Clemency suggests

Email registration

Free weekly email update

Great products and special offers for Spectator readers

Click here for great value reader offers and events

Click here for the latest Spectator Wine Offers

Leading article

How to save the Union

Wednesday, 31st October 2007

The Spectator on Malcolm Rifkind's answer to the West Lothian question

It is ironic to hear Labour reduced to the very scaremongering and misrepresentation it so condemned in those who opposed Scottish and Welsh devolution. Responding to Sir Malcolm’s proposals, David Cairns, the Scotland Office minister, told the Observer: ‘Once you breach the principle that all MPs should vote on matters before them in Westminster you get constitutional anarchy ... Taken to its logical extent it would create multiple categories of MPs. Where does it end?’

Quite apart from his absurd alarmism, what Mr Cairns carefully ignores is that there is already a two-tier system at Westminster. Scottish MPs have more authority over English affairs than English MPs do over Scottish policy. The ‘in and out’ principle first proposed by Gladstone during the Home Rule debates is already in place in the sense that English MPs are already excluded from crucial decisions now delegated to the Scottish Parliament. The Westminster Parliament has already been fundamentally changed by devolution. The Rifkind plan would simply remove a glaring injustice.

The government also warns of terrible conflict between (say) a Labour government and a Westminster Parliament in which the English Grand Committee had a Tory majority. Sir Malcolm points out that the government would still maintain control of the parliamentary timetable, the right to initiate legislation, and command of the Civil Service.

Indeed, Labour’s anxiety on this score is revealing. It has relied on the votes of Scottish MPs to force through controversial measures which did not affect Scottish voters, notably the establishment of foundation hospitals in 2003 and tuition fees for students in England in 2004. The real opposition to an English Grand Committee system comes not from the voters north or south of the border, but from English Labour.

Previous page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 Next page

Scott Forsyth

November 17th, 2007 2:18am

The final comment in this article is spot on. The English must have something comparable to the rest of the UK countries where Westminsiter could be used for Defence foreign and EU policy and conflicting or areas of mutual concern to debate. Canada and the US are the perfect example to save the Union we must address what the English need. Iam a passionate Scot and Brit and would be devastated if any UK member left the union!