There are nearly sixty Westminster Members of Parliament sitting for Scottish seats. Far too many when so much decision-taking has been devolved to the Scottish Parliament. Almost every aspect of every day life in Scotland, where there is any government intervention, is a matter for their own Government and their own Parliament. The intervention of those sitting for Scottish seats in matters that refer only to England, or to England and Wales, is wrong.
Wrong for two reasons: the obvious irrelevance of Scottish opinion on everyday English affairs, and the importation into English politics of a most distinctive and frankly unpleasant kind of Scottish Labour political behaviour.
The Devil makes work for idle hands, and since Scotland has a Scottish National Party government, these Scottish Labour MPs can enjoy the fruits of being in power only in England. Removing the member for Glasgow East (Labour to the bitter end despite the requirement that the Speaker should be above Party) from a position of power in Parliament in London must be followed by a drastic reduction in the numbers of Scottish seats and a prohibition on their taking part, let alone voting, in purely English affairs.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
4 comments:
Why does Scotland get so many seats when it's population is only about two thirds of London's? The Boundary Commission seems to have been corrupted by New Labour.
There are technical (so they say) answers to that Raven, about scattered populations and large areas, but I cannot remember them.
There is a bias too in seat distribution and numbers needed to elect an MP that is skewed in Labour's favour, though no as badly as it was at the 2005 election. Umm try Political Betting?
No matter how we divide up the population into constituencies, there shouldn't be all these Scottish MPs sitting at Westminster and voting on anything to do with matters devolved to Scottish governance (or Welsh, or Northern Irish for that matter). That deprives Ed Balls and his scary department and legislation of its majority at once.
You're being illogical. If they are prohibited - as they should be - from voting on English affairs, then they should be fully represented numerically for voting on UK affairs.
One way way to do it would be to turn the Westminster Parliament into an English Parliament, build a British Parliament in Berwick, and staff it a few times a year by sending suitable delegations of MPs from Westminster and Holyrood. (A few times a year would be all that would be required given how few powers they'd have, sandwiched between Holyrood/Westminster and Brussels.) When I say "build" I have in mind tents and portacabins.
Doing my best Dearieme, mumbles, distressed, into distance.
However, adds brightly, there's no reason why the countries that make up the islands off this coast of the European continent shouldn't mould the European Union as their proper venue for discussing their common interests. (not purposes, note, interests).
Actually there are a lot of reasons to do with authoritarian control of peoples and plain bullying because it blows their frocks up, but in principle the EU could be the right venue if we can oust the socialist wreckers.
Post a Comment