Whatever the polls say, as soon as anyone is told what Scottish New Labour are doing to England, they are at first astonished that they didn’t know, then angry that they didn’t know and finally furious that England’s MPs have allowed it to happen.

The one thing that is without exception, is that no one, once they are informed of the issues, thinks any Scot should be in charge of Egnland, let alone Gordon Broon.

These polls have been carried out before the issue of the West Lothian Question and Barnett Formula have been discussed openly and without prejudice in the media. These results are BEFORE a debate has begun. Wait till that happens and trouble will brew in their beloved Union and they know it. That’s why they refuse to discuss it. They think if people remain ignorant, their colony will remain compliant. They can think again.

If things continue as they are, devolution will have some unpleasant consequences for those Scots with political ambitions in England.

The problem is that he would not only be Prime Minister of Britain, and
also First Minister of England, but he would NOT be First Minister of either Scotland or Wales!

I have never got on a soap box before so please bear with me while I get myself balanced up here.

I am by no means politically biased nor have I sufficient political knowledge to throw weight at any debate on politics but what I do wish to say is Gordon Brown has been trusted with our “British Pound” and has held the office of Chancellor of the Exchequer since the Labour party came to power in 199? and I think he has done a pretty reasonable job of it. Mind you, I just cringe at his Budget days. What’s he raised the price of now…?

Should Gordon Brown become Prime Minister? Well, I don’t think he’ll do any worse than some of our previous PM’s, in fact I’m sure he’ll do a better job. Who else is capable of filling the role?

Is Gordon Brown too Scottish to be PM?
Is the Manager of the England football team from England?
Is the Pope of Rome from Italy?
I say, “If the cap fits, wear it”

Surely you remember the last two PM’s, (Conservative) they weren’t moulded for that position, they were thrown in the deep end and left to drown. No one was capable of or wanton enough to throw them a life jacket.
Remember PM Ted Heath and the 3 day working weeks and the Miner’s strike of the seventies and how the Country was almost facing a civil war before he was ousted? Didn’t he do a good job of PM? And he was from England!
Remember Maggie Thatcher? Powerful and stubborn as she was had her faults and wasn’t capable of running a happy ship because she wouldn’t listen to her underdogs or to the cries of the people. She was from “England” and was thrown out in “Julius Caeser style” …. without the daggers.

It seems to me, England has produced very few good political leaders over the past 30 or 40 years and should now take a rest and give someone else a shot at leadership. Tony Blair has thrown the dice 3 times in succession and landed a six each time but I don’t think his flare will extend to another English blooded PM for another few years.

I feel Gordon Brown is capable enough and wanton enough for the position, he has the desire, drive and ambition to be Prime Minister.

Just because he is a Scot and a Westminster MP for a Scottish constituency doesn’t mean he can’t do a good job of running the Country as Prime Minister. He’s been living in No 11 for the past 10 years and so surely has a better understanding of what the Country needs and doesn’t need.

He has good track record, more than can be said of the Deputy Prime Minister from “England” of whom it is said can’t control his zip or his fists. Now wouldn’t you have thought the Deputy PM would be a suitable contender for the role of PM? ….not this one.

The title of the PM is usually announced as “The British Prime Minister” which if I’m correct envelopes England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland and not just England and Wales.

So why shouldn’t a member of Parliment regardless of his or her geographical background become Prime Minister providing they are capable of doing a good job of it.

Is Gordon Brown too Scottish to be PM? No! If he was too Scottish he wouldn’t have stayed in London for so long!

Why Gordon Brown for Prime Minister? I say, “Why not!”

re: Martin Donnelly

One of the best posts I have read on here, well done Martin.

Actually Martin, whilst I don’t agree with your viewpoint I have to say you argued it well.

My personal view is that no-one should be a Prime Minister passing laws for which they themselves can never be held accountable for by their own constituents.

I have no problem with there being a Scottish PM but I have accountability issues with a PM from a Scottish seat.

Gordon Brown in my view can be a Labour PM only if he steps down as MP for his Scottish seat and seeks selection to an English seat.

Thus ensuring that any policies he inflicts upon the rest of us he inflicts upon his own constituents and is thereby directly accountable for them.

If he’s too Scottish for 40% of the population then he’s too Scottish.

Everytime his government drafts or votes upon legislation concerning England this matter of his mandate (or rather lack of) for England will be raised, undermining effective government and the UK itself.

Why should someone that is totally unnaccountable to any electorate - be they Scottish or English - be allowed to vote upon matters concerning English NHS, transport or education? More to the point why should he be able to assemble a cabinet and select ministers to be responsible for those areas and formlate policy?

I won’t stand for it. A Scottish constituency MP cannot be UK PM until England has its own parliament.

Of course an alternative answer is have an English parliament, then Brown can easily be PM from a ‘Scottish’ seat. A federal system of parliament is quite logical and works well in the rest of the world including the USA, Australia, Germany, South Africa etc.. The underlying issue here is that the constitution is fundamentally illogical, after all, even before devolution the Westminster parliament did not ‘control’ the legal and education systems in Scotland. The federal system in a UK would actually be an excellent solution to every country’s historic past but keep Westminster for the UK wide issues.

If England had its own Parliament, Brown’s constituency would not be a problem. The current position can easily be remedied and any current objections are of his own making.

The fact that they made such a mess of devolution does not speak volumes for their capabilities as a government. The corruption is another matter, which should not be ignored either. Taking these into account, Martin Donnelly’s arguments for capability are totally shot out of the water.

The Yougov results on the barnet formula throw up a real problem for both brown and Menzie campbell. They both want to portray themselves as british particularly to voters in middle england, but the Barnett formula which is supported by close to three out of four in their fife constituencies, gets the support of less than one in four in the South East.

Campbell has come out in favour of change, but so far brown has defended it, but I think that can’t last, although he may well hold off doing anything until he is leader or after the Scottish elections.

I also found it interesting that about half of people feel indifferent to Scottish Independence, although three out of four don’t think it will happen, I would be interestied to see how this changed if they thought it was more likely.

Anthony,

I don’t suppose there is any chance of geetting a better breakdown of the figures by region, as I would be intersted in the Scottish figures on what people thought about the result and likelyhood of Independence, and the different attitudes between Northern England and London.

Peter.

Peter - breakdown by country are here

http://www.yougov.com/archives/pdf/TEL060101009_2.pdf

(The Scottish sample size is very small, and therefore I would caution against drawing conclusions from anything except strong contrasts like the differing answers on the Barnett formula).

Afraid I haven’t got any breaks by region.

Anthony,

Even givenwhat was said about samplee size, the figure of 42 to 40, on happiness on Independence is interesting.

It shows two things, firstly as you’d expect that the vast majority of people in Scotland have thought about it and come to an oppinion on it, while many people in England and Wales don’t seem that bothered either way.

The second, is that like the survey for the SNP of those who have made up their minds a slight majority are pro independence.

As to the “Do you think it will happen” question, that is notoriously volatile and moves with party support, when the SNP were ahead of Labour in the run up to the first Holyrood elections, more than two thirds though the Union wouldn’t last ten years, but within six months it was back down to a third.

As to the SNP score of 22%, if it’s for a Westminster election that’s probably about right and actually up from what we got in May 2005.

I’d be intersted to know the answer to an open question on what people in England though the negative and positive consequences for Scottish Independence would be, as i suspect people in England would be far more concerned about Britains pace in the UN or EU that what it did to Scotland.

Peter.

The Labour Party in Scotland the 1980’s and 1990’s evoked anti-English sentiment to damage the Conservative Party in Scotland, by branding it as an ‘English Party’. This campaign was intended to maximise Labour support in Scotland.

The recent attacks on people in Scotland (including a child) for wearing England shirts are disgraceful and have been attributed to being fueled by the lunatic remarks of some politicians elected in Scotland like the Labour First Minister Jack McConnell, as highlighted by one of the victims.

One of the key problems is the separate participation on sport by the British nations. A single British football team would end this narrow minded nationalism, and would be far more successful.

When the British people participate in the Olympics as a nation, we are united and are successful.

A British football team would end these racist attacks in Scotland on English people.

I am not English but born and bread in Glasgow. Thanks to Labour, Scotland is now a nation with a wrecked economy where its only major export is it people. I had to leave Scotland in search of work in my early 20’s, and now live in Aldershot. I know many other Scottish people in the town who have also had to leave Scotland and very few have any time for Labour or Gordon Brown.

As far as I’m concerned the chickens have come home to roost for Gordon Brown. As a Scot, I have no loyalty to this man and will not vote for him.

This man who has done so much damage to Britain now wants to wrap himself in the Union Flag and the majority of British people believe he is being opportunistic in his rather unconvincing claims that he wants the English team to succeed in Germany. Oh…is he suddenly now trying to appeal to ‘middle England’?

I also resent the assertion put around by Brown’s supporters that if the English don’t vote for Gordon Brown they will have been deceived by a ‘Conservative’ or ‘English Nationalist’ campaign to undermine him on his ‘nationality’.

One of them described him as ‘the greatest political talent of our generation’. As far as I’m concerned, Brown is ‘dour’, a bore and lacking the charismatic style of David Cameron.

Brown has got nobody to blame but himself for his predicament.
As a Scot who has been forced to leave Scotland due to Labour’s policies, which have destroyed the Scottish economy, it will be a great day to see Brown totally rejected by the British people at the polls.

Peter Crerar, Aldershot

Tony Blair IS Scottish. He was born in Edinburgh, and educated at Fettes High School, a very high calibre school in Edinburgh.

Very well said.

It is strange that people seem to overlook this fact. It is the media that portray Gordon Brown to be unfit for the job (which he is as its a UK parliament, not an english one and considering its power over Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales electing only English people wuld be undemocratic.)

I do not remember the question of Scottishness being constantly raised about Blair ( even thouh he represents an English constituency now.

Simon Moore Says:

September 24th, 2006 at 10:35 am
Tony Blair IS Scottish.

TB gets my sympathy but rarely.

He is perceived as Scottish in England, and as English in Scotland.

He may have to choose if Scotland elects an anti-Trident, pro-Independence majority in May.

I think Simon, Kescomw and John have missed the point.
It isn’t a question of nationality, it’s about accountability.
Blair, a Scott was elected in an English constancy therefore
he as a mandate to represent his English constituents.
Brown was elected in a Scottish constancy but because of
devolution he as no say in what happens to his constituents.
He as no mandate in Scotland concerning devolved matters
and at the same time he as no mandate in England because
nobody voted for him.

If Brown was English and represented a Scottish constituency
the problem would still be the same.

Sorry, I forgot to check the spell checker ;o)

For constancy read constituency.

I think Gordon Brown is being picked on because of his ethnicity. His job is not to represent England, Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland. His Job is to represent us all as one nation and Britian can hardly be called one nation if everyone in England demand that all Prime Ministers be English.

Even if Brown didnt vote on English matters he would still be picked on for being Scottish. I also believe that if he is voted out next election that his ethnicity will be the main reason. Scotland is becoming more and more for seperation, so voting out a Prime Minister because he is Scottish is hardly the way to convince Scotland that we are all equal and better off together.

English MPs and Prime Ministers have ruled over Scotland for for 3 centuries now, so i think its very hypocritical and racist for England to now turn round and say Brown is unfit to lead Great Britian because he is Scottish.

If this is the case then Scotland may as well just vote for independence and she obviously wont be treated fairly in the Union.

It’s clear from Brown and Salmond that Scotland has evolved a very distinct ( rather in the same way that Northern Ireland has done) tradition from England. My feeling is that as long as it doesn’t cost any money Scotland can go as far as the average English voter cares.