"For everything I learn, there are two I don't understand"

Are Scottish MPs at Westminster part of the solution or part of the problem? I refer of course to "the English Question". The BBC website reports:

"Devolution may be causing an English backlash, according to the House of Commons Scottish Affairs Committee.
The MPs said a recent poll for the BBC suggested there was increasing concern about whether Scottish MPs should vote on issues that affect England only.
They warned that the debate, known as the "West Lothian question", could undermine the devolution settlement.
More than half those surveyed in the poll said a Scottish MP should not become prime minister."

In fact, the Scottish Affairs Committee report was about Sewel motions (keep up at the back). The full report (which - to be honest - is not very full) is here. For reasons that only they will know, they considered it appropriate to tack on the following, somewhat gratuitous, paragraphs about the English Question:

"49. It is a matter of concern to us that there are signs that English discontent with the current situation is becoming apparent. According to a report in The Scotsman, a recent poll, conducted by ICM for the BBC, indicated that 52 per cent of people in the UK believed it wrong that a Scottish MP should become Prime Minister, given that Scotland has its own Parliament. That figure rises to 55 per cent of people in England and 59 per cent of people in the South East of England, whereas only 20 per cent of people in Scotland thought it wrong.[50]
50. In order to address the West Lothian Question, there are usually four solutions proffered: the dissolution of the United Kingdom; English devolution; fewer Scottish MPs; or English votes on English laws. Although we make no recommendations on how to resolve this question, we considered it worth noting our concerns, with the hope that the matter will be comprehensively debated, and resolved, before the situation is reached whereby it could actually undermine the whole devolution settlement."

Yes, that's all: a reference to a dubious BBC poll, a brief outline of some possible solutions and a refusal to come to a conclusion. Why did they bother? (Ed: to attract some media interest, silly!)

But what did they have to say about the Sewel motions? Nothing very interesting...