It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Should England have it's own Parliament?

page: 7
5
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 27 2013 @ 04:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by LeBombDiggity
reply to post by HelenConway
 


Your claims about the Scots PMs destroying England are just that, claims, they can't be measured or put to the test because they only exist in your own head, which as far as I see is closed to visitors.

Yay for the English tories, those you'd have govern England permanently. I have to save you from that fate, Helen, I really do.


I think my claims are actually quite valid.
New Labour - lets see:

sold our gold
bankrupted us
signed up to all the EU treaties without the mandate of the people.
bailed out the banks with tax payers money.
Allowed UK PLC to be sold .. across the world, with the inherent loss of revenue that entailed.
Lost control of our borders.
Deliberately did not police our borders.
Changed the demographic of the country.
Sent us to war on a lie.
Caused pain and untold misery.

The one and only reason that Labour was in power was because they managed to get a majority in govt due to Scottish votes.

So yes I blame them

Addit: I nearly forgot they covered up their incompetence with welfare payments on borrowed money, knowing that they would not have to deal with the consequences of the repayment mess.

They devalued the pound - so it is now arguably fiat money.

They encouraged cheap spending and presided over the biggest unsustainable property value increase in history.
edit on 27-1-2013 by HelenConway because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-1-2013 by HelenConway because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 27 2013 @ 04:21 PM
link   
reply to post by grainofsand
 


Oh come on - I gave you a full response above. Take a look at it please. The West Lothian question was never resolved because the Scottish Executive came into being when the LABOUR party was in power in Westminster - they needed the Scottish Labour Mp's votes. It's not fair and it's not right (and I've already said that - now I've said it twice).

Come on lass - get the reading comprehension skills up to speed.

ETA lass or lad

edit on 27-1-2013 by christina-66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 27 2013 @ 04:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by grainofsand

Originally posted by threewisemonkeys
Hate to point out the obvious here but England already has its own parliament, it just imposes it's will on the Scottish and Welsh. In fact with a devolved Scotland and Wales, there would be little left but an English parliament.
Urm, did you miss the bit that in Westminster the Welsh, Sctottish and Northern Irish MP's get to vote on issues which solely affect England...that is not an 'English' Parliament at all.


I'm not a U.K. citizen, but I propose this:

For continuity and efficiency's sake, don't have a separate Parliament for England. However, for various issues which relate solely to England, the UK Parliament constituencies are subsetted only to English districts for voting.



posted on Jan, 27 2013 @ 04:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by mbkennel

Originally posted by grainofsand

Originally posted by threewisemonkeys
Hate to point out the obvious here but England already has its own parliament, it just imposes it's will on the Scottish and Welsh. In fact with a devolved Scotland and Wales, there would be little left but an English parliament.
Urm, did you miss the bit that in Westminster the Welsh, Sctottish and Northern Irish MP's get to vote on issues which solely affect England...that is not an 'English' Parliament at all.


I'm not a U.K. citizen, but I propose this:

For continuity and efficiency's sake, don't have a separate Parliament for England. However, for various issues which relate solely to England, the UK Parliament constituencies are subsetted only to English districts for voting.


And you are quite right - but that does not happen, Scotland votes on english matters - it must stop.

I think Scotland needs to have its independence ASAP. Hopefully this will happen, then the English at least will be more fairly represented in parliament and that will reduce the need for an exclusive English parliament actually.
edit on 27-1-2013 by HelenConway because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 27 2013 @ 04:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by christina-66
reply to post by grainofsand
 


Oh come on - I gave you a full response above. Take a look at it please. The West Lothian question was never resolved because the Scottish Executive came into being when the LABOUR party was in power in Westminster - they needed the Scottish Labour Mp's votes. It's not fair and it's not right (and I've already said that - now I've said it twice).

Come on lass - get the reading comprehension skills up to speed.
Lass? I'm a bloke. regardless, what are you saying now? The unjust funding of Scotland, Wales and NI by English taxpayers is Labours fault?! How silly is that? And again, I don't see Scottish people fighting for an equitable solution. They won't because they'll be skint without the workers of England propping their administration up.



posted on Jan, 27 2013 @ 04:27 PM
link   
reply to post by HelenConway
 



I think Scotland needs to have its independence ASAP. Hopefully this will happen, then the English at least will be more fairly represented in parliament and that will reduce the need for an exclusive English parliament actually.


Well well well - problem solved. Now what was all that fuss about?



posted on Jan, 27 2013 @ 04:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by christina-66
reply to post by HelenConway
 



I think Scotland needs to have its independence ASAP. Hopefully this will happen, then the English at least will be more fairly represented in parliament and that will reduce the need for an exclusive English parliament actually.


Well well well - problem solved. Now what was all that fuss about?


I have said this all along but you told me to leave the last thread for saying this - so here I am at your request discussing the need for english people to be properly represented in parliament, I think Scotland leaving the union is imperiative for this to happen,

Not devo max - but full on leaving,

But I doubt that will happen because the truth is Scotland gets more out of the union then England. The English voters have not been given a vote on this matter.



posted on Jan, 27 2013 @ 04:32 PM
link   
reply to post by grainofsand
 


Sorry bloke (I did ETA lad) - I think you're confusing the West Lothian question and the Barnett Formula - they're not the same point. The fact that West Lothian question (Scottish mp's having a say in English affairs that wouldn't affect the Scots) was not resolved is certainly because it worked to the labour party's benefit when they were in power - no doubt about that at all. I say (once a bloody gain) it is not fair.

I also posted that one way or another the Barnett Formula is on its way out.

So any other issues with me given that I do agree that in view of the Welsh, Irish and Scottish devolved powers that England should have its own assembly?



posted on Jan, 27 2013 @ 04:33 PM
link   
reply to post by mbkennel
 


Well they've kind of got that in the form of the English Grand Committee, which is composed of all the members of the lower house of the Westminsterr parliament from English constituencies. It could be given it's own special legislative authority, becoming a de facto English parliament within the setting of the UK parliament. As Stumason suggested, the English tradition was for parliaments to meet across the Kingdom not just in Londres. The other tradition was for there to be long gaps between Parliaments, the MP's only being called to meet on a very irregular basis.

I think your suggestion is quite interesting.



posted on Jan, 27 2013 @ 04:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by christina-66
reply to post by HelenConway
 



I think Scotland needs to have its independence ASAP. Hopefully this will happen, then the English at least will be more fairly represented in parliament and that will reduce the need for an exclusive English parliament actually.


Well well well - problem solved. Now what was all that fuss about?
What fuss? I suggested in the OP that England should decide it's own path in it's own parliament without subsidising Scotland, Wales and NI - you appeared to have some issues with that.



posted on Jan, 27 2013 @ 04:35 PM
link   
reply to post by HelenConway
 


I didn't tell you to leave the last thread - I said that if you wanted to start talking about an English parliament then you should start a thread on the subject because the other thread was entitled 'Should Scotland be an independent nation?'

And here we are



posted on Jan, 27 2013 @ 04:36 PM
link   
reply to post by grainofsand
 


Grainofsand - that response was written to Helen - are you seeing straight?



posted on Jan, 27 2013 @ 04:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by christina-66
I think you're confusing the West Lothian question and the Barnett Formula - they're not the same point.
Nope, I completely understand both. We must agree with my points in the OP then? Or is there some other issue you feel my contributions to this thread are inaccurately describing?



posted on Jan, 27 2013 @ 04:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by LeBombDiggity
reply to post by mbkennel
 


Well they've kind of got that in the form of the English Grand Committee, which is composed of all the members of the lower house of the Westminsterr parliament from English constituencies. It could be given it's own special legislative authority, becoming a de facto English parliament within the setting of the UK parliament. As Stumason suggested, the English tradition was for parliaments to meet across the Kingdom not just in Londres. The other tradition was for there to be long gaps between Parliaments, the MP's only being called to meet on a very irregular basis.

I think your suggestion is quite interesting.


I agree that Londres - as it is presently does not represent England and her needs. I think conveening the English parliament in rotating cities is a good idea. Such as Nottingham, Winchester, Newcastle.

All this is conjecture - the English will not be properly represented whilst Scottish MPs vote on English matters and this will only change when Scotland leaves the union IMO.



posted on Jan, 27 2013 @ 04:43 PM
link   
reply to post by grainofsand
 


You do realise your argument about the money, about Scotland being poor, too poor to rely on it's ownself ...that's been thrown into the pot by people such as you since the 1960s.

Too poor with every man fully employed, too poor with pits and steelworks and shipyards at full capacity, too poor with the discovery of north sea oil, too poor with the expansion of the financial and service sectors, too poor under Harold Wilson, Edward Heath, James Callaghan, Margaret Thatcher, John Major, Tony Blair, Gordon Brown, David Cameron.

Too poor, too poor, always the Scots are too damned poor, the only nation in God's creation which can't stand on it's own two feet.

Riiiiiiiiight !



posted on Jan, 27 2013 @ 04:45 PM
link   
reply to post by grainofsand
 




Oh come on - I gave you a full response above. Take a look at it please. The West Lothian question was never resolved because the Scottish Executive came into being when the LABOUR party was in power in Westminster - they needed the Scottish Labour Mp's votes. It's not fair and it's not right (and I've already said that - now I've said it twice).

Come on lass - get the reading comprehension skills up to speed.




Lass? I'm a bloke. regardless, what are you saying now? The unjust funding of Scotland, Wales and NI by English taxpayers is Labours fault?! How silly is that? And again, I don't see Scottish people fighting for an equitable solution. They won't because they'll be skint without the workers of England propping their administration up.


You are confusing because I post relating to the West Lothian question and why it was never resolved (the labour party's vested interests) and your reply was concerning the Barnett Formula ???



posted on Jan, 27 2013 @ 04:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by LeBombDiggity
reply to post by mbkennel
 


Well they've kind of got that in the form of the English Grand Committee, which is composed of all the members of the lower house of the Westminsterr parliament from English constituencies. It could be given it's own special legislative authority, becoming a de facto English parliament within the setting of the UK parliament. As Stumason suggested, the English tradition was for parliaments to meet across the Kingdom not just in Londres. The other tradition was for there to be long gaps between Parliaments, the MP's only being called to meet on a very irregular basis.

I think your suggestion is quite interesting.

Why do you advocate a different situation for the England than the rest of the UK? I cannot see your reasons for doing so.



posted on Jan, 27 2013 @ 04:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by christina-66
reply to post by grainofsand
 




Oh come on - I gave you a full response above. Take a look at it please. The West Lothian question was never resolved because the Scottish Executive came into being when the LABOUR party was in power in Westminster - they needed the Scottish Labour Mp's votes. It's not fair and it's not right (and I've already said that - now I've said it twice).

Come on lass - get the reading comprehension skills up to speed.




Lass? I'm a bloke. regardless, what are you saying now? The unjust funding of Scotland, Wales and NI by English taxpayers is Labours fault?! How silly is that? And again, I don't see Scottish people fighting for an equitable solution. They won't because they'll be skint without the workers of England propping their administration up.


You are confusing because I post relating to the West Lothian question and why it was never resolved (the labour party's vested interests) and your reply was concerning the Barnett Formula ???
Game playing is not appropriate or acceptable here, I am sure you totally understand my argument and my own knowledge of the issue at hand. Sticking to the point is a more preferable option than sidetracking.



posted on Jan, 27 2013 @ 04:51 PM
link   
reply to post by grainofsand
 


I'm not advocating it. I'm merely throwing it into the air to see whether it flies or crash dives !

It is late now unfortunately and I am having the evil eye cast in my direction by the ATS Widow who shares my home.

Until another time, all



posted on Jan, 27 2013 @ 04:52 PM
link   
I think the only resolution to the Scottish issue is to give them complete independence.

I don't simply mean the version of independence they want where they still get support from us (open borders, use of the pound as currency, usage of our credit rating etc)

FULL independence, they would go under very quickly if we remove all defence installations (MoD has been researching this quietly for years now), ties to the national grid, separate the oil revenues (such as they are) by extending the current borders. No access to our currency, credit rating and put in place a proper border with real passports etc.

They will of course cry about the oil revenue, claiming they own it all which is complete bull - be fun to work out how much they paid to setup the damn oil fields in the first place!

The same should be done for the Irish, they've been fighting for it for a good few years now, they're bankrupt already so that should should empty a few bowels over there too.

I get totally sick of the scottish & irish complaining all of the time, they have all of the benefits of the united kingdom and none of the hazards of being an independent country. STILL they moan.

I'm not having a direct go at either population en mass, had some great years posted on duties in both countries but jeez can they complain!



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join