Home› Archived Forums› General Discussion
Options

Should England consider 2 Parliaments?

OnexOneOnexOne Posts: 3,816
Forum Member
✭✭✭
in General Discussion #1
With the now near possible break up of the United Kingdom and the now realisation that Westminster is broken, it begs the Question? Should England really consider a parliament for the North aswell?

Comments

  • Options
    KapellmeisterKapellmeister Posts: 41,322
    Forum Member
    ✭
    #2
    God, no. There's nothing wrong with Westminster that moving parliament to a more centralised location wouldn't cure. The Palace of Westminster can then be opened up as a tourist attraction. England only needs one parliament, ffs.
  • Options
    CravenHavenCravenHaven Posts: 13,953
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    #3
    can the Thames bridges really put up with the pong of twice as much sh** there?
  • Options
    BRITLANDBRITLAND Posts: 3,443
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #4
    Kapellmeister wrote: »
    God, no. There's nothing wrong with Westminster that moving parliament to a more centralised location wouldn't cure. The Palace of Westminster can then be opened up as a tourist attraction. England only needs one parliament, ffs.

    I think he meant having a Federal UK with Governments in different areas of England similar to the Scottish Parliament ie North, Midlands, Yorkshire etc
  • Options
    KapellmeisterKapellmeister Posts: 41,322
    Forum Member
    ✭
    #5
    BRITLAND wrote: »
    I think he meant having a Federal UK with Governments in different areas of England similar to the Scottish Parliament ie North, Midlands, Yorkshire etc

    Yes, I realised that, and it's a daft idea. The UK is tiny. We're not Germany in the 17th century made up of numerous principalities and archbishoprics. England needs uniting, not yet more division.
  • Options
    OnexOneOnexOne Posts: 3,816
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #6
    thing is Westminster is NOT uniting the Nation! the divide between North and South is Widening by the year.. .what other alternatives could there be? Assembly say for the North?
  • Options
    KapellmeisterKapellmeister Posts: 41,322
    Forum Member
    ✭
    #7
    OnexOne wrote: »
    thing is Westminster is NOT uniting the Nation! the divide between North and South is Widening by the year.. .what other alternatives could there be? Assembly say for the North?

    Which is why a more centralised parliament would be a good idea. London could then continue to operate as the financial centre, like Frankfurt does in Germany, and the political centre could be elsewhere.
  • Options
    CLL DodgeCLL Dodge Posts: 115,870
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭✭
    #8
    Why just the North? What about the Midlands, East Anglia or the West Country?
  • Options
    AneechikAneechik Posts: 20,208
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #9
    If we had a federal systen, you could separate London from the rest of England as it would be the seat of the federal government (as they do in the US and Australia), which would reduce the size of England and the London-centric focus.
  • Options
    Welsh-ladWelsh-lad Posts: 51,925
    Forum Member
    ✭
    #10
    The English regions in question rejected devolution when the electorate was consulted in a referendum on the matter:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_England_devolution_referendums,_2004

    It was quite a resounding rejection too - 77% against.
  • Options
    steveh31steveh31 Posts: 13,516
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    #11
    OnexOne wrote: »
    With the now near possible break up of the United Kingdom and the now realisation that Westminster is broken, it begs the Question? Should England really consider a parliament for the North aswell?

    Broken?
  • Options
    skp20040skp20040 Posts: 66,874
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    #12
    Aneechik wrote: »
    If we had a federal systen, you could separate London from the rest of England as it would be the seat of the federal government (as they do in the US and Australia), which would reduce the size of England and the London-centric focus.

    Would that mean less money was sent out of London though ? and with each area keeping it's own, which I don't think would work very well.
  • Options
    exlordlucanexlordlucan Posts: 35,375
    Forum Member
    ✭
    #13
    OnexOne wrote: »
    With the now near possible break up of the United Kingdom and the now realisation that Westminster is broken, it begs the Question? Should England really consider a parliament for the North aswell?

    Are you frightened of being left out on your own then - you need English allies in the North?
  • Options
    Iqbal_MIqbal_M Posts: 4,093
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #14
    Kapellmeister wrote: »
    Yes, I realised that, and it's a daft idea. The UK is tiny. We're not Germany in the 17th century made up of numerous principalities and archbishoprics. England needs uniting, not yet more division.

    That does not stop Australia and Canada from being federalised, despite having a population a third and half the size of the UK respectively.
  • Options
    Iqbal_MIqbal_M Posts: 4,093
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #15
    Welsh-lad wrote: »
    The English regions in question rejected devolution when the electorate was consulted in a referendum on the matter:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_England_devolution_referendums,_2004

    It was quite a resounding rejection too - 77% against.

    Yes, but what was proposed then was to take power away from local councils rather than Westminster giving up powers in any meaningful way.
  • Options
    jjwalesjjwales Posts: 48,572
    Forum Member
    ✭
    #16
    Welsh-lad wrote: »
    The English regions in question rejected devolution when the electorate was consulted in a referendum on the matter:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_England_devolution_referendums,_2004

    It was quite a resounding rejection too - 77% against.

    That was just one region though - the North East - and they weren't offered an Assembly with anything like the powers of Scotland or Wales.

    In contrast, the referendum to establish the London Assembly found 72% in favour.
  • Options
    jjwalesjjwales Posts: 48,572
    Forum Member
    ✭
    #17
    Aneechik wrote: »
    If we had a federal systen, you could separate London from the rest of England as it would be the seat of the federal government (as they do in the US and Australia), which would reduce the size of England and the London-centric focus.

    Excellent idea. With the English Parliament being located in the Midlands perhaps?
Sign In or Register to comment.