Why did non-English MPs vote?

scorza said:
:confused: No, it's all right to vote as long as it's not for something that is unfairly advantageous to the Scots/Welsh residents and to the detriment of English residents.
Click to expand...

I see, ok I'd go with that. However if devolution is here to stay then the English really need a devolved Government also, to be fair....
 
Castiel said:
I see, ok I'd go with that. However if devolution is here to stay then the English really need a devolved Government also, to be fair....
Click to expand...

Yes, because not allowing scottish and welsh MPs to vote is not on devolved matters is going to cause problems, especially for Labour, as they rarely achieve a majority in England, and rely on over-represented Scotland and Wales to ensure they have a working majority.

Likewise, in 2010, parliament would not have been hung for votes counting only English seats.

I'm still all in favour of full fiscal and legislative automony for Scotland and Wales, I think it would work out beneficial to all one way or another. Of course, I would expect the major partner to get the best deal in any asset split, and any national public sector work to be returned to the home area...
 
Dolph said:
I'm still all in favour of full fiscal and legislative automony for Scotland and Wales, I think it would work out beneficial to all one way or another. Of course, I would expect the major partner to get the best deal in any asset split, and any national public sector work to be returned to the home area...
Click to expand...
Noooo :(

I <3 Union.
 
Dolph said:
Yes, because not allowing scottish and welsh MPs to vote is not on devolved matters is going to cause problems, especially for Labour, as they rarely achieve a majority in England, and rely on over-represented Scotland and Wales to ensure they have a working majority.

Likewise, in 2010, parliament would not have been hung for votes counting only English seats.

I'm still all in favour of full fiscal and legislative automony for Scotland and Wales, I think it would work out beneficial to all one way or another. Of course, I would expect the major partner to get the best deal in any asset split, and any national public sector work to be returned to the home area...
Click to expand...


Absolutely agree, especially with the latter.
 
meghatronic said:
Noooo :(

I <3 Union.
Click to expand...

Problem is that many do not so we should give them the choice via referendum. Make it a straight forward yes/no vote, make the vote compulsory to eradicate only the radicals voting and then go with the simple majority.

I suspect that the over-riding majority will not wish to leave the union anyway.
 
Castiel said:
Problem is that many do not so we should give them the choice via referendum. Make it a straight forward yes/no vote, make the vote compulsory to eradicate only the radicals voting and then go with the simple majority.

I suspect that the over-riding majority will not wish to leave the union anyway.
Click to expand...
The problem is it's an emotional topic.

It's like having a referendum on the death penalty. It would EASILY pass but is something that can simpy not be allowed to happen in a modern world.
 
Castiel said:
I see, ok I'd go with that. However if devolution is here to stay then the English really need a devolved Government also, to be fair....
Click to expand...

I would agree that the current state of devolution is a right old mess, an epic failure by NuLabour in fact. A devolved English government is one solution, but not the only one.
 
meghatronic said:
The problem is it's an emotional topic.

It's like having a referendum on the death penalty. It would EASILY pass but is something that can simpy not be allowed to happen in a modern world.
Click to expand...

Having the vote compulsory negates the emotive vote, as everyone will have to vote one way or the other.

I don't agree that giving the devolved nations a referendum on independence is the same as one on the death penalty however.

I strongly suspect that the Union would be both stronger and intact after such referendums and we could forgo this daft devolution experiment once and for all.
 
Castiel said:
Having the vote compulsory negates the emotive vote, as everyone will have to vote one way or the other.

I don't agree that giving the devolved nations a referendum on independence is the same as one on the death penalty however.

I strongly suspect that the Union would be both stronger and intact after such referendums and we could forgo this daft devolution experiment once and for all.
Click to expand...
I meant I doubt the majority of people will think it through and consider the long term implications. Our Celtic brothers will no doubt vote due to chips on shoulders. Conversely the English may well vote as they're sick of the handouts etc.

I just don't like the idea.
 
meghatronic said:
I meant I doubt the majority of people will think it through and consider the long term implications. Our Celtic brothers will no doubt vote due to chips on shoulders. Conversely the English may well vote as they're sick of the handouts etc.

I just don't like the idea.
Click to expand...

I'd just like to see a more equitable split in income and expenditure. The barnett formula favours scotland and wales over england, while failing to take into account significant 'welfare' spending in the form of state employment for national agencies and for defence (which is definitely used as welfare employment in Scotland). The block grant should factor in all spending in these areas before splitting the cash, or alternatively, we give tax and spend powers to the devolved areas and cut the block grants entirely, so for devolved only matters, they can only spend what they can raise, and we take steps to ensure state spending decisions cannot be made for political reasons (see building most things naval related over the border when we have perfectly good, skilled facilities elsewhere that are cheaper and didn't get a look in under the previous administration's contracts). I'd even be happy to see enforced equality of state welfare employment, taking it out of welfare status and meaning that it actually gets spread fairly, rather than used to shore up votes in the north of the England, Scotland and Wales...
 
Rotty said:
ridiculous isn't it, about time the Scots made up there mind onw way or the other and stopped wanting the best of both worlds

at least the vote went the right way though
Click to expand...

Nothing to do with the scots at all why can't the english have their own parliament instead of doing all their business in the National (read United Kingdom) parliament?

May I remind you that neither England or Scotland exist as nation states.
 
meghatronic said:
SNP are hardly worth shouting about.
Click to expand...

I think they are.

They refuse to vote on English only matters with the SNP MP's.

Far more democratic than any other 'Scottish' party.

The Westlothian Question is firmly in the hands of Westminster, and the way things are headed it will not be resolved.
 
Castiel said:
I strongly suspect that the Union would be both stronger and intact after such referendums and we could forgo this daft devolution experiment once and for all.
Click to expand...

Devolution was a result of an ineffective union. It wasn't working, and it wasn't politically representative of the constituent nations.

Problem being, the new devolved system brought the West Lothian Question.

Dissolving it does not rectify those problems.

It takes you back to stage one, disillusionment with Westminster and votes outside middle England having no effect on the end result mainly.
 
pretty stupid debate, they are mps therefore have to vote,
however, conservative party should expect no support from scottish mps at all given the way the population of scotland voted
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom