English Parliament

[Azog 150]

As we know, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland have their own devolved Parliaments/Assemblies in which decisions affecting just those areas of the UK are decided.

Now there has been much criticism drawn about the fact that MP's of these devolved areas can vote on English-only matters through Westminster, but not vice-versa. On top of this, the very fact that these areas get their own devolved assemblies when England does not is unfair and isn't in keeping with the idea of devolution.





There have been several proposals put forward in the past to create an English Parliament. Some of them involve having an English parliament to cover the whole of England. But as England contains over 80% of the UK's population, many fear this could be too big and powerful and will lead to many decisions that will greatly effect the other devolved areas of the UK.

Labour put forward the idea of having several regional assemblies (Map shown below). This would create several regional assemblies with similar populations to Scotland- hence not wielding too much power. But this was shot down by the people of the North East in a referendum and the plans were abandoned



The reason this proposal has drawn criticism is due to many in England not wanting to be split up into regions like that. People also fear that it will produce too many levels of government and create more needless bureaucracy







So what are your opinions on the matter?




Personally I support the idea of an English Parliament but I am not sure which is the best system for it. A Parliament covering the whole of England sounds great, but it could wield too much power as has been said, and further lead to the break up of the Union.

And Regional Assemblies sound good in principle- I like the idea of more localised government. But I fear it will be too complicated and create too many layers of government, plus I don't like the idea of the splitting up of England like that. It would be all too confusing for, for example, the North West to have a completely different educational policy then the West Midlands.

Either way, I think if devolution is to work all the regions of the UK should get their own Parliaments. Either that, or we give up on the idea of Devolution and give all the powers back to Westminster (although I am not sure that people outside of England would support this idea)

[Dr. Croccer]

I think it would be a bad idea because of the aforementioned significance England plays in Britain. Better to keep it divided in smaller parliaments to make it more equal with the other members.

[♔Goodguy1066♔]

I think a reigonal assembley for England is fair. If Wales, Scotland and N. Ireland get to have an assembley England should have one too! Either that, or get rid of the other reigonal assemblies....

[Poach]

I would support either:

A massive reduction in the number of MPs and the foundation of an English Parliament. Powers currently held by other Devolved Parliaments will be given to this English Parliament, and the Westminster Parliament will continue with much fewer MPs and will handle powers currently withheld from the other Devolved Parliaments. Essentially, each country runs it's own affairs and a smaller Parliament of the United Kingdom will deal with the higher level things.

OR

A complete abolition of Devolved Parliaments and a return to a single Parliament, and a standardisation of English and Scots law to bring the entire UK onto the same legal, health and educational footing.


Being realistic, abolishing the Devolved Parliaments is probably the best way to give the SNP and PC the support they crave to try and leave the UK. This cannot happen, I enjoy living in Scotland but I will ing not live in a Scottish nation-state. As such, an English Parliament is the way to go.

[Azog 150]

Being realistic, abolishing the Devolved Parliaments is probably the best way to give the SNP and PC the support they crave to try and leave the UK. This cannot happen, I enjoy living in Scotland but I will ing not live in a Scottish nation-state. As such, an English Parliament is the way to go.

That is one of my big fears, and I can't really see devolved powers being given back to Westminster. But I am still concerned that an English Parliament would wield too much power and that in itself could lead to a breakup of the Union.

[Poach]

In what manner would an English Parliament hold too much power? As long as they held only the powers that other Parliaments held, the Westminster Parliament, representing all nations of the UK, would still be the Parliament deciding on foreign affairs, UK-wide affairs, etc.

[Azog 150]

Well if they could work out a fair formula in which each of the devolved parliaments gets a proportionally equal share of finances then I see it working. But the fact is that matters affecting England (which has 80% of the population) are going to more greatly affect the other countries then vice-versa. As they would no longer get a say in these matters which could have big knock-on affects in Scotland/Wales/N.Ireland it could lead to increased resentment.

[Poach]

The Scottish Parliament already gets more money than it's due, simply continue using the same formula for issuing money to the Devolved Parliaments and give the rest to England if complaints are feared to be an issue. It would be fairly easy to disarm any complaints by the SNP/PC by releasing the documentation showing that Scotland gets more money than it's population would merit.

You raise an interesting point about English matters. As the English do constitute the vast majority of the British population, their issues are not usually just their own. Such cases would be fairly rare though, there's been little trouble with the current Devolved Parliaments butting heads with the Westminster Parliament over it's governance of England.

This could be solved by use of the Westminster Parliament: if one Devolved Parliament complains about something another does, the issue can legally be passed up to the Westminster Parliament, where all nations are represented, and dealt with there. Or by a simple process by which the two (or more) Parliaments involved in the issue set up a joint committee to reach a shared conclusion.

As I said though, I feel such cases would be fairly rare and could be dealt with on a case-by-case basis rather than requiring a robust procedure.

[Azog 150]

This could be solved by use of the Westminster Parliament: if one Devolved Parliament complains about something another does, the issue can legally be passed up to the Westminster Parliament, where all nations are represented, and dealt with there. Or by a simple process by which the two (or more) Parliaments involved in the issue set up a joint committee to reach a shared conclusion.

As I said though, I feel such cases would be fairly rare and could be dealt with on a case-by-case basis rather than requiring a robust procedure.

Thats an interesting idea. Certainly solves a few problems.

why not divide England in two, north and south?

I don't see how it would hold too much power over the other parliaments. They wouldn't be able to influence the other parliaments on devolved issues at all.

And for other descisions it is only right that the place with the largest population have the largest representation.

What about the people of the midlands? I reckon a better proposal would be to split it into four: North (Covering 14.5 million people), Midlands (Covering 9.5 million people), South (Covering 10.5 million people), Greater London (Covering 7.5 million people)




But if we were going to split up England, I would rather do it as illustrated in the map of the OP.

Though ideally I'd like to return to a single centralised parliament based in Westminster, realistically I'd support a series of English regional assemblies. Current system is this awful halfway house that just garners feelings of resentment in the English population.

I agree. I wish that there had been more referendums then just the one done in the North East. London already has its own Assembly afterall.

Unfortunately it doesn't seem to be high on the political agenda.

It does seem that way.

[removeduser_4536284751384]

What about the people of the midlands? I reckon a better proposal would be to split it into four: North (Covering 14.5 million people), Midlands (Covering 9.5 million people), South (Covering 10.5 million people), Greater London (Covering 7.5 million people)

midlands would be part of the north.

really I don't see why there can't be one english parliament, although I won't pretend to be an expert on english politics

[removeduser_4536284751384]

why not divide England in two, north and south?

I don't see how it would hold too much power over the other parliaments. They wouldn't be able to influence the other parliaments on devolved issues at all.

And for other descisions it is only right that the place with the largest population have the largest representation.

[Yorkshireman]

why not divide England in two, north and south?

We (Yorkshire) don't want to be in a regional assembley with Lancashire. You should know that as you lived in Bradford.

[removeduser_4536284751384]

We (Yorkshire) don't want to be in a regional assembley with Lancashire. You should know that as you lived in Bradford.

lol I have two English neigbhours from Lancashire and they never shut up about hte war of the roses.

[Their Law]

lol I have two English neigbhours from Lancashire and they never shut up about hte war of the roses.

They're just sore that they lost.

[Hookah Smoking Caterpiller]

They're just sore that they lost.

Lancs won? Or is this an impressive bout of historical revisonism?

[Their Law]

Though ideally I'd like to return to a single centralised parliament based in Westminster, realistically I'd support a series of English regional assemblies. Current system is this awful halfway house that just garners feelings of resentment in the English population. Unfortunately it doesn't seem to be high on the political agenda.

[Poach]

It would be hilarious if England seceded from the United Kingdom. That's the last thing anyone would expect.

[Their Law]

It would be hilarious if England seceded from the United Kingdom. That's the last thing anyone would expect.

Technically more accurate than Scotland seceding considering the countries were united under a Scottish monarch. Rise up my fellow Englishmen and throw off the oppression of these haggis loving, skirt wearing barbarians.

Freedom, liberty, and a cup of tea!!!

[Dr. Croccer]

It would be hilarious if England seceded from the United Kingdom. That's the last thing anyone would expect.

Expect the unexpected!

[Poach]

The problem with splitting it up so heavily is that England has a shared legal, education and health system covering the entire English nation. Mutliple Parliaments responsible for seperate areas of England will, over time, introduce their own changes and uses on these laws. If England were to be split up as such, the ability to make or change laws would have to be heavily restricted to ensure English law remains consistent.

That simply lands us back at square one, as the only Parliament that the lawmaking abilities kept from the Regionals could be granted to would be the UK Parliament.