English devolution - a good idea?
SnowStorm86
Posts: 17,273 Forum Member
✭✭
As has been afforded to Wales, Scotland and the North of Ireland. A devolved English government, seeking to help the needs of all of our Country; not just London. A fair system of voting could be used such as Proportional Representation. The new parliament would be a more central city in England, bringing extra prosperity to other regions. It would pave the way towards the ability to facilitate an independence vote in the same way as the Scottish have got, if there's an appetite for such a thing. At the very least, the people of England would get a sense of national identity at last, and know what it is to be ENGLISH, rather than British, lumped together with 3 other Countries who don't particularly like us anyway. I just feel that today, St. George's Day, reflecting on what it means to be English, this could be something that makes sense to quite a lot of people.
0
Comments
Good question.
It would definitely mean a reduction in the role and size of UK government. In fact that's the only way it could possibly happen.
Departments of health, education, and all the other things that are now devolved to Scotland and Wales, would be transferred to the new English government. The new UK federal government would handle things such as defence and foreign policy.
The UK Parliament.
The only way it could work is by downgrading the status of the Westminster Parliament and creating a truly federal United Kingdom. However, at present there is very little public appetitie for such huge constitutional change. The Blair government tried to introduce regional assemblies for England, but it was voted down overwhelmingly in the 2004 referendum in the North East.
As another poster said, it would mean more politicians, more expense and just another layer of bureaucracy. So I'm happy with the current quasi-federal arrangement.
Part of the trouble there was that the regions were not being offered the same powers as Scotland or Wales, so people probably just didn't see the point of them.
Doesn't have to mean more politicians, especially if the Lords was abolished at the same time. The current number of MPs could be split between the two new Parliaments.
As you say it would mean huge constitutional change, but I really don't think the present system is sustainable in the long run.
Also those parliaments (along with the Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish ones) should have full control over domestic and tax policy/revenue, with Westminster retaining control over defence and foreign affairs (thus much smaller).
Westminster can also have only 100-200 MPs (with the House of Lords being abolished), divided by population and elected by PR...
Sorry I probably didn't explain it clearly. The level of power would be disproportionate because a Scottish Parliament, representing the interests of 5 million people, would have equal status with an English Parliament representing 50 million. If English devolution were to happen, devolved regional assemblies of roughly equal size would surely make more sense.
I have no objection to English devolution in theory, and I think it could be a viable option for the future, but as present I am satisfied with how things are. As I said, I think it has the potential to create more problems than it solves.
It would also take years of work by lawyers to disentangle all the historic laws made as our Parliament evolved and became what it is today.
What happens to the UK Parliament once England has devolved from it?
we just need to stop the MPs from devolved regions voting on devolved matters.
It becomes a much smaller federal Parliament.
That could lead to other problems.
Why would it? There wasn't a huge problem with Welsh and Scottish devolution.
It will have more time to concentrate on foreign wars.
Why ?
If i don't get a say on matters devolved to wales why should you get a say on them in england?