8 Comments »

Toque said:
I think that the BSA figures contained within the IPPR report underestimate support for an English parliament and/or a Westminster solution to the WLQ.
The BSA survey also found that 61% thought it was wrong for Scottish MPs to vote on English laws, so the 49% in England who apparently favour the Status Quo probably only do so on the proviso that Scottish MPs are banned (interesting that support for the Status Quo has fallen below half for the first time ever).
# 3 March 2010 at 9:19 am

Stephen Gash said:
“We need proper and fair devolution.”
If you mean that England must be sacrificed and bust up into regions (already rejected by the people) for the sake of the Union, then I choose England to remain and the UK to disappear.
The 1998 Devolution Act made provision for Scottish regions, but they don’t have them.
Regions have been an expensive disaster for England.
# 3 March 2010 at 12:59 pm

Chris (author) said:
Stephen, no I don’t mean that England must be sacrificed. I am implacably opposed to the “regions” idea.
England is a country and needs to remain as one – and with proper devolution, it can do.
# 3 March 2010 at 6:56 pm
First Class posts on Wednesday | Letters From A Tory said:
[...] Blue Idea demands that an English Parliament is included in any devolution [...]
# 3 March 2010 at 9:09 pm

AGilinsky said:
As a Scot who is vehemently opposed to the Scottish Parliament I can tell you a few things.
1) You do not want an English Parliament. It will be an expensive disaster.
2) England (like all the other constituent nations) is not a country. It is a nation, one of four which makes up the country of the United Kingdom.
3) Scotland and Wales get more money because they are poorer and more deprived. Seriously, it’s like complaining that Birmingham gets too much of our tax money.
4) If you believe 29% is a mandate for anything then you need to be checked into the “George W. Bush centre for the electorally challenged.”
# 3 March 2010 at 11:22 pm

Michele said:
AGilinsky – do you know what the support for a Welsh Assembly was – when it was steamrolled through? A mere 25% I believe. It appeared to be more than enough to be termed a ‘majority’ – for the Welsh at least.
And while this survey gives a figure of 29%, I like Toque believe that the figures vastly underestimate for the real support for an EP – other more reflective surveys have put the support as high as 69% – Even Tony Blair understood that if the people in England were asked if they wanted a Parliament for England they answer would be a resounding ‘Yes’.
I think I understand what a mandate actually means – I just wonder if you do?
# 4 March 2010 at 8:27 am

Chris (author) said:
AGilinsky, we want an English Parliament because the current situation leaves England with a massive democratic deficit. And as the Scottish and Welsh devolved bodies were voted in with significantly less than 50% support, 29% should be enough t start politicians thinking. I didn’t suggest that this 29% meant we should have an English Parliament NOW, but that in a Parliament or two (so over the next four to ten years), support will grow to a level that CANNOT be ignored.
Scotland Wales DON’T get more money because they are poorer and more deprived; they get it because the Barnett formula only pays attention to population-based spending. Were the extra payments in Scotland and Wales based on need, there would be much less argument against it. But it’s not.
# 4 March 2010 at 8:40 am

Urbe Politicus said:
I am not British but have been watching the UK election since late 2008. That poll that Toque showed indicates less than half favor the present configuration (though it is a plurality).
The trend towards greater public favor of an EP seems pretty strong too.
# 16 March 2010 at 2:34 am

Comments