Reasons
for rejecting the "English votes on English Laws"
It
is a reactionary policy born of the need for the Conservative
Party to have a devolution policy of some sort. It is a policy
that shows a complete lack of enthusiasm for devolution and the
opportunities it offers, although it does seem to recognise that
devolution is a fact and the UK has changed forever. That grudging
acceptance cannot hide a wish to limit constitutional change to a
minimum and preserve a centralised UK at whatever cost.
Unfortunately, England will be left to bear the cost of preserving
the remnants of an outdated constitutional structure. The morsel
offered is unsatisfactory.
It
is meant to provide a minimalist answer to the West Lothian
Question but it does not deal with the many other ways in which
the people of England are discriminated against.
It
will not provide England with a First Minister and an Executive
that are able to initiate and pursue policies specifically
concerned with English problems and priorities. In other words,
MPs representing English constituencies will only be able to react
to proposals put forward by the UK government. Even if MPs were
able to initiate policy, they have neither the mandate nor
commitment to promote purely English interests.
It
will not provide an English equivalent to the system whereby
Scottish interests are represented within the European Union and
the UK government.
It
does not address the issue of how England can benefit from
devolution. The Conservative Party opposes the Government's
Regional policy because it sees it as unwanted, unneeded,
bureaucratic and costly. But is there a commitment to dismantle
the regions? Are there plans to introduce a different method for
decentralising power?
It
does not address the unfair system of funding which makes it
possible for public spending (per head) to be significantly higher
in Scotland and Wales than in England.
Unfortunately,
all three of the main political parties are guilty of the double
standard that recognises Scotland and Wales as countries and
natural political entities but sees England as a constitutional
inconvenience that needs to be dismembered, patronised or ignored.
England needs a well thought out constitutional arrangement that
is designed to serve the long-term interests of the people of
England. It does not need an arrangement that is cobbled together
to serve the interests of individual political parties
|