News from the New Party

Tuesday, January 16, 2007

State of the Union

Today marks the three hundredth anniversary of the Act of Union between England and Scotland in 1707. Recent polls, for example this one commissioned by the BBC for Newsnight, apparently indicate that enthusiasm for the Union may have dampened on both sides of the border in recent years. In the first instance desire for a greater degree of autonomy from a large proportion of the Scottish population led to ever greater insistence for a form of devolution for Scotland, which was finally delivered by the UK government in 1999. Since then, however, resentment from a substantial proportion of the English people against the devolution settlement for both Scotland and Wales has led to calls for an English parliament, which, it is thought by some, would put England back on a par with Scotland and Wales.

The nub of the problem seems to be what has come to be known as the West Lothian question, named after the constituency of the Labour MP Tam Dalyell, who raised the question in the House of Commons in the context of the Scottish devolution debates leading up to the referendum of 1979. The question raised by Dalyell was as follows:

"For how long will English constituencies and English Honourable members tolerate... at least 119 Honourable Members from Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland exercising an important, and probably often decisive, effect on British politics while they themselves have no say in the same matters in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland?"

The point of the West Lothian question is that a voter of West Lothian might have a direct influence over both Scottish and English legislation if a Scottish parliament were voted into existence without a corresponding English legislature, whereas a voter from an English constituency would have no corresponding influence over Scottish affairs. Since the creation of the Scottish parliament and executive in 1999 the question has an additional dimension, with the appointment of Scottish MPs as ministers in departments which hold responsibility only for England.

Although the problem raised by the West Lothian question raises an apparently serious flaw in British democracy, the flaw in practice is apparent, rather than serious. Scotland exerts a somewhat smaller electoral pull within the British House of Commons than does Greater London. Wales has barely more MPs than Greater Manchester. Northern Ireland is comparable in terms of population to the larger English counties such as Essex and Kent. There has been no instance since the Reform Acts of the 19th century in which the voting patterns of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland have resulted in a government in London contrary to the voting intentions of the population of England. There have, in fact, been several examples of the opposite being the case, notably in the 1980s when large Conservative majorities delivered by large Conservative votes in English constituencies overrode large Labour majorities in Scotland and Wales. Indeed this very circumstance contributed greatly to the popularity of Scottish and Welsh devolution, especially among members of the Labour Party, during the period of the Thatcher governments.

The call for an English parliament to uphold the rights of the English against the assumed domination of the Scots and Welsh is at best an irrelevance, and at worst ludicrous. There is an argument for Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish MPs to be excluded from certain votes in the House of Commons which apply only to matters relating to England. There is no justification, however, for a separate English Parliament. On the contrary, it is doubtful whether the devolution settlement itself has really delivered much of value to the people of Scotland and Wales. If it is true that Scotland and Wales have never imposed a government on England against the will of the English, it is at least partially true that the English have never imposed such a government on the Scots and Welsh (at least within the context of democratic elections). To accept such a proposition surely implies that we should accept that Conservative governments have been imposed on Liverpool and South Yorkshire against their will; and that Labour governments have been imposed on Surrey and Buckinghamshire in clear defiance of the will of the people of those counties.

The New Party remains sceptical of the value of the separate Scottish and Welsh legislatures as they are currently constituted. Instead, the New Party proposal is that Scottish MPs should simultaneously act as Members of the Scottish Parliament, and should sit for part of the time in Edinburgh in order to consider matters pertaining solely to Scotland. Similar proposals would apply to Wales and Northern Ireland, and an English Grand Committee consisting of all MPs from English constituencies would fulfil the function of an "English parliament", to consider matters pertaining only to England. As a result a lot of expense, confusion and duplicated effort would be avoided, and the quality of legislation would undoubtedly be enhanced. Most importantly, the negative effects of devolution manifested in mutual resentment and suspicion between the English, Scots and Welsh in particular would be removed. The New Party believes that we are, and should remain, a United Kingdom.

News from the New Party

News Highlights

News Archive

State of the Union