel Islands
Guernsey
Jersey


Contact Us


Like this page?
Send it to a friend!

 

or register to join or start a new discussion.


Discussion:

Is it Time for England to be governed by the English?

Messages  1 - 20 of 23

 
< Previous 1  2  Next >
 

Message 1 - posted by Jonathan Vernon-Smith, Jun 21, 2006

Devolution may be causing an English backlash, according to the House of Commons Scottish Affairs Committee.
The MPs said a recent poll for the BBC suggested there was increasing concern about whether Scottish MPs should vote on issues that affect England only.
They warned that the debate, known as the "West Lothian question", could undermine the devolution settlement.
More than half those surveyed in the poll said a Scottish MP should not become prime minister.
The figure rose from 52% to 59% in the south east of England.
The West Lothian question, first posed by Tam Dalyell in the 1970s, asked why Scottish post-devolution MPs should be allowed to vote on Westminster matters, like health or education, but could not vote on issues that would be devolved to a Scottish Parliament.

So what do you think? Is it time for England to be governed by the English?

Do you think that England is being left outside in the dark as the Scottish and Welsh are devolved from the UK?

Does it bother you that Scottish MPs representing Scottish constituents are making decisions that only affect England?

Do you think that England should have its own parliament rather like the Scottish and Welsh ones?

Or do you think that things are fine the way they are? Would you be happy with a Scottish Prime Minister?

Do you think the Scottish and Welsh hate the English? Are you Scottish or Welsh? Do you hate the English?

Do you think that England is gradually loosing its identity because of the strength of Scottish and Welsh patriotism?

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

This is the subject of today's phone in on BBC Radio Northampton between 1pm and 2pm. Tune in on 104.2, 103.6FM or online and have your say on 01604 23 44 55!
Complain about a message      

Message 2 - posted by Blackcountrybloke, Jun 21, 2006

From above;

So what do you think? Is it time for England to be governed by the English?............YES

Do you think that England is being left outside in the dark as the Scottish and Welsh are devolved from the UK?.............. WHAT CAN WE EXPECT WHEN MOST OF THE CABINET ARE SCOTTISH OR WELSH?

Does it bother you that Scottish MPs representing Scottish constituents are making decisions that only affect England?.....YES.

Do you think that England should have its own parliament rather like the Scottish and Welsh ones?..............WHY NOT.

Or do you think that things are fine the way they are? Would you be happy with a Scottish Prime Minister?..... NO.

Do you think the Scottish and Welsh hate the English? Are you Scottish or Welsh? Do you hate the English?....... WHO CARES! THEY CAN THINK WHAT THEY WANT. THEY ARE HAPPY TO KEEP ON HAVING ALL THE BENEFITS PAYED BY ENGLISH TAXES.

Do you think that England is gradually loosing its identity because of the strength of Scottish and Welsh patriotism?.... YES.

If they want devolution, fine, let all the Scottish and Welsh MPs go back to there own Parliments and vote for there own. Lets go the whole hog and break up the UK, and let England, Wales and Scotland collect there own Taxes and only use them for there own Country. Lets put this to them I know what would happen!

Any way it should be put to the citizens of the UK which way they want to go, I should imagine the majority would vote to keep the UK.

So lets have a Referendum
Complain about a message      

Message 3 - posted by U4427091, Jun 21, 2006

They should all be from Cornwall.

Cornwall would then become the hub for investment, growth, manufacturing and everything. Big chimneys could be built on all the new factories resulting in the English scruffy tourists now visiting the newly rural wastescapes of London, Birmingham, Manchester, Liverpool and Newcastle.
Complain about a message      

Message 4 - posted by Blackcountrybloke, Jun 21, 2006

I've just found this report;

There was nothing hypocritical or inconsistent about Gordon Brown travelling to Germany last night to support England in the World Cup.
Chancellor is a British patriot who has never perceived any problem being both a proud Scot and loving England.
English MPs call for Scottish MPs vote exclusion
But such an attitude is utterly contrary to the puerile anti-English prejudice expressed by Scottish First Minister Jack McConnell who began the World Cup by declaring his support for England's group rivals Trinidad and Tobago.

Tragically, the forces unleashed by Scottish devolution are now making Mr Brown's approach more rare. Last week, two English football supporters were savagely beaten up in a Renfrewshire pub. Days earlier, the Commission for Racial Equality felt compelled to warn Scots not to display anti-English bigotry.
The truth is that there has never been a worse time to be English in Scotland and the reason is clear. The reckless constitutional vandalism by which Tony Blair created a Scottish Parliament is wrecking the Union.
Devolution let Scotland have its cake and eat it, but at the expense of anti-English sentiment in Scotland and a growing backlash in England. The latter is inexcusable, but it is easily explained.
In Scottish schools, children are taught a deeply symbolic lesson about imperialism. There was only one Scottish colonial adventure the Darien scheme of 1698, which was a calamity.
One thousand two hundred settlers of the Scottish East India Company were sent to establish a trading post in Panama, but within a year, desertion and death destroyed any prospect of success and 900 survivors fled.

As a result, it's not surprising that Scotland abandoned imperialism. But has it? Since Edinburgh-born Mr Blair took power, talented Scots have been encouraged to build a new empire. It is called England.

The major institutions of the British state are now dominated by Scots. Apart from huge representation in the Cabinet and in Blair's circle of McCronies, the wider arms of government and the quangos that it appoints, together with powerful parts of the media that is supposed to scrutinise them, are Scottish enclaves. So are key areas of industry, showbiz, business and sport.

Of course, none of this influence in the upper echelons of the British Establishment would be controversial if Britain was still a thriving unitary state. In 1902, when the obnoxious polemicist T. W. H. Crosland complained that 'England is virtually run by the Scotch', he was condemned as a bigot. But now, with Scots-born politicians leading both Labour and Liberal Democrat parties and Mr Brown poised to replace Mr Blair, the legitimacy of Scottish influence is in question.

As the Scottish Affairs Committee of the House of Commons recognised earlier this week, the Scottish presence at the heart of the British state is no longer based on equal citizenship. Such inequity, it warned, could lead to English voters deserting Labour if Mr Brown becomes Prime Minister.

The Scottish Parliament was created to put Scottish affairs in Scottish hands. But, in fact, it has subjected English affairs to an unprecedented degree of Scottish control while denying English people to power in Scotland.

Only a handful of people born O outside Scotland sit in Holy-rood. It is inconceivable that an English politician could be elected First Minister.

Down in London, the Glaswegian Michael Martin is Speaker of the Commons, but no English politician can hope to fill the equivalent post of Presiding Officer at Holyrood.

Of the Scots who made New Labour Tony Blair, Gordon Brown, John Smith, Robin Cook and Donald Dewar only Dewar returned to the Edinburgh Parliament. Since its creation, traffic has stampeded in the opposite direction.

If membership was accorded in proportion to population, Scotland would have two ministers in the British Cabinet. But there are seven. Also, there are more than 106 Scottish MPs sitting in Westminster. It is not just the number of Scots in government that highlights the rank inequality devolution has created. They have disproportionate influence, too.

And the Scots do better out of the public purse than their southern cousins. Public spending is 1,503 per head higher in Scotland than in England.
Complain about a message      

Message 5 - posted by U4409815, Jun 21, 2006

Fred has a good indirect point, if England gets to devolve from the UK. Then the other ethnic regions recognised by the EU should also get to devolve from England/UK, i.e. Cornwall, Isle of Man, Channel Islands.

This would allow proper representation, this is particularly relevant for Cornwall being the poorest in the UK as defined by the EU (poor than Liverpool or Port Talbot-Neath even). Then we could probably tax those second home owners and build some nice big casinos.

On a similar tone, the Catalans have voted for indepence from Spain and teh Spainish government are about to enter negiotations with the Basques. The EU may now be indirectly acting as the instrument of release of subpressed nationhood.

Perhaps its right that the Scots and Welsh get to a chance to tell the English what to do as an antidote to the previous centuries of English Imperialism in the British and Irish Isles.

Make sure that all contributor know that British and English aren't the same.
Complain about a message      

Message 6 - posted by U4427091, Jun 21, 2006

Yes, and their goalkeepers are crap too.
Complain about a message      

Message 7 - posted by Benji_UK, Jun 22, 2006

The Channel Islands and Isle of Man havenever been part of England OR the UK.

We definitely need reform and devolution in England but I don't thik an English parliament on the same level as the Scottish one would be very useful.
Complain about a message      

Message 8 - posted by robbiethelyddite, Jun 24, 2006


Black country guy makes some good points but is muddled. You have to start from the premise that Wesminster is the UK parliament and until power is devolved away from there to England or the English regions that Scots and Welsh MP's have the right to vote in any business there.

Ken livingston and others always raise the issue of public spending differentials between England and Scotland without mentioning population density. Are they really saying that the people of Lewis and the other remote islands should not enjoy the same level of services as london, where a denser population ensures more synergies, so that services are cheaper to provide?

The West Lothian Question is always framed wrongly, it should be, when is governance in England going to be modernized. Currently there is a hotch-potch of districts, counties, unitary authorities, parish councils and quangos trying to deliver services to the public. This is expensive and in many cases based on boundaries that say more about heritage than modern realities. There should be a fundemental review of governance in England to see at what level powers should be exercised. Regional government for transport, police, tetiary and secondary education and waste, for example is unavoidable; other services need to be delivered more locally than at present.
Complain about a message      

Message 9 - posted by robbiethelyddite, Jun 24, 2006


Position in the Uk government is normally decided on ability, when England has its own government it can run it, like many county councils are at present, on the buddy system.

Scots may have lost out at Darien, in part this was down to the Royal Navy - on the Kings orders not intervening on their side when the Spanish invaded. Odly enough I think I read that English traders were on the side of the scots.

It should be remembered that the British empire was a UK enterprise, the almost exclusivly English part of it declared independance in 1776,
Complain about a message      

Message 10 - posted by John of Paddington, Jun 24, 2006

JVS, lets get this straight. What is called 'Develution is nothing other that this Governments attempt to conform with the EU demand that the United Kingdon is broken up into Regions. They were lucky that three of the proposed regions had the bounderies od Scotland, N.Ireland and Wales, except it took in the English county of Monmouth. It will be seen, however, that the majoritry of the voters of these areas did not vote for it. Bouyed by his succses in pulling this Con trick off, Prescott, who was given the job, tried it in NE England and got a bloody nose. The Government therefore just setup the Regions and appointed 'Councilors', the act of a Dictator.
What it does mean is that English MPs have no say in Scottish or Welsh affairs, but MPs from these places, who make up the bulk of Blairs majority, can stamp on the English, and being Celts they take great delight in this.
Complain about a message      

Message 11 - posted by U3508276 - alt id 4, Jun 24, 2006

Sooner we split into national Parliaments and look after our own affairs the better (and simpler).
Complain about a message      

Message 12 - posted by robbiethelyddite, Jun 24, 2006

This is so wrong and old fashioned a view of the country (c1957)it is not worth commenting on, except to say, thatcher and major had no mandate in Scotland and Wales and both areas had essentially a colonial regime. The reason that regionalism is needed in England is because we all commute outside the heritage counties we live in, some things are better delivered on a bigger basis and most importantly, London and the SE economy is out of kilter with the economies of the midlands/the north etc. It should also be noted that the English regions conform roughly to the saxon kingdoms of England rather than the norman french nation that replaced it.

JVS, lets get this straight. What is called 'Develution is nothing other that this Governments attempt to conform with the EU demand that the United Kingdon is broken up into Regions. They were lucky that three of the proposed regions had the bounderies od Scotland, N.Ireland and Wales, except it took in the English county of Monmouth. It will be seen, however, that the majoritry of the voters of these areas did not vote for it. Bouyed by his succses in pulling this Con trick off, Prescott, who was given the job, tried it in NE England and got a bloody nose. The Government therefore just setup the Regions and appointed 'Councilors', the act of a Dictator.
What it does mean is that English MPs have no say in Scottish or Welsh affairs, but MPs from these places, who make up the bulk of Blairs majority, can stamp on the English, and being Celts they take great delight in this.

Quoted from this message

Complain about a message      

Message 13 - posted by johnharrison, Jun 24, 2006

The Channel Islands and Isle of Man are Crown Dependencies ie just like Bermuda they are Colonies.

And as for the "British Empire" it wasnt just the American Colonies that were English. Newfoundland and the eastern part of Canada apart from Novia Scotia were settled by the English prior to 1707, and Bermuda as well.
Complain about a message      

Message 14 - posted by John of Paddington, Jun 24, 2006

You have forgotten Hawaei, this was a british Colony, we gave it independance but it was invaded and aneexed by the U.S.A. For proof look at the flag, don't you thin it strange that a socalled State of the Union has a Union Jack in the top right hand corner.
Complain about a message      

Message 15 - posted by robbiethelyddite, Jun 25, 2006

the english settlers in bermuda were prisoners, in the 17th century there was a term 'to be barbadoed' a large number of prisoners from the war of the four nations were exiled there by cromwell and the later, by the crown. Canada at this time was mostly a French enterprise. i understand that that there were viking colonies there in 11th century! Eastern Canada had been visted by fishermen in Europe long before it was officially discovered, it was overlooked cos it had no obvious gold.
Complain about a message      

Message 16 - posted by U3775715 - alt id 1, Jun 25, 2006

What is the advantage of having a UK Parliament when the non-English componants are happy to go it alone?
Complain about a message      

Message 17 - posted by redrebelrecords, Jun 27, 2006

KIYOMORI - NONE OF THE ABOVE!!! - UPRISING!!!!


www.youtube.com/watc...


The soundtrack to the devolution of parliament, the dawn of the last revolution!!

myspace.com/kiyomori
kiyomori.co.uk
Complain about a message      

Message 18 - posted by Benji_UK, Jun 28, 2006

The Isle of Man and Channel Islands are not colonies - they have never had any formal relationship with the London government. Their relationships are via the Crown, not Westminster.

Back on topic - Britain and England cannot be governed as one homogenous block because it isn't - it needs local and regional bodies to deal with running services and policies that have to be tailored to different circumstances. Our current and past government have been grossly centralised and evolution is not before time. Unfortunately, because turkeys don't vote for christmas, the New Labour government seem very unwilling to devolve any meaningful powers from themselves to a democratic or representative body outside Whitehall.
Complain about a message      

Message 19 - posted by robbiethelyddite, Jun 28, 2006

hooray, someone sensible joins the debate. Nationalist zealots confuse evolution of government with the break up of the UK. The UK has been a bigger success that any of the four countries that make it up, would or could have been, on their own. The enlightenment started here (well in Edinburgh at least) and created the rules by which the world lives.

The last time the four nations fought each other over how we should be ruled, the war lasted 19 years and over 800,000 people died.

All I want to see is a written constitution to protect us from the politicians! With the shifty lot we have nowadays, unwritten is not going to cut. I recall hearing that TB does not honour committments that are not written down, during one of his scraps with Brown.
Complain about a message      

Message 20 - posted by sogrot, Jun 29, 2006

Further...often, when I wake up and switch on the T.V. or radio, I think that during the night I've been transported to Scotland as so often the politicians, presenters and weather women are from north of the border!
Let's have regional accents by all means, but more English ones in England.
The Scots have far too much influence here. By the way, I'm half Scots!!
Complain about a message      
< Previous 1  2  Next >

This discussion is tagged with:
- England
- Northamptonshire
- Scotland
- wales
- devolution

getting involved How to reply to messagespopup icon
complain  Alert us about a messagepopup icon
online safety Are you being safe online?popup icon

Messages  1 - 20 of 23

 


About the BBC | Help | Terms of Use | Privacy & Cookies Policy