Today, the situation is that neither he, nor I, nor any Member of the House has the right to vote on hospitals, schools or housing in his constituency or in other parts of Scotland, yet he is able to vote on hospitals, schools and housing in my constituency. We already have two classes of MP. Is it not the case that the only effective way to solve that problem is to give MPs in English constituencies the decisive say in the House on issues that affect only England?
Mr Cameron was echoed by Michael Howard:
I welcome many of the proposals that the Prime Minister has put forward, but in rejecting the case for English votes for English laws, he said that he did not want to create two classes of Members of the House. Is it not a fact, as pointed out by my right hon. Friend the Leader of the Opposition, that we already have two classes of Members of the House—those who are able to vote on all measures affecting their constituents, and those who, on many measures, are able to vote only on measures affecting the constituents of others?
I might argue that there are no two classes of MPs at present. All of them have the right to vote on all measures affecting constituents in England but none of them has the right to vote on certain measures affecting constituents in Scotland. The situation may not be symmetrical but - for now at least - all MPs have exactly the same rights in terms of what they can and cannot vote for. To suggest that there are already two classes of MPs is misleading.
Or am I dancing with the angels on a pinhead?
2 comments:
I take what you're saying, but there are still 2 classes of MPs whichever way you look at it.
One set (English) who can vote on everything and are accountable to their constituents for everything they vote on.
And the other set (Scottish) who can also vote on everything but are only accountable to their constituents for about 20% of the things they vote on, assuming people in Brechin don't have a vested interest in the English NHS for example.
Of course, there would still be 2 sets if the rules changed. Just what would constitute a "set" would differ....
Brown hasn't got a leg to stand on on this one, it'll be interesting to see how he plays it.
Take away powers from Scottish MPs and you end up with the possibility of a 'minority administration' of England - where the govt doesnt have the MPs to win votes on the NHS etc.
Going the extra mile and creating an English Parliament solves this, but then that's not something Labour would want, given that they'd lose the English Parliament elections more often than the UK ones.
I wonder what Brown will do to 'address' the problem.
Post a Comment