If Cameron doesn't talk about greater powers for England, Labour will
Peter Hoskin 9:11am
Action over Scotland is certainly producing a reaction in England. It's not what you'd
call an ‘equal and opposite reaction’ yet, but it's there — and it's crystallised by Tim Montgomerie's article for the Guardian this morning. I'd recommend that you read it in full, but Tim's basic point is that David
Cameron could score a ‘triple crown of political victories’ by moving towards a more federal UK:
As for whether this move towards federalism will happen any time soon, I'm not sure. It is likely that we'll see more detail from No.10 on the first of Tim's suggestions — after all, Cameron is already hinting that a Scottish ‘No’ vote comes with greater devolution in the future, and he'll need to set out just what that means at some point. But I suspect there'll be less enthusiasm for making England more its own political entity. For starters, this would run counter to some of the demands of the coaltion, which, as Tim notes, have already sacrificed a Tory manifesto commitment to ‘introduce new rules so that legislation referring specifically to England, or to England and Wales, cannot be enacted without the consent of MPs representing constituencies of those countries’. And it could also complicate the delicate political battle over the Scottish referendum, introducing questions about who's voting for what, when and why, which Alex Salmond would be eager to exploit.‘By offering to extend Scottish devolution he can be the Conservative leader who saves the union. By promising to balance Scottish devolution with a commitment to new arrangements for the government of England, he can radically improve his own party's electoral prospects. And through these changes — with the introduction of city mayors and greater localism — he can be the PM who replaces one of Europe's most centralised states with a political architecture fit for the 21st century.’
This is why, when I blogged about the subject of English powers last Friday, I wrote about it as part of Cameron's ‘longer term’ agenda. It would be ideal if he'd deal properly and finally with these questions now — but, of course, the ideal often doesn't happen.
That said, Cameron still ought to at least talk about greater powers for England now, perhaps setting them up for the Tories' offering in 2015. And for a very simple, political reason: if he doesn't, Labour will. Ever since the general election, there has been much discussion in left-wing circles about reconnecting with England. This began with David Miliband's New Statesman article in July 2010, saying that ‘Labour needs a revived politics of Englishness rooted in a radical and democratic account of nationhood’, and it's continued right through to last month's IPPR report that investigated ‘England as an emerging political community,’ and which I've mentioned before. Given Labour's current position, Ed Miliband would be foolish not to develop this as a theme of his own. David Cameron would be foolish not to pre-empt him.
Previous
Rhoda Klapp
February 20th, 2012 9:25am Report this commentYou should give some consideration to the idea that there is no long-term plan, and everything the wringing wet weasel says is to get him to tomorrow, or maybe to the end of the week, without being found out.
England is still the third rail. Not a one of them, of any of the big three, has any idea of how to handle the percieved problem of evil english nationalism, coming as it does (at least in the heads of the bubbleers) with hefty doses of small-c conservatism, racism and xenophobia. And hatred of slimy politicians, although I am sure they don't know that.
Rhoda Klapp
February 20th, 2012 9:26am Report this commentOh, Pete, thanks for the England post as requested. Shame you had to use Montgomerie as a pretext, but hey.
Swiss Bob
February 20th, 2012 9:38am Report this commentThis is as shameful a sideshow as I've seen, Greece is going up in flames and out of the Euro and we're fed this non-issue, like anyone south of the border gives a shit about Scotland or what the slimy blowhard Salmond has to say.
If Cameron had any balls he would tell Salmond to get on with it or expect no help from the UK Govt. There are two parties in this divorce.
Blair and Brown are Scottish and Cameron is half Scottish, what do the Scots want, a permanent Scots PM, FFS.
Heartless Curmudgeon
February 20th, 2012 9:41am Report this commentYou insult the National Flag by portraying the H2B against it, just as you insult the Tory Party by referring to the H2B as a Tory.
Why not do away with snaps if this is the best your people can provide?
Nickle
February 20th, 2012 9:50am Report this commentBarnet formula share of the debt for Scotland.
Nickle
February 20th, 2012 9:50am Report this commentGreece isn't going out just yet. They are going to give it another 130 bn. That staves off default for a bit.
Then when they do default, its the tax payer on the hook.
Nickle
February 20th, 2012 9:53am Report this commentCameron is in a difficult position. He clearly wants the Union. So he has to campaign for it, and like all politicians, they will lie/omit the bad bits.
However, if Salmond gets his way, then Cameron's role has to change. He has to fight for the rump against what Salmon wants.
So, Barnet formula share of the debt. If its fair for the benefits, its fair for the debts.
Similarly when it comes to HBOS and RBOS, they are Scottish banks. Salmond takes on the whole of the mess.
Russell
February 20th, 2012 10:16am Report this commentWhat a pity Cameron doesn't stand up for the UK (with or without Scotland) and England.
What Cameron, Miliband & Clegg don't understand is that the English represent the majority of the UK population, the majority of UK taxpayers, the majority of tax paying companies, and we keep being ignored.
Look at how many English constituency labour MP's are Scottish!
Look at where our English taxpayers money goes (the EU and Scotland).
Enough is enough.
Either the EDL or hundreds of truly Independent MP's will get elected at the next general election as English people are sick of Labour/Conservative/LibDem disregard for them.
Axstane
February 20th, 2012 11:00am Report this commentThe union is dead and started rotting when Blair engineered devolutionary powers. There remains only the burial - sadly. Then of course, the squabbling over the deceased belongings, the fist fights, the hair pulling.
Curmudgeon - you are a bloody bore. This daily posting must be the highlight of your life. Get a hobby that might exercise your mind. At the moment you react like one of Pavlov's rats - no thought, just response to a stimulus.
Publius
February 20th, 2012 11:15am Report this comment"a political architecture fit for the 21st century"
Ah, don't you just hate these lazy tropes? And what would 'fit for the 21st century' look like? Modern perhaps?
I was about to read TMs piece in full until I saw this. But if this is an indication of his thinking then I'm not interested.
2trueblue
February 20th, 2012 11:34am Report this commentPeter, forgot to ask What will Labour do or say? Labour presided over the issue and were hell bent on sectioning England into little bits, the infrastructure for this is still in place. What Cameron needs to do is get rid of the undemocratic elements of the assemblies and the quangos that are very powerful in them.
E Justice
February 20th, 2012 11:59am Report this commentTo right the Union is dead, time to go time. And then the English can admit to being English without looking over their shoulder's to see if they have offended someone,
And a English Parliament is the next step dump the "British" one in Westminster before it does any more harm!
Sir Everard Digby
February 20th, 2012 12:00pm Report this commentLabour may indeed talk about this,or a host of other issues. History suggests that they either do nothing but talk, or do 100% the opposite of what they are talking about.
On this form,their musings will either be ineffective,or just lies -why give them any credence?
salieri
February 20th, 2012 12:05pm Report this commentThe clear message of the article is that "further devolution" is inevitable: it's just a question of how much further and what advantage if any England could gain for it.
So, firstly, the SNP will have achieved by blackmail what it might never have achieved by popular vote; and, secondly, Axstane is quite right and the whole irreversible slide was foreseeable (and foreseen) when the Blair government decided in its student-common-room wisdom that "devolution" was a good idea.
2trueblue
February 20th, 2012 12:23pm Report this commentThe Scots will get their independence whether we like it or not. I like it.
2trueblue
February 20th, 2012 12:27pm Report this commentWhy will Scotland be better of without us? They will have to make economic decisions and pay for them? The Shethland Isles may not go with them, it is not a given.
Holdsworth
February 20th, 2012 12:43pm Report this commentI am looking forward to independence for Scotland (as a Scot). It will be nice to keep our oil money, and also to begin exploiting the huge renewables potential that our land has.
I also very much applaud a more active politics centred around Englishness. We can be good neighbours. We can each enjoy our own identities and strengths, and each others' countries as the closest of friends.
Where is the problem in that? To those Scots like me who think we'll do just fine economically, it's good, and for those English who think they are subsidising Scotland, it's good.
Anyway, the sums aren't large: England will hardly notice the loss of oil revenues, nor Scotland the like for like change (ie. Barnett - oil = not that much, either way).
See here: www.cebr.com/?p=788
So what are we waiting for?
TrevorsDen
February 20th, 2012 1:08pm Report this commentThe last thing we need is an english parliament manned my failed politicians and self important former county councilors.
Dimoto
February 20th, 2012 1:15pm Report this commentThe English have always rather liked the Scots and usually given them the benefit of the doubt.
At present, nobody wishes to speak out of turn, and give huckster Salmond more cheap-shot material.
But if the Scots vote yes, there WILL be an almighty backlash in England.
Which will be the only force preventing Cameron from dealing the Scots a highly advantageous "independence", or an incoming (Scots rich) Labour party, giving away every last crown jewel.
Rhoda Klapp
February 20th, 2012 1:53pm Report this commentTrevor, it is my belief that you and I are in the same constituency (Henley), and that we are represented by an apparatchik former councillor. What is the difference?
Frankly
February 20th, 2012 1:58pm Report this comment"Our shared home":
http://tinyurl.com/7zaso6v
Nigel Rupert Snodgrass
February 20th, 2012 2:18pm Report this commentLabour, Liberals and tories has blocked a referendum on Scots independence for 100 years. Now that the SNP is in charge in Scotland. Labour, liberals and tories all of a sudden want a referendum tomorrow morning !!
One has to admire the hypocrisy, duplicity and double standards of the English.
Be patient my little English chums, Alex Salmond the Prime of Scotland in waiting has decreed that the referendum will be in 2014 and no silly old English judge in tights, wig and frock will stop it.
Nigel Rupert Snodgrass
February 20th, 2012 3:52pm Report this comment'' Charming '' Swiss Bob
My dear English chum, England is only interested in countries with oil. Libya, Iraq, Falkland islands and Scotland.
That's why the English aren't interested in Syria, Zimbabwe, Greece.
Super Scouse
February 20th, 2012 3:58pm Report this commentI predict by the time of the referendum the rest of the UK will so heartily sick of the Scots and their tireless posturing they will be glad to see the back of them. I am already.
I also predict that the rest of the UK will remain intact.
starfish
February 20th, 2012 4:35pm Report this commentEasy
Federal Govt in (what is now) the House of Lords, elected by popular vote on a term that is not coincident with devolved parliaments
Devolved govt in England in London (current House of Commons), Wales in Cardiff (current WAG) and Scotland in Edinburgh (current Scottish Parliament)
Federal powers restricted to foreign affairs, defence and anything else that needs to be done on a UK-wide basis
Union saved, West Lothian question sorted, Scottish wishes fulfilled, Wales gets more of what they yearn for (apparently)
Everyone happy - can I claim my prize?
Barry
February 20th, 2012 5:00pm Report this commentSnodders- I love the Bond-villain tone of that post, but remember the Lib/Lab/Con parties that blocked the referendum bill were all Scottish and pesky to boot. Remember to factor that into any of your dastardly plans.
Robin of Bagshot
February 20th, 2012 5:17pm Report this commentCastle in the Air or the Nats' lament on waiting for a detailed policy from their leader.
Sic a night in winter weel mak' him cauld;
His chin upon his buffy hand will soon mak' him auld,
His brow is brent sae braid, O pray that daddy Care,
Would let the wean alane, wi' his castles in the air.
He'll glow'r at the fire! and he'll keek at the light!
But mony sparkling stars are swallow'd up by night;
Aulder e'en than his are glamour'd by a glare,
Hearts are broken, heads are turn'd wi' castles in the air.
WIlliam Blakes Ghost
February 20th, 2012 6:23pm Report this commentStarfish:
Well you better take it up with Nigel Farage because that is the basis of UKIP's proposal's I believe? So suggest you send him a prize?
Cameron has little choice but to do something similar to what is suggested because not only will Labour go for something (probably the outrageous balkanisation of England) but UKIP also now are trumping them not only on the EU but on the WLQ with their Federalisation proposals. Cameron could find himself fighting the next general election with the badly neglected right wing of his party having gone elsewhere. thatr could be 5% or more of his vote share and that would put him back in Hague territory. Does he really want that sort of legacy (the worst vote by any sitting Conservative PM)?
Cynic
February 20th, 2012 8:21pm Report this comment"If Cameron doesn't talk about greater powers for England, Labour will" Let us not forget that Labour was responsible for the pig's ear of the current situation where England is the only part of the UK without its own parliament. Given their track record, I wouldn't believe a word Labour said. By their deeds shall ye know them.
Swiss Bob
February 20th, 2012 8:28pm Report this commentNRS,
Blair, Brown and Cameron are all Scots, which somewhat holes your risible analysis.
starfish
February 21st, 2012 12:12pm Report this commentWBG - is Farage stealing my ideas???!
Well that makes UKIP sensible in my book
Back to top