English Votes for English Laws

Another thing which doesn't sit right with me, Cameron is an MP so will vote with the English MP 's but should the PM of the UK do so? Should he vote on policies which could have a negative effect on the other three countries . The leader of the Welsh Assembly and the leader of the Scottish Parliament do not have the power to do this

Correct Bez, if my elder granddaughter gets her grades come AUGUST she will go to Cardiff University and we pay a lower fee, if she doesn't get the grades Cardiff require she has been accepted in a university in England, she will pay the same fees as English students there

I Said no such thing!!!!!! I mentioned no names except the leaders of Scotland, Wales and Plaid Cymru - please get your facts right Far North assume you are Scottish or at least living there with that name! I simply said that Wales do not charge Welsh students the full fees. - they have to have lived in Wales and been to Welsh schools and have a Welsh address - when they had none of these requirements the welsh Universities suddenly became extraordinarily popular with English k students. If Welsh young people elect to go Universities outside Wales they pay the relevant fees.

If that is all that comes of it, that will be fine.

I will be very interested to see what England gets out of the new rules for MP's, as you say Grannyonce, only English MP's voting on all English matters may be all that comes if it, but that will be something at least.

FarNorth at the time of Labour's introduction of tuition fees the Scottish Parliament may not have existed but MPs were not voting for the whole of the UK - Scotland was excluded, although Scottish Labour MPs voted in favour.

Bez said " Tony Blair ..... etc

Oops, sorry, it was absent.

The amount of money that the Scottish Parliament gets for its NHS is dependent on the amount that England decides to spend on its NHS. It is calculated as a proportion of that.

So if England were to decide to privatise a lot of medical care, leading to a reduction in its NHS spending, Scotland would receive a much lower amount of money regardless of whether it had also decided to go for privatisation, or not.

It cannot be fair for that to happen without Scottish MPs being allowed to have a vote on the decision.

Bez said " Tony Blair managed to get tuition fees for English universities through Parliament only because Scottish MPs voted in favour. It does seem undemocratic and unfair."

In fact at the time of that vote, the Scottish Parliament did not exist, and the MPs were voting to introduce tuition fees to the whole of the UK.
Subsequently the Scottish Parliament was set up and it decided to take on the cost of tuition fees, from the funds devolved to it.

the problem is that what we have now is a mismatch which is not the 'old system' but has been partly regionalised/federalised but not totally.
Out of interest I looked at other countries where there is a house of representatives (or similar) and a senate (or similar). Australia for example seems to have managed to square the circle on this keeping the upper and lower house but bringing it into the modern age - they were lucky as there was no historical hangover. At least that seems to be the way it works - is NZ the same?
when Scotland, Wales and NI were given assemblies/governments with differing powers and there was no provision made for an English equivalent - the assumption being that Westminster was England's parliament - this left a massive imbalance - either all countries in the UK had the same devolved assembly or none did.
we are where we are and it seems the English votes for English only matters is all we in England are being offered. It is not enough but it may be all we can expect .

Anniebach I can see why you say that but I was thinking each of the assemblies/parliaments would send MPs to the UK Parliament so they would all be in the same position. They would send them pro-rata to the party representation in their own parliament. I would not want to see any more of them than we need. . If we called each of the countries gatherings parliaments the UK one could be an Assembly or Senate (and no House of Lords)

I understand that Bez, but cannot agree that MP's should be locked out of the UK Parliament. Thin edge of the wedge .

It could actually be done by agreement - just to abstain when it was an England only issue. But if the one member sat on the assembly ( or whatever) and also on joint business in Parliament it would save so much in salaries. There was only one group of people - MPs - doing all the business for hundreds of years. I would go a long way to solving the deficit and something could also be done at local level to get rid of some of the money councillors are paid - it was done for many years by volunteers and paid officials who gave advice as they knew the law etc - and the councils met in the evening --- after work finished.

Yes Bez, and so it should be in England , no Welsh MP has a say in the Assembly, no assembly member has a say in Westminster

I don't see how UK MP's can be locked out of Parliment or banned from voting , it flies in the face of our democracy

The English MPs though do NOT vote on a lot of things to do with Scotland. Wales or Northern Ireland as they are devolved powers and sorted out and debated by the Assembly or Parliaments of that country. For instance they do not vote on Health or Education matters in Wales - they are dealt with by the Assembly in Cardiff.

Gracesgran, it would be wrong for English MP to vote on English matters, there must be as in Scotland and Wales seperate representatives , English assembly members not sitting in the UK parliment and voted for by the English people , this is how assembles are run in the other three countries

rosesarered, I am quite aware of the contents of my posts and I think you should say what you consider to be anti English

I still like the idea of an English Assembly/Parliament but there doesn't need to be an additional layer. The House of Lords could go and be replaced by the United Kingdom Parliament. That could be populated, when it needed to meet, by a suitable number of Members of Parliament/Assembly from each of the countries.

I do feel that the idea of English MPs voting on so called English only matters and UK matters appears to give the English MPs too much power. Obviously, as the biggest country they will always have the majority of members in a UK parliament but it would be more transparent than this cobbled together idea that is being put forward.

It cost plenty of taxpayers dosh to set up the Welsh and the Scottish and the NI devolved parliaments, so that really cannot be a good reason to deny one for England.

Exactly Soontobe,what would the point be of anyone objecting, be they English or otherwise.

Not strange at all anniebach, if you read all your own and also Djens posts on here.

Scottish people persumably vote on purely Scottish matters.
Ditto Wales.
Ditto NI.

So now ditto England.

Not many are going to object, are they?!

Well said Bez, I have said I as a Welsh voter did not want independence . Seems some think Wales has the same powers as Scotland , we do not.

rosesarered, where did you read anti English posts, are you claiming some English posters are anti English ? Most strange

Elegran, I think you are Scottish? I have not seen anti-English sentiments from Scottish people on here , but from Anniebach, who is Welsh, and from DJen who is English! up to now, they didn't seem worried by cost, it was other things ( what? ) that bothered them. if we do need a special English only parliament as the other three countries enjoy, and it does cost money then so be it. those Three cost money as well.We need fairness all round, nothing else.

Good post Bez. at the moment we are only talking about English MP's voting on all things pertinent to England, of course.That is fair, and does not need a referendum as suggested by DJen .