Guest pelmetman Posted June 9, 2013 Share Posted June 9, 2013 Rather than they to leave us? >:-)..................Divide and propser :D............... English devolution 'could save UK', MP David Davies says David Davies fears English taxpayers will one day 'wake up' to the unfairness of devolution Continue reading the main story Related Stories Devolution inquiry hits the road Sort out English devolution - MPs MPs debate the English question Failure to devolve power to England could threaten the future of the UK, two senior MPs say. Monmouth Tory MP David Davies, chair of the Welsh Affairs select committee, said English taxpayers may "wake up" to the unfairness of the situation. Labour MP Graham Allen, whose select committee oversees constitutional reform, fears it could boost UKIP. Their warnings come as the UK government considers giving Wales major borrowing and taxation powers. The recommendation was made in a report by the Silk Commission into scope for further devolution for Wales. Scotland, which already has tax varying powers, could also get additional financial powers regardless of the result of next year's referendum on independence. Both developments would leave England without devolved powers which has prompted the concern of the two MPs. Continue reading the main story “ Start Quote One of these days... taxpayers in England are going to wake up, realise that this is happening, say it's absolutely outrageous” David Davies Monmouth MP 'Grossly unfair' Mr Davies told the BBC's Sunday Politics Wales programme: "I can vote for higher student fees in England while supporting a situation where students don't pay those fees in Wales. "This is grossly unfair and the reason why people in Wales and Scotland should care about it, at least those who are unionists should care about it, is because that basic unfairness is likely to fracture the union. "One of these days, people in England, taxpayers in England, are going to wake up, realise that this is happening, say it's absolutely outrageous and we're not having it any more, you know, let them [the UK nations] go their own separate ways." Nottingham North MP Graham Allen, who chairs the select committee on political and constitutional reform, said the main political parties had to get a grip of the issue. He said: "If they don't, the conventional political parties are going to leave the field free to other organisations like UKIP, who frankly don't have many policies at the moment, who might seize that opportunity and be the party of English devolution. "That I think would be a very bad thing for the conventional parties and a very bad thing for the people in England. "If you have those two key principles together, devolution and union, I think we'll put nationalism back in the box." Running scared Continue reading the main story “ Start Quote UKIP are now setting the agenda for these parties as we've seen in so many decisions” Kevin Mahoney UKIP Mr Allen said devolution had been a success in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland and he would like to see it applied to councils in England. Failure to do so will increase discontent, he believes. Kevin Mahoney, a UKIP councillor in Wales, believes it is clear the traditional parties are running scared. "They assumed the votes of the people and now they're just waking up to the fact of how disliked, despised or whatever they are, and they see UKIP coming up on the rails," he said. "Yes, they are reacting and to a certain degree UKIP are now setting the agenda for these parties as we've seen in so many decisions." Labour had planned to devolve powers from Westminster to regional assemblies in England but that was stopped after the North East delivered an emphatic "no" vote almost a decade ago. Prime Minister David Cameron went to Scotland on Friday to tell his party conference that 2014 would be the year in which to save the union as a referendum is held on the issue of independence. He said a future Conservative government would deliver "strong alternatives" to keep the UK together. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave225 Posted June 10, 2013 Share Posted June 10, 2013 And, your point is..................................? England has had a devolved government since time began, it is called Westminster. Of the 650 MPs there the vast majority are from England so can vote anything they like, however as so many of them play games to suit themselves they divide and argue among themselves, and allow very small groups to call the shots. That is nothing to do with devolution, that is selfish stupidity and they should be rewarded by being voted out. Also Scotland did not request devolution, it was imposed on us by Blair with the full support of his English MP's, again as they thought it would suit their own political ends. However, it backfired as those 'dumb Scots' stopped voting en masse for Labour. and as they all hated the Tories, voted SNP instead. I think it is called shooting yourself in the foot. Once of course you open Pandora's Box you cannot re seal it again, and of course devolution for the Scots has become more relevant than Westminster, even if we have some total ijits as well. I do have some sympathy for those English who feel they seem to be getting a raw deal, but that is not the case. All the wonderful stories the English Press are printing showing Scots are living a life of luxury on the backs of the hard working English are just propaganda. Just visit us and see for yourselves. In fact some regions of England get more money thrown at them than us, but that is not mentioned. At the end of the day most Scots want the Uk to remain as is, but if the English wish to get stroppy then so be it. They would then find out that their own world will shrink and have consequences they might not like. As for David Davies, he seems to have some good ideas but this one is not one of them. He could always resign as an MP and stand for the Welsh Assembly if he really felt he wanted to do something for Wales, but then again, think of the perks he would lose.......... I also suspect most Scots would not really care if they lose their MP, as they do very little for Scotland anyway. However, if that did occur then any truly national issues would need approval from the devolved parliaments as well as Westminster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted June 11, 2013 Share Posted June 11, 2013 Dave225 - 2013-06-10 9:01 PM And, your point is..................................? Maybe the point that a Scottish or Welsh MP being able to vote on purely English issues, yet we can not vote on theirs....................is reason enough for us to all run our own houses ;-)............ In fact I'd like to see much more power devolved from London to the provinces..............allowing councils to keep the business rates they raise, would go along way in helping the rest of the country recover from this depression *-)......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted June 11, 2013 Share Posted June 11, 2013 No, the point, I think, is that England, within the present "constitution" of the United Kingdom, is not a soverign entity within the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. It may have a majority of the seats at Westminster, but Westminster is the parliament of the United Kingdom, not of England, and that majority of seats is not as a result of some kind of favouritism, it is a consequence of England having by far the greater population. Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales have gained greater autonomy for themselves, but England has no individual voice. Nevertheless, all three of those countries press for greater devolved powers. The ultimate goal for a substantial number of their inhabitants is full independance. Were that to be the outcome, I should be happy for Westminster to revert to being the English parliament, as there would be no United Kingdom, just four independent countries: England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland. This is the unresolved issue inherent in devolution. If the other UK countries want to set their own tax levels, that is fine by me - but only if there is agreement on how the tax is to be spent. Scots tax can be raised in Scotland, and spent in Scotland, but only on things the whole of the UK agrees appropriate, which means it has to be subject to UK scrutiny to be sure it is going where it is supposed to go. That level of scrutiny will be unacceptable to many in the Scottish parliament, because they will claim it demeans Scotland. The same will be true for Wales and Northern Ireland, though not necessarily to the same degree, or at the same time. It is clear to me that the United Kingdom government has to become a "federal" government, that exercises only those powers the member countries agree that it shall have. Failing that, the individual countries may as well go their own ways, having their own borders, their own defences, and their own currencies, with all that flows from that. That, I think is the logical conclusion. Otherwise, the UK should stay broadly as it is. We all gain, in different ways, to different degrees, and at different times. Most of the present problem is, IMO, the result of the banking crash of 2007, from which we have not yet recovered. The more austerity measures pinch, the more sections of the population look for someone else to blame, or look at "their" resources and claim others are wasting/abusing them. Either we are one country, in which case we should share the ups and downs, or we are not, in which case we should stop pretending otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.