Can a Scottish MP be Prime Minister?
Since the creation of the Scottish Parliament the West Lothian Question - why should Scottish MPs be able to vote on issues that have been devolved in Scotland and therefore affect only England and Wales - has gone unresolved. A related question is whether MPs representing Scottish constituencies should be able to hold ministerial portfolios that cover only England and Wales. Obviously there is no any legal or constitutional bar to it - the question is whether or not a government would face a backlash from the public for doing so.
There have been occasional rumbling when MPs representing Scottish constituencies have been given ministerial responsibiles on matters that are devolved in Scotland (for example, as Transport Secretary Alistair Darling had responsibility for transport in all the constituencies in England and Wales, but not in his own Edinburgh constituency). The most recent example is John Reid’s appointment as Home Secretary. YouGov’s last poll asked specifically about whether this anomoly bothered people - 45% of people said yes, 49% said no.
However bothered people say they are, at present this is clearly a pretty minor issue in the greater scheme of things. Once Tony Blair stands down as Prime Minister though it becomes far more important, since Gordon Brown’s constituency is in Scotland - will the general public accept an MP for a Scottish constituency as Prime Minister? A new ICM poll for Sunday’s Daily Politics suggests that 52% of the public think that, post-devolution, it would be wrong for a Scottish MP to be Prime Minister.
As one might expect, in Scotland itself there is no such feeling - 75% of people think it would be perfectly okay. In South-East England though, 59% of people think it would be wrong for a Scottish MP to be PM, as do 54% of people in Northern England and 55% of people in Wales.
Filed under: ICM
Isn’t the West Lothian Question about the purpose of Scottish MPs? something like: How can it be right that MPs elected to Westminster from Scottish constituencies have no ability to affect the issues of their constituents which have been devolved to the Scottish Parliament?
If this question was asked a couple of years ago most people wouldn’t have given it a second thought. By the time of the next election the thought of a Scottish PM lording it over England will be unacceptable to most English people.
Well I don’t think its allright. Before 1997, there wasn’t a problem. The PM’s decisions affected everyone in the UK. But a Scottish PM dictating discriminatory policy onto England, when his own constituents won’t be affected? I’m sickened. Whatever happened to democratic accountability?
Fjms - I think the exact wording by Tam Dalyell was along those lines (why should the MP for West Lothian be able to vote on matters in West Bromwich, but not in his own consituency?), but since then it has been raised far more often, and caused far more discussion, from the English end of the argument.
England comprises 85pc of the UK population, Wales and Scotland - 5 and 10pc respectively.
It is a constutional outrage that the overwhelming majority of the UK population are denied democractic accountability - for both Scots and Welsh MPs at Westmister vote on English only matters.
This is something the normally tolerant and peaceable English “up with will not put”, not for much longer anyway.
Labour’s power base is Scotland and the divident for their loyalty is ministerial seats and lots of English dosh to support a welfare system they could not possibly finance from their own pockets, or the oil revenue.
The pressure is not building up because the safety valve in the form of media complience and Tory acquiecence is working. But a head of English steam is rising and it could all end in tears yet.
With an angry neighbour ten times its size, if I were a Scot I would councel caution, go home and remain quiet - very, very quiet, just in case the English notice me.
Taken to it’s conclusion you could have no Scottish Mp’s as ministers in any UK department, other than Defence of the foreign office. As a member of the SNP I’ll avoid the obvious solution , and instead ask the other often asked one, given the choice for Prime Minister of an incompetent Englishman or a Brilliant Scot, which would you choose.
Making the place of birth the principle determinant of who is Prime Minister seems to me an arcane position for a 21st century democracy.
I’d be interested to know what percentage of English people support Independence, as I have often found that they tend to not like the number of Scots in senior positions but to be against the end of the union.
Peter.
I have no problem with an English parliament; a federal state is a very common political structure - the USA. Australia, Germany, France, Sth Africa, Canada etc all have them. And it would be logical.
But since when has the UK political structure been logical with an unelected Head of State and an Upper House full of unelected people? We may well have started democracy, we may well invade totally undemocratic states, but we are not a democracy.
For too many English there is a fundamental belief that all change is, on principle, wrong. This attitude is that which drives so many of the best of the younger generation overseasa. It is the attitude which encourages devolution. We are currently well on the way to becoming an historical theme park, nothing more.
Devolution is obviously incomplete . England is still ruled directly by the British government and worse , that same government is attempting , via regionalisation , to obliterate England altogether. We need to move rapidly to an English Parliament for all England with the same rights and competencies as the Scottish parliament and nothing less . This will create , in effect , a federal British state . There are plenty of other British inspired federal states around the world eg Canada , India and Australia - and they work very well .
It is completely unacceptable that an MP of the British parliament with a Scottish constituency and therefore no democratic legitimacy in England be imposed on England . He / she however , would be eligible to be British PM but only AFTER there is an English Parliament .
Ahem - two comments on this thread so far haven’t got past moderation. Up untill now I’ve only ever moderated a handful of comments in total (apart from comment spam of course).
By all means debate the issue, but do it in a civil manner without resorting to yelling insults and disparaging the entire population of England/Scotland* (*delete as applicable).
I find it strange that those who site the West Lothian question don’t take it a stage further . Why should a MP representing a Lancashire constituency for example have any say on legislation which affects people only in Sussex or take it even further why should a MP for Hastings have any say in legislation only affecting Chichester .
In response to Mark Senior - any issue which is so solely local should not be in a federal Uk Parliament (call it Westminster) and barely in an English parliament. It should be at the further level down, call it county parliament.
There is a significant difference from the idea that where devolved powers exist (or, in the case of Scotland, never part of the -progressively dead?- union) that MPs from such areas should not vote on isues which do impact on their country. I note that I am arguing from a perspective of a federal UK.
I think Tony Blair is basically a conservative in wolf’s clothing; one of the few radical things he has done is devolution. He thinks it’s an action; it’s a process. What would be the impact if the Liberals joined with the SNP after the netx elction? I’d love a poll on that basis!
Jack,
Blair was never a big fan of devolution, he inherited it and many believe he went for the “two question” referndum to try to strangle it at birth.
Come to think of it, when you look at the successful Labour policies, The minimum wage, universal child care, Independence for the bank of England, and devolution, most were John Smiths or even before.
For Blair policies, read Foundation Hospital, Trust Schools, City Academies, ID cards, detention without Trail,and War with Iraq. that reads more like a wolf in conservative clothing
I tend to see Blair as a front man in a hit show that other people wrote, who when he made it big, insisted on writting his own material……
Peter.
I can understand the English being uneasy with this but that is the way things are that is the union.
The only ones with any honesty in this are the SNP who will not vote on English matters.
The people of Scotland may remove this problem for the English next May by electing pro independence parties to the Scottish Parlaiment if that is the case then this problem will be solved as Scottish MPs would be withdrawn from the London Parliament.
Now some of those MPs such as Brown and Reid are so anti Scottish they may well wish to move and try their luck in an English constituancy but I’m sure English voters will see through that.
So the solution to this problem is a new concept for many in England,English independence.I’m also sure it will lead to both countries having better relations rather than the constant feelings of mistrust that have been building.
It’s funny to see so many people who have a problem with this, all through the 80’s Scotland had a Tory government foisted upon it, one that the Scottish electorate had not voted for, i didn’t hear anyone south of the border suggesting thats not very fair.
Does anyone really think that a Scottish PM would have the power to go against the wishes of his party when the vast vast majority of MP’s would be English, he’s a Prime Minister not a President(although I’m sure Blair would wish that were otherwise).
If people in England do find this so abhorrent they should perhaps look at trying to get independence from the ‘Union’.
I agree - I think the Scots should be thrown out of the UK at the earliest possible opportunity.
In fact, I think we should be thrown out now. Go on, throw us out, please.
It will be interesting to watch how this develops from the autumn.
After the party conferences the Scottish and Welsh elections will be the next big items on the political agenda.
If the government hasn’t recovered and the SNP are still doing well and offering an Independence referendum, if they are part of an executive, then all these issues could come to a head.
It will be interesting to see if polls are carried out on what people elsewhere in the UK think of Scottish Independence and an Independence referendum.
It might be difficult for Unionists to oppose a referendum if all the indications are that a majority of people south of the border support it too.
The line,
“We don;t think it’s a good ideas, so we won’t allow people to vote on it”,
could be a particularly difficult position for Menzies Campbell to hold as a LibDem leader, assuming of course he still is.
Peter.
Peter,
Would you intend to limit any referendum on Scottish independance to Scotland only, or would you let the rest of the Union (which includes Wales and Northern Irleand as well as England) have a say too ?
If Scotland voted to seek independance from the Union that could lead to some awkward economic questions as well as the usual constitutional issues.
On the original question, I think that what is becoming particularly galling to many English people is the prospect of a PM and cabinet dominated by Scots with so little sympathy for the English. After all, we have had Scottish (and Welsh) PMs (from all three parties) in the past with no problems.
Put another way, the English are likely to object to Brown as PM. This is likely to be reflected in Labour losing lots of seats in England. It is only if Labour under Brown get re-elected on a slim majority, when the Conservatives have a clear majority of seats in England, that the constitutional arguments will get rolled out - especially if Labour won despite a large Conservative lead in votes across the UK. If Cameron wins an overall majority, even while still only holding a handful of seats in Scotland and Wales, it is likely that the whole rumpus will abate.
Mark Senior’s point is a good one. Simon Heffer wrote a typically ludicrous column in the Telegraph on Wednesday arguing, apparently, that British constituency elections were mini referendums on individual ministers performance in office.
Before the orchestrated break-up of the UK ‘Yes’ would have been my answer, however since devolution took place it has to be NO way Jock!
We have had 9 years of Scottish Rule and England is now a multicultural shambolic disaster zone - no more, thank you.
Can England have a referendum on a devolved Parliament?
Can England have a referendum on Independence?
Scotland need not worry about losing the subsidies from England/English, they can turn to Brussels.
Paul,
SNP policy is to have a referendum bill in the first 100days withh it to be held within the parliamentary session 2007-11. Just as the quebec or indeed Montenegro elections didn’t include the rest of Canada or serbia, it would be for Scottish residents only, but any EU citizen living in Scotland could vote ( the UK is in the EU so English , Welsh and Irish are all included).
In addition having overseen the count of postal ballots at a Westminster election in Inverness, there a number of people with holiday homes who choose to vote in Scotland ( In theory though illegal they could vote in both) so they would be able to vote too.
As to an English backlash , I tend to see this as a storm in a tea cup, but one way to check would be for polls to include Scottish independence in a list of issues of concern and see where it came. As over the last few years we have sen the long dominance of Health and Education, challenged by Security and immigration, we could see how relevant it was and track how the issue developes.
Maurice,
This year the North Sea will net the treasury £13bn, and possibly more next year. Given that the total value of North Sea output is far higher, and will dissappear from the UK GDP and be added to the red column on the UK’s balance of trade, it might not be us going cap in had to Brussels.
Peter.
Before Scotland got its parliament and Wales and NI their respective assemblies, I had no problem with the current set up in the UK parliament. However, since devolution it seems absurd that the majority population on these isles do not have “fair” representation i.e. an English parliament with English MP’s.
I say good luck to Alex Salmond and the SNP for speaking up for their belief that the people of Scotland should rule Scottish affairs. Where is the English Alex Salmond?
Perhaps since the conservatives are primarily an English party these days, why don’t they ‘federalise’ their party and the English Conservatives call for English independance. Perhaps when the English are better represented in government we might all get along together a little easier . I thinks it’s a shame it has got to this state of affairs though.
When Scotland and England united as one nation in 1707 it was done for the mutual benefit of both nations and with the agreement of both parliaments. For reasons only known to themselves, the Scots have always resented the’English’ and have always toyed with the idea of independance. With the restoration of the Scottish parliament and Scotland virtually declaring itself independant, is it any wonder that England has rediscovered its own national identity. Devolution has started the stone rolling. It will only stop with the demise of the United Kingdom.
the reason the macmafia ,will not offer the scots independence is because,the scots would find an awful lot of oil fields would be in english waters,that way they can moan about “the oil”,and milk the english taxpayer.make sense.they talk about bringing in multi national companies by offering generous grants,thet might.but do you think i would let them transport their goods through englands green and pleasant land,no way.we should also limit immigration and in their case i would repatriate them back to scotland and wales.this would increase their populations and give us back our identity and some badly needed housing,without destroying our beautiful countryside.we also need a referendum on europe what with blair and browns dismantling of our border controls,which is used in conjunction with the human rights act to destroy england as an entity.
The demand for the English to have fair representation is gathering pace. If like minded English people out there want to get things moving join the ENGLISH DEMOCRATS PARTY, I have. Look them up at http://www.englishdemocrats.org.uk
I don’t normally enforce the comments policy too harshly round here, but exactly which part of…
“On potentially contentious issues, particuarly politics, please try to keep comments civil, constructive and not party-partisan”
…didn’t you get?