Monday, October 30, 2006

Jack Straw: ENGLAND would lose by end of union.

This is from an interview on the BBC website: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/question_time/5388078.stm

Question from Stephen, London: As Leader of the Commons, how can having two Scottish MPs as the front runners for PM be democratic? Powers for most agencies including health, education etc have been devolved in Scotland, yet Mr Reid or Mr Brown would set the agenda for solely English matters when they represent Scottish constituencies.

Jack Straw: English MPs control all the money which Scotland receives - is that 'fair'?

England constitutes 85% of the UK's population and 87% of its wealth. It was English MPs who agreed to devolve some powers to Scotland in a Westminster Act of Parliament; but year by year controls over public spending levels for all of the UK continue to be exercised by Westminster. And power devolved is power retained, not ceded.

While the current Tory cry of "English votes on English laws" has a simplistic appeal, it is in reality unworkable, undesirable and dangerous. It would create a two-tier system of "ins and outs" that would be so complex and confusing as to be unworkable. How is it possible, for example, to distinguish between English "bits" of legislation and UK "bits"?

It isn't. The territorial extent of the clause in a bill - or part of a clause - cannot be conclusive, as so many "England only" decisions have plain implications for Scotland as well.

Hence, Vernon Bogdanor, perhaps the foremost constitutional expert in Britain, has claimed that the Tory proposals would "destroy the principle of collective responsibility, according to which government must stand or fall as a whole, commanding a majority on all the issues that come before Parliament, not just a selection.

It is difficult to see how Britain could be effectively governed in such circumstances." Moreover, it is difficult to see how the UK could remain united. The outcome of a break-up of the union would be calamitous. The United Kingdom - Great Britain and Northern Ireland - is a union which works to the equal benefit of all four nations of the union. The whole is greater than the sum of the parts.

Historically, England called the shots to achieve a union because the union was seen as a way, among others things, of amplifying England's power worldwide. And the reverse would certainly be true.

A broken-up United Kingdom would not be in the interests of Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland, but especially not England.

Our [England's] voting power in the European Union would diminish. We'd slip down in the world league GDP tables. Our case for staying in the G8 would diminish and there could easily be an assault on our permanent seat in the UN. [security council]

---------------------

[Straws remarks reveal the truth. Firstly the British union then and now is a device for amplifying English power and without that union England's position will be substantially undermined internationally. Secondly Scotland and Wales voices in the UN and EU must remain silent to allow England to have a larger international role than it actually deserves. JOE]

No comments: