Are we over-governed?

Where I live we have a parish council, above that a borough (district) council and, at the top of the local government tree, a county council.  Then there is the Queen in Parliament and finally the albatross of Brussels.

Do we need them all?  One of the reasons plans were abandoned for elected regional assemblies was the public's perception that we could do quite nicely thank you without any more decision making bodies.

A few questions.

Do we need both district and county councils?

In some areas unitary authorities have been created.  They are mergers of district and county councils.  Why not extend unitary authorities to other areas?

Do we need an English parliament?

This is the 'West Lothian Question.  There are devolved governments in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, so why not England?  It does seem barmy that an MP from a Scottish constituency can vote in the House of Commons on English health issues, but not on Scottish health issues as such matters are for the Scottish Parliament.

Why not abolish the second chamber?

Do we need a second chamber to 'revise' bills?  Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland do not have second chambers, nor do any local authorities.  What should be happening is that House of Commons select committees, the committee stage of bills etc are beefed up so that legislative proposals are subjected to rigorous analysis.

IPPR Report delivers body blow to English Democrats.

An interesting report on attitudes to 'Englishness' and an English parliament.

http://www.ippr.org/images/media/files/publication/2012/01/dog-that-finally-barked_englishness_Jan2012_8542.pdf

At page 34 of the PDF is the following:

Even more significant was the response to a question that asked respondents which political party in their view ‘best stands up for the inter ests of England’. As is made clear in table 6.2, a (narrow) plurality supported the view that no party does this.

To the extent that one agrees that ‘English interests’ require championing, it is hard to dissemble from the view that they are not sufficiently well represented in the current political system. Unlike Scotland and Wales, there is no significant political party promoting England as a locus and focus of political life. That the tiny English Democrats are currently absorbing members from a disintegrating British National Party makes clear that they will not plug that particular gap. 12 UKIP’s recent conversion to the cause of an

12 For example, two very prominent former BNP activists – Chris Beverley and Eddy Butler – ar e now members of the English Democrats, the latter following an unsuccessful leadership bid against the BNP’ s Nick Griffin in 2010. Despite their membership of the English Democrats, Beverley and Butler continue to work for BNP MEP , Andrew Brons. See http://andrewbrons.eu/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=71&Itemid=120 (accessed 5 January 2012)

English parliament suggests they hope to broaden their appeal in England, but they can draw little encouragement from table 6.2.

Party
British National Party	4
Conservatives	20
English Democrats	2
Green Party	2
Labour	21
Liberal Democrats	4
UK Independence Party	9
‘I do not think that any party stands up for the inter ests of England’	23
Don’t know	15
N

The full report is well worth a read.

See also: http://www.ippr.org/publications/55/8542/the-dog-that-finally-barked-england-as-an-emerging-political-community

West Lothian Question

The members of the West Lothian Question commission have been announced:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-16594976

For me, it is simply a matter of democracy.  When legislation is passed which applies only to England, why should MPs from other nations have a vote?  MPs of other nations are not answerable to the English electorate.  It has nothing to do with 'identity' or 'culture', it has everything to do with representation.  the argument that the House of Lords in non-elected is a red herring as the Lords is always subject to the primacy of the House of Commons.

One possible solution is that on legislation which apples only to England, MPs from non-English constituencies should be barred from voting.  Some advocate the formation of an English Parliament, distinct from Westminster, and an English government.

The growing clamour for an independent Scotland would, should such a nation come about, lead to a major upheaval in constitutional arrangements, not simply between England and Scotland, but also Wales and Northern Ireland in view of the devolution arrangements in place currently for these latter nations.

Should a federal structure replace the current structure?

See:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scotland/scottish-politics/9017866/Amid-the-talk-of-Scottish-independence-its-now-time-to-answer-the-English-Question.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/9018567/Independent-Scotland-would-have-270bn-debt-pile.html

Economical with the truth?

Just before the end of 2011 I published the following:

The accusation was that I am being economic with the truth.

Not a shred of evidence to support the assertion.

In 2011 the English Passport blog published this:

The British Social Attitudes survey link takes you to a document that does not have a Table 2.  However, I have been supplied with a Table 2 from another source:

http://toque.co.uk/sites/default/files/EngParlTimeSeries.pdf

Note the discrepancy in the figure in the bottom right hand box. 57 is the figure quoted by the English Passport Blog, 23 in the Table provided on the Toque blog. 

For a detailed analysis of the English Passport article I commend:

http://www.toque.co.uk/british-social-attitudes-survey-shows-decline-support-english-parliament

West Lothian Question

The UK government announced this week that a commission to examine the West Lothian Question is to be established in February 2012 and report in 2013.  This week also the retiring head of the Civil Service pondered on the possibility of a break-up of the United Kingdom.  His comments were taken up quickly by Alex Salmond, Scotland's First Minister.

See:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/8971787/Sir-Gus-ODonnell-The-UK-faces-break-up.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/8972219/Alex-Salmond-Sir-Gus-ODonnell-is-right-to-recognise-possibilty-of-Scottish-independence.html

Afore ye go:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scotland/8973124/Why-the-Scots-want-independence-from-the-English.html

Any changes, either in the voting rights of MPs representing Scottish (and I assume Welsh and Northern Ireland) seats or a 'yes' vote in a referendum on independence for Scotland will lead to changes in the Act of Union 1707.  This year Plaid Cymru decided its policy is to seek an independent Wales.  It is doubtful if Northern Ireland would seek independence as it would soon fall into the clutches of Eire.

What has surprised me is that the announcement of the commission has not been mentioned on the pages of the English Democrats website, Facebook page or on the blog of the ED's chairman Robin Tilbrook.  Instead we have been regaled with an article and comments on 'England's oil'.

An English Parliament?

Interesting article from the Daily Telegraph:

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/edwest/100111777/would-an-english-parliament-save-the-union/