IPPR - The English Question: The View from Westminster
Before discussing the IPPR's investigation into MPs' attitudes towards 'The English Question' it is worth noting that only 114 MPs replied to this survey. Of those that replied 49% were Labour, 28% Conservative, 16% Liberal Democrat and 7% 'other'.
IPPR note that 'MPs divide along lines determined by their party’s interest in their perception of the so-called ‘West Lothian’ question', and that 'political expediency rather than constitutional principle appears to determine party attitudes to this vexed issue'. Sadly true. However, IPPR make no mention of the nationality of the respondents, nor the nation in which they were elected, both of which are factors that may also be important determining factors. At the Westminster bear pit the West Lothian Question is undoubtedly a question of party politics, but on a personal level it is also a question of territorial politics and nationalism.
As we do not know the identity of the respondents we cannot speculate as to how many of them will still be in the House of Commons after the next general election. It is probably safe to assume that there will be a large influx of new MPs at the next general election, and that by far the largest number of those will be Conservative MPs. The timing of this survey is unfortunate to say the least.
In the IPPR survey only one Tory MP (2.5%) supported an English Parliament, with by far the most popular option being 'English Votes on English Laws' (60% among Tory MPs). Not one Tory MP supported 'regional government', and localism - as an answer to The English Question - was less popular among Tory MPs than it was with Labour and Lib Dem MPs, leading the IPPR researchers to conclude that there was a 'lack of enthusiasm among current Conservative MPs for one of David Cameron’s flagship policies.
A recent Conservative Home survey featured in the Times (30th April, 2009) polled 148 Conservative candidates and found that 20% favoured an English parliament. So it may be the case that the new intake will be less jaded, less Establishment in their thinking, and more radical.
Most encouraging about this survey is the MPs attitudes to St George's Day. 44% agreed that St George's Day should be a public holiday while only 24% disagreed. Gordon Brown has stated that "As far as St. George's day is concerned, it is a matter for public debate on whether this is going to be a holiday" (Hansard, 23 April 2008) but as yet he has failed to take part in any public debate on the matter, presumably because he is Scottish and/or an anti-English bigot. Perhaps the issue of an English national holiday is something that an English Conservative government can take the lead on, if only to help compensate for all their failings in respect of English democracy.
A Conservative government would appear to offer less hope in the quest for an English national anthem. One in four MPs agreed that ‘God Save the Queen’ should be replaced by a specifically English anthem when English sporting teams compete. But this figure fell to just 19% among Conservative MPs.
For Alex Salmond the most exciting finding of IPPR's survey will be the revelation that an overwhelming majority of Conservative MPs believe that the Barnett Formula is unfair (no Tory MP believed that the funding arrangements are fair). This will be an extremely delicate issue for a future Cameron government whilst Alex Salmond is still in power in Scotland. And if the Barnett Formula is abolished in favour of a funding mechanism that does not use English spending as a baseline for Scottish spending, then the only legitimate reason for Scottish MPs to vote on English legislation is removed.
Coming, as it does, at the fag-end of a disgraced Parliament, with an unnatural (for England) gerrymandered Labour majority, the timing of this IPPR report is unfortunate. It tends to raise more questions than it answers. I do hope that IPPR will repeat it after what might be a record-breaking new intake of MPs after the next general election, possibly during the successful 2010 England World Cup campaign ;-)
References
- The English Question: The View from Westminster
- Ten years on from devolution MPs across all parties support change to way England is governed
Trackback URL for this post:
- Login to post comments
The CEP should change tack
This survey has exposed that attempting to change the mainstream parties from within, or indeed seeking to influence them is an utter waste of time.
For example, the CEP has sent representatives to the Lib Dem conference for years with absolutely no effect on policies.
What campaigners and English people in general have to understand is this:-
1. MPS are only interested in themselves. This means they want the widest influence possible on both the national and international stages in order to satisfy their own sense of self-importance. They will not relinquish these dual roles because their egoes prevent them from doing so.
2. All three mainstream parties are Unionist and devolution has made it patently obvious that the Union trumps the interests of the English people, in their eyes.
3. An English Parliament would make all MPs in the UK Parliament redundant across the whole of the UK, so self-interest prevents these MPs from doing what is right. Cameron promises to slash the number of UK MPs by 10%. We know this axe will not be wielded in Scotland, Wales and N. Ireland anywhere near as ferociously as in England. An English Parliament would make the cuts in the UK Parliament even more necessary and would herald a new debate about the future of the British constitution. None of the three parties will countenance this.
4. The only way for English people to achieve an English Parliament is to dump the LibLabCON at the elections and to wipe them out. Attacking MPs' self-interest and unrelenting greed is the only way to make them even contemplate an English Parliament, but even then they should not be given the choice. Let's get rid of them. Every MP elected before 2009 is guilty of allowing the corruption of the British Parliament to happen. The fact that Michael Martin is now a Lord is reason enough to flush the fetid turds down the parliamentary toilet.
5. The English owe nothing to any of the parties infesting Westminster. This is particularly so for the Tories who would not exist if not for the English, but who nevertheless have systematically betrayed the English at every given opportunity, most recently in the IPPR survey described above.
The English should - Vote for anyone, but the LibLabCON!
The CEP now has to recognise it has failed to influence the mainstream parties. If it cannot bring itself to support the English Democrats then it should field its own candidates on the single issue of an English Parliament. These candidates could be independent and fight on local issues with the one mandate of fighting for an English Parliament. They could join Martin Bell's independent's alliance, for example, and promise to vote only in the interests of their constituents in England, if elected.
In fact they could start their own English Parliament Alliance without the need to become a political party.
Their election slogan need only be "For an English Parliament"
Targetting marginals would be a good start.
The CEP has to get its head out of its arse, quite frankly, and to be a real campaign group. Putting out press releases to politics.co.uk clearly has not worked. The only way it will succeed is to challenge the cosiness of the MPs currently stinking out parliament. Trying to persuade these MPs has obviously failed, so something new must be done.
Being "apolitical" with respect to parties has merely resulted in the mainstream parties kicking the CEP and English people in the teeth.
It's time to kick back.
IPPR survey
Why wasn't my post published? :-(
Why wasn't my post published?
Hi Steve,
Sorry, it's a new operating platform that I haven't yet got the hang of (apparently there's a comment moderation queue).
Cheers Gareth. I really would
Cheers Gareth.
I really would like to see the CEP dump its "non-party" stance and field candidates in marginals.
Party politics has failed England. English politics will benefit England.
The CEP independent candidates will vote on:-
Conscience
English interests
Parliament for England
As you may know I haven't
As you may know I haven't been on the CEP National Council since 2005, so I don't have any influence. However, for what it's worth, I think the CEP should keep its non-partisan stance.
I believe that the CEP will be writing to prospective candidates in key marginals to canvas their opinion on how England should be governed. This information will then (I imagine) be publicised so that people can make an informed decision on who to vote for. I hope the CEP will come to me to get this information online, and if not then maybe I will set up a site on my own.