How will the economy be affected by SNP MPs; will it be for richer or for poorer and

CLAPTON

Shakethedisease wrote: »

So correct it. Like I said it's not EVEL itself that anyone has an issue with. But tuition fees since 1998.. have been a Labour, Tory and Lib Dem issue and creation. The buck stops with them. Nothing really to do with the SNP.

I agree with you that no Scottish MP should've voted in 2004 re tuition fees. But in the event they all did apart from one ( The Tory MP ). Labour for, SNP and Lib Dem's against.

What is relevant, is what a truly English-only Law is defined as in the future. Those are likely to be equally rare. But I think you keep misunderstanding the fact that EVEL itself is something I'm all for ! As long as it doesn't directly or indirectly affect any Scottish based finances in passing them.

Obviously many English laws will have a small impact directly or indirectly on the other regions of the UK.

You are less than honest in saying you're are in favour of English voting for English matters and then take the view that the smallest impact of Scotland is excluded: this will mean that virtually nothing falls in that category.

We need a simple definition : if the subject matter is devolved then there can be an English only vote : not perfect but fair.

Alternatively we should postpone any further devolution of powers until there is a unanimous agreement against all the peoples of the UK as to what constitution an English only matter. Obviously by means of a referendum.

Shakethedisease

CLAPTON wrote: »

Obviously many English laws will have a small impact directly or indirectly on the other regions of the UK.

You are less than honest in saying you're are in favour of English voting for English matters and then take the view that the smallest impact of Scotland is excluded: this will mean that virtually nothing falls in that category.

That's about the size of it. And why EVEL is a waste of time and effort. No taxation without representation and all that. As long as there is the smallest impact on Scottish/Welsh or NI constituents, then it cannot be a truly English law.

We need a simple definition : if the subject matter is devolved then there can be an English only vote : not perfect but fair.

The subject matter may indeed be devolved. However, the funding is not. Anything that affects the funding for a devolved issue, therefore, is not an English only matter.

Alternatively we should postpone any further devolution of powers until there is a unanimous agreement against all the peoples of the UK as to what constitution an English only matter. Obviously by means of a referendum.

An English only matter, is one that only affects English constituents. You either need a devolved parliament and/or budget like the other three nations...or to accept that very few matters, most especially in terms of funding coming from Westminster, are English only, and only affect English constituents.

kabayiri

Shakethedisease wrote: »

...

Yes, but you were doing the same yourself with your own post re 'new kids and big school'. We'll see.

I was judging their arrival. That has happened.

I imagine it's pretty hard not to be impressed by the whole Westminster experience. Some people don't like it, but we (UK) do the whole pageantry and protocol thing here very well.

It is like new kids and big school.

The challenge comes when things aren't going your way, or you have conflicts with your fellow colleagues.

Tromking

EVEL is the mother of all political fudges, and when we finally become a truly federal country then history will see it as such.
EVEL has nothing to do with English suffrage and is more to do with Tory MP`s trying desperately to perpetuate Westminster`s pre-eminence in our now busted constitutional model, not for nothing is the Palace of Westminster seen by some MP`s as the finest Gentleman`s club in their beloved central London.
We need a constitutional convention to look into a new constitutional settlement for all the people of the UK.

Shakethedisease

kabayiri wrote: »

I was judging their arrival. That has happened.

I imagine it's pretty hard not to be impressed by the whole Westminster experience. Some people don't like it, but we (UK) do the whole pageantry and protocol thing here very well.

It is like new kids and big school.

The challenge comes when things aren't going your way, or you have conflicts with your fellow colleagues.

Well then, we'll just have to hope that the SNP maintain the same levels of outward cohesion and discipline, as they've shown in Holyrood for the last 8 years in power ( under Salmond ). They've started well down the same road in terms of a 'team'. We'll see, like you said, if it continues.

Shakethedisease

Tromking wrote: »

EVEL is the mother of all political fudges, and when we finally become a truly federal country then history will see it as such.
EVEL has nothing to do with English suffrage and is more to do with Tory MP`s trying desperately to perpetuate Westminster`s pre-eminence in our now busted constitutional model, not for nothing is the Palace of Westminster seen by some MP`s as the finest Gentleman`s club in their beloved central London.
We need a constitutional convention to look into a new constitutional settlement for all the people of the UK.

I would agree with that. It's all getting terribly muddled and complicated. I doubt EVEL will do anything more than further complicate things. A constitutional convention would be something I'd like to see also ( since the regrettable, in my own view of course, No vote last year ). Labour were banging the drum about a convention not long ago. Perhaps they'll dust off their plans,

Tromking

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Labour were banging the drum about a convention not long ago. Perhaps they'll dust off their plans,

Labour are no more interested in a fair and equitable settlement for the English than the Tories, they`re probably worse in fact.
Their plans for devolving power to the 'city/regions' would make the current Dog`s Breakfast even worse.

CLAPTON

Shakethedisease wrote: »

That's about the size of it. And why EVEL is a waste of time and effort. No taxation without representation and all that. As long as there is the smallest impact on Scottish/Welsh or NI constituents, then it cannot be a truly English law.

The subject matter may indeed be devolved. However, the funding is not. Anything that affects the funding for a devolved issue, therefore, is not an English only matter.



An English only matter, is one that only affects English constituents. You either need a devolved parliament and/or budget like the other three nations...or to accept that very few matters, most especially in terms of funding coming from Westminster, are English only, and only affect English constituents.

yes to some extend you are correct

so the 'UK' government would be Tory with a small majority and would vote on overall funding

and the 'English' government would be Tory with large majority and would vote how that money was used in England

and you would be happy with that

we agree both in that and our joint wish for us to separate.

Shakethedisease

Yes. Have a 'thanks' from me.

And for what it's worth. I think there will be a Tory majority in some form in England for some time to come. Especially if they push boundary changes through.

Shakethedisease

Tromking wrote: »

Labour are no more interested in a fair and equitable settlement for the English than the Tories, they`re probably worse in fact.
Their plans for devolving power to the 'city/regions' would make the current Dog`s Breakfast even worse.

I thought that was Osborne and his 'northern powerhouses' ?