Pellentesque habitant morbi tristique senectus et netus et malesuada fames ac turpis egestas. Vestibulum tortor quam, feugiat vitae, ultricies eget, tempor sit amet, ante. Donec eu libero sit amet quam egestas semper. Aenean ultricies mi vitae est. Mauris placerat eleifend leo. Quisque sit amet est et sapien ullamcorper pharetra. Vestibulum erat wisi, condimentum sed, commodo vitae, ornare sit amet, wisi. Aenean fermentum, elit eget tincidunt condimentum, eros ipsum rutrum orci, sagittis tempus lacus enim ac dui. Donec non enim in turpis pulvinar facilisis. Ut felis.

Header Level 2

1. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit.
2. Aliquam tincidunt mauris eu risus.

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Vivamus magna. Cras in mi at felis aliquet congue. Ut a est eget ligula molestie gravida. Curabitur massa. Donec eleifend, libero at sagittis mollis, tellus est malesuada tellus, at luctus turpis elit sit amet quam. Vivamus pretium ornare est.

Header Level 3

• Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit.
• Aliquam tincidunt mauris eu risus.

#header h1 a {
	display: block;
	width: 300px;
	height: 80px;
}

The threat of an anti-Conservative “Progressive Alliance” which called upon 58 Labour, Lib Dem and SNP MPs from Scotland; 3 SDLP MPs from Northern Ireland, and; 32 Labour, Lib Dem and Plaid Cymru MPs from Wales to provide a rainbow coalition majority that trumped the Conservative majority in England, threw the future of the Union into serious question.

It was not just the voting privileges of the non-English MPs that was of concern (the so-called West Lothian Question) it was the fact that these non-English MPs constitute a sizable proportion of the Commons’ electoral college that chooses the prime minister and government of the United Kingdom, and hence – because England has no parliament and government of its own – of England. There was a fleeting possibility that these MPs elected outside England’s borders would impose upon England a government not of England’s choosing, that did not have a majority of English MPs, but could nevertheless formulate policy for England and bring it before the House. A government such as this, legislating on matters such as health and education that are devolved to the other nations of the UK, could not possibly claim legitimacy as the government of England.

To address the West Lothian Question the Conservative Party Manifesto promises that they “will introduce new rules so that legislation referring specifically to England, or to England and Wales, cannot be enacted without the consent of MPs representing constituencies of those countries”. This policy, referred to as ‘English Votes on English Laws’ until 2009 when it was revised to allow non-English MPs to vote on the Second and decisive Third Reading of England-only Bills, attempts to addresses the undemocratic voting rights of non-English MPs within Parliament but it does not address the question of who governs England and by what right. The people of England deserve an English Government that governs in the interests of England, immediately accountable to an English Parliament, and ultimately accountable to the people of England alone.

The Conservative’s coalition partners make no mention of ‘English Votes on English Laws’ in their manifesto. Instead the Liberal Democrats pledge to “Address the status of England within a federal Britain, through the Constitutional Convention set up to draft a written constitution for the UK as a whole”.

The Campaign for an English Parliament favours* the Liberal Democrat policy because of its more holistic federal approach, which asks the people for resolution of the English Question, as opposed to the Conservative’s technical top-down Parliamentary mitigation of the much narrower West Lothian Question.

We call upon the new coalition Government to outline their joint policy on the future of England and we ask that a Minister for England is appointed with special remit to oversee that policy and to represent England’s interests in Cabinet, as the Secretaries of State for Scotland and Wales will do for their people in Cabinet discussions over reform of the Barnett Formula, Scotland’s Calman Commission proposals, and the plans for a referendum on a Welsh Parliament with primary legislative powers. England requires a voice in Cabinet.

The National Council welcomes the initiative reported on the BBC website for Scotland (sic) that there will also be a commission to discuss the possibility of setting up an Assembly for England and to look at the West Lothian question. However, the CEP will continue to campaign for a separately elected English Parliament or assembly with primary legislating powers in devolved matters.

We qualify our preference for a constitutional convention on the proviso that the that the convention is preceded by a “National Conversation for England” so that the people of England can participate in a full and rounded discussion on the governance of England and England’s place within the Union, and surveyed on the options before us, before a phalanx of politicians, union leaders, churchmen, self-appointed or government appointed civic leaders all begin pontificating on what’s best for “the people”.

The National Council of the Campaign for an English Parliament, 12th May, 2010

Contact:

Scilla Cullen

Scilla.cullen@dsl.pipex.com 01438 833 155

Stuart Parr, a member of the CEP’s National Council, said “This result backs up last year’s poll for the Jury Team and the last two independent polls commissioned by the Campaign for an English Parliament, all of which came out with the same figure. The people of England want an English Parliament, it’s a mystery why the British parties go to such great lengths to deny us the same right to self-determination they gave the Scots, Welsh and Northern Irish.”

Hundreds of thousands of people – perhaps even millions – will celebrate St Georges Day today and over the weekend with local councils, companies, societies and individuals organising fun days and parties. What better way to finish off the St Georges Day celebrations than an announcement from the leaders of the big three parties that they are listening to voters in England and will hold a referendum on creating an English Parliament like they did in Scotland and Wales? They’re all promising change, this is change we want.

“So, when the parties refer to policies for education, health, police, prisons and courts, transport, land use, financial assistance to industry, agriculture and fisheries, food standards, the arts and sport they will, unless they state otherwise, be referring to the future UK government’s plans for England only”.(1) Reading through the manifestos which have now been issued we can see that Mrs Newman was absolutely correct.

None of the Conservative, Lib-Dem or Labour has produced a manifesto for England and each avoids mentioning England. Each offers a manifesto for Britain and will provide one each for Scotland and Wales. Gerry Hassan, a Scottish journalist, exposed the duplicity of this in his column in Open Democracy: “Jim Murphy, Scottish Secretary of State, …launched the (Labour) Scottish manifesto with its lack of Blairite reformist zeal on public services, yet across the rest of the UK the same Murphy is signed up to the next stage of Blairite management gobbledy-gook…. the wider democratic deficit in the entire process is actually England, for the supposed British Labour manifesto is in fact in many respects an English manifesto, with many of its proposals not travelling north to Scotland or west to Wales. However, it is an implicit English agenda, rather than an ashamedly explicit one, lacking the straightforwardness of being labelled as ‘English’ and lacking any sense of aiding and nurturing the development of an English voice and democratic space”. (2)

England is mentioned once, on P72, of Labour manifesto. (3)The reason for its decision to ignore England is summarised by Simon Lee of the University of Hull:”The second feature of this campaign is the political invisibility of England. This week’s manifesto launches address policies for public services that apply to England alone, not Britain or the UK. But, from the parties themselves and the broadcast media, you will never know this because it is a fact rarely acknowledged. Instead, you will hear Gordon Brown talk of “this country”. He cannot afford to say the word “England” because, although his power over health and education policy is rooted in England alone – because of devolution – he does not represent an English constituency. (4)

The Conservatives take the same line. Their manifesto also treats England and Britain as if they were the same and all policies that apply only to England are presented as applying to Britain as a whole. Apart from one mention of England, the only other reference is to the West Lothian Question: (p84): “Labour have refused to address the so-called ‘West Lothian Question’: the unfair situation of Scottish MPs voting on matters which are devolved. A Conservative government will introduce new rules so that legislation referring specifically to England, or to England and Wales, cannot be enacted without the consent of MPs representing constituencies of those countries.” (5) Yet the policy that the Conservative party has been trailing before the election and which we understand is still its policy would allow MPs from outside England participate in the final vote in the House of Commons, that is the Report and Third Reading, which means that they could, as they have done previously, vote through legislation applicable to England against the wishes of the majority of English MPs.

The Liberal Democrats mention changes to local council voting in England (p90) in their manifesto but, except under constitutional reform, make no attempt to distinguish between policies for England only and policies which apply to the whole UK. The Liberal Democrats pledge to replace the outdated Barnett formula with a needs-based policy. They also propose (p92) to “Address the status of England within a federal Britain through a Constitutional Convention set up to draft a written constitution for the whole of the UK”. (6)There is no guarantee that addressing the ‘status’ of England would include political recognition as the preferred policy of the Liberal Democrats is to divide England into regions to fit their version of a federal Britain.

Thus, Labour, Conservative and Lib-Dem manifestos all choose to ignore England and to present policies for England as if they apply for the whole of Britain. May we refer the parties to a full list of devolved powers helpfully listed for them on the BBC’s website under the heading: Devolution: A beginner’s guide. They will also find in the BBC’s Election 2010 (7) a note on each manifesto identifying which policies apply just to England or England & Wales. If the BBC can do this why can’t the political parties? What are they trying to hide? Why are they all trying to pull wool over the eyes over the electors in England? At the beginning of the first of the debates by the party leaders on ITV on 15 April on domestic policies, the moderator, Alastair Stewart, took care to remind the audience, that they would be discussing their policies for England. His reminders were the only time that England was mentioned.

Ian Campbell

CAMPAIGN FOR AN ENGLISH PARLIAMENT

19 April 2010

Contact ICamp10697@aol.com or 01483 28 5626

(1) Western Daily Press 12 4 2010

(2) Open Democracy www.opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom/gerry-hassan/tale-of-two-labours-three-manifestos

(3) Labour Party Manifesto

(4) Simon Lee 14 4 10 www.thisishullandeastriding.co.uk/General-Election-main-parties-speakers-England

(5) Conservative manifesto

(6) Liberal Democrat manifesto

(7) News.bbc.co.uk/2/hi.news/politics/election_210

The Scottish Government is demanding that the Scottish portion of the DEFRA budget be handed over to Scotland’s control before any of the planned cuts are made, thereby causing the cuts to fall even more heavily on England.

This demand follows the recent assurances from the Conservative Party that they will ‘respect’ the budget passed by the Scottish Government, an offer that has now also been extended to Wales. In other words, as an editorial in The Scotsman has pointed out, “England will see painful cuts over the next 12 months, while Scotland will escape relatively unscathed.”[*]

For how much longer must England and her people be treated with this cavalier contempt? At what point will the British Government realise that it has to treat all its citizens equally if the Union is to survive? Or will it keep putting this off until it is too late?

David Wildgoose

CAMPAIGN FOR AN ENGLISH PARLIAMENT

Contacts: cep@skein.co.uk or 07906 551 417

[*] news.scotsman.com/opinion

Whilst we do not consider English Votes on English Laws an acceptable way to govern our country, we do look forward to British politicians being made to talk about England for once. We may even hear the Prime Minister say “England” before the election!

However, in anticipation of the British establishment’s inevitable refusal to end the discrimination against England, the Campaign for an English Parliament will continue to fight for our right to govern ourselves through a separately elected Parliament and Executive.

Stuart Parr

National Council Member

Campaign for an English Parliament

25 February 2010

The Campaign aims to secure from the British Government equality with the other countries of Britain by the restoration of the original English Parliament with its own Executive to deal with domestic matters for England as the Scottish Parliament does for Scotland.

Background

The Campaign is a not-for-profit company limited by guarantee incorporated in England (number 03636739) in 1998. It is a member of the National Council of Voluntary Organisations (number 10963) and the English Speaking Union. It represents all those in England who are entitled to vote and is not allied with any political party.

For more information contact:

Scilla Cullen, scilla.cullen@dsl.pipex.com

Now the First Minister of Scotland, Alex Salmond, is demanding that Scotland’s already over-generous Barnett subsidies should be continued untouched, thereby leaving the enormous burden of the Scottish bank bail-out to fall primarily on public services in England whilst leaving Scotland unscathed.

With no Parliament and politicians of our own to speak up for us and defend our interests, the Campaign for an English Parliament wishes to remind the British Government that any attempt to make England suffer an unfair share of the burden will be neither understood nor forgiven.

David Wildgoose

Vice-Chair, Campaign for an English Parliament

Contact: cep@skein.co.uk or 07906 551417

Ref: “Hands off Scotland’s grant, warns Alex Salmond”

http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/news/Hands-off-Scotland39s-grant-warns.6071256.jp

The PCS union is predictably complaining about the job losses and calling on MPs, MSPs and Glasgow councillors to fight the job cuts.

There should never have been any Student Loan Company jobs in Glasgow in the first place because it is primarily an English-only quango. Student loans are given to people studying at university in England to pay for the tuition and top-up fees they have to pay thanks to the votes of Scottish Labour MPs [2] who joined the lobbies to help defeat the majority of English MPs that voted against them.

Quite why the British government thought it was acceptable to follow the national insult of having top-up fees imposed on English students by MPs elected in Scotland with the indignity of having the loans to pay them administered in Scotland and Wales where students receive grants to pay for their university education is a mystery.

The Scots and Welsh have profited from the English for long enough. The Student Loan Company should close its offices in Glasgow and Colwyn Bay and transfer all the jobs involved in administering the student loan tax back to England where they belong.

Stuart Parr

Campaign for an English Parliament

2 February 2010

Contact: stuart.parr@thecep.org.uk

Tel: 07973 296 118

[1] http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/scotland/glasgow_and_west/8483056.stm

[2] http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/scotland/3432767.stm

Note:

In tertiary education student fees decided by the British Government for 2009-10 in England are £3,225 p.a. The N. Ireland Assembly has also copied this charge but the Scottish Parliament has decided that further education should be free to Scots and £1,775 to other UK students, The Welsh Assembly decision: £1,285 to the Welsh, £3,225 to other UK students. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/education/8348365.stm).