It isn't negative to challenge this unfairness

This has just been posted on Our Kingdom:

Mike Small (Lessons in Democracy and Self-Determination) makes some valid points about pushing forward the case for an English Parliament.

I firmly agree that the case for an English Parliament needs to be put in a way that demonstrates how good it would be for England. The Scottish Claim of Right was an incredibly powerful statement, loaded with intent and meaning, and clearly expressed what the whole movement for constitutional change in Scotland was all about. The English Constitutional Convention (ECC) has convened twice since its creation in 2004, and now boasts the support of leading Scottish-devolution campaigner, Canon Kenyon Wright. A similar “English Claim” has yet to be stated by the ECC, but seeing as our new Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, signed the Scottish Claim of Right- pledging that the interests of the Scottish people (not the British people) would be “paramount” in all his “actions and deliberations”, an English Claim of Right is surely soon to be made.

Mike’s point about icons and identity is also important. It is only since devolution that the English have really begun to question who we are and what it means to be English rather than British. A sense of English identity is and will continue to be a powerful factor in the campaign for justice for England. But it was only when Scotland and Wales began to re-assert their separate identities and demand political institutions to reflect this that people in England have done so. It’s in this point that something important must be recognised: demands for real devolution in England are a reaction to devolution elsewhere. It is because of this that the debate can appear to be negative; we are often calling for an English Parliament in the same breath as complaining about how we are missing out compared to the Scots. But don’t forget that it is not enough to just state that an England’s Parliament is England’s right- that would not convince the public. We have to validate our demands for an English Parliament by highlighting how England is disadvantaged by asymmetrical devolution. English students pay university fees (Scottish students do not), English cancer patients have to go without life-saving cancer drugs (Scottish patients do not), English pensioners often have to sell their homes to afford personal care (Scottish pensioners do not- the list goes on). If this means some people feel this is being negative, or even label us as “anti-Scottish”, they are missing the point. We in England feel aggrieved at the current state of affairs, and such blatant unfairness cannot go unchallenged.

At the second meeting of the English Constitutional Convention, Canon Kenyon Wright said that devolution in Scotland happened for two fundamental reasons: “First, because we rediscovered something about our own heritage… But second, because of things like the poll tax. In other words the Scottish people saw that measure after measure after measure was being imposed upon them against the manifest will of at least 80% of Scottish MPs and Scottish opinion”.

Devolution in England will undoubtedly be much the same

Get on to Our Kingdom and have your say.

Labour Deputy Leadership candidates: don't mention the "E" word!

The Labour Deputy Leadership candidates were recently asked on OurKingdom, “What should be done, if anything, to give England more representation or ‘voice’?”.

The answers were, predictably, abysmal.

The CEP's view of their repsonses has been put up on the OurKingdom website. Have a read of it at OurKingdom or read it below, but don't forget to add your own views.


It is interesting that the candidates, when asked what should be done to give England fair representation within the Union, immediately start talking about Scotland, Wales, the Union or even the “Regions”. They would rather talk about anything other than the “E” word.

Their response is, sadly, not surprising. This Labour Government has done more than any other to undermine England and the English way of life. The plans to balkanise England into regions failed when it encountered that annoying little thing called “democracy”: in the only referendum to be held on a regional assembly in the north east of England, the idea was emphatically rejected by 78% to 22%. Despite this, regionalisation in England has continued. It’s undemocratic, it’s unwanted, it’s unfair. That the candidates said nothing of this does not bode well for England in the near future. It certainly shows that talk of “re-engaging” with voters and the public is just as false as it was in 1997.

What the Labour Deputy Leadership candidates must realise - indeed what all Labour, Conservative and Liberal Democrat politicians must realise - is that the public want an English Parliament. Successive opinion polls have shown this: 68%, 61%, 67% in favour. Therefore their arguments about regions or the Union are irrelevant. As Labour MP Frank Field said recently, an English Parliament “is what voters want and what justice demands”. It cannot be said more simply or more powerfully than that. The fact that England’s voice is ignored by our political masters is evidence enough of why we must have an English Parliament.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

UPDATE 15 JUNE: Tom Griffon of The Green Ribbon covers this, adding an importnat point about the sheer uselessness of regional assemblies. Worth a read.