Ken Clarke to recommend that MPs from Scotland and Wales should retain final say on English laws

Philip Johnston writing for The Telegraph suggests that Ken Clarke's Democracy Taskforce hasn't only, as expected, rejected an English Parliament but it has also rejected Sir Malcolm Rifkind's plan for English Votes for English Laws.

What will emerge from the Taskforce, Johnston predicts, is "a compromise" that will retain a final say on laws that only affect England for MPs from non-English constituencies.  MPs from English seats will have an exclusive right of amendment but nothing more:

"It is a compromise between those who want English votes for English laws and those who would leave things be.  Legislation affecting only England, an education Bill, for instance, would receive a second reading by the entire Commons; but its committee stage, where the measure is subjected to line-by-line scrutiny and can be amended, would be for English MPs only.  When the Bill came back to the Commons for its report stage and third reading, all MPs would again have a vote. But the Government would be bound to accept amendments agreed by the committee, or risk losing the legislation."

At the end of last year there was Scottish Tory relief when David Cameron appeared to emphasise "Unionism" rather than Englishness.

Related link: On today's frontpage there are links relating to Alex Salmond's ambitions for the SNP to hold the balance of power after the next General Election.

Comments

[Letters From A Tory]

Obviously this represents a 'compromise' but I still don't see why there should be a compromise in the first place.

English votes for English laws is a matter of principle which you can't adhere to half-heartedly.

[Iain]

Absolutely outrageous, for me English votes for English Laws was the barest of bare minimum, yet Ken Clarke is even going to recommend backsliding from that promise. USELESS!!!

What England needs is a Parliament with its own Executive to fight for the interests of English people, for as we have seen our so called 'representatives' in the UK Parliament have been nothing short of useless in defending our interests. Top up fees that’s fine by our so called 'representatives', load them on the English young. Cut English health budgets, that's fine for by our so our 'representatives'. Shove our pensioners in to penury, yeah that's OK’d by our so called 'representatives', and above all the have sat on their fat back sides while the British state has made English people Constitutionally second class citizens in their own bloody Parliament, how useless is that? And now the useless opposition are even going to give us the a half decent choice at the next election to rectify the problem. UESLESS , USELESS, USELESS!!!!!!

[englandism.com]

Dancing to the Scottish jig

To quote Salmond whose stated ambition as of this weekend is to hold the balance of power at Westminster in the event of a hung parliament to directly impose SNP policy upon the UK:

‘He may even try to use a hung parliament to corner UK party leaders into supporting an independence referendum.’

By Simon Johnson, Scottish Political Correspondent
Last Updated: 3:06am BST 21/04/2008

And the threat to the Union comes from England?

The cometh the hour cometh the man and Ken Clarke turns up with a bucket of fudge that is so convoluted and incomprehensible to the average voter that the only issue that it addresses is that the English question will not be addressed.

Think about it Ken. How do you sell this to 85% of the electorate?

Well, umm, when it comes to something that, umm, only applies to England and that something is almost impossible to identify when it applies to Wales as well and sometimes to Scotland then the SNP Scottish MPs will now, according to Salmond, vote on it but when we look at it properly only English MPs will be allowed except when it is a bit Welsh or Scottish and then SNP MPs in the hung parliament will decide. Sort of.

K.I.S.S.

Keep It Simple St#pid

English parliament well hung or otherwise.

[Iain]

Sorry in my fury and anger I made a couple of spelling errors, this might read a little better.

Absolutely outrageous, for me English votes for English Laws was the barest of bare minimum, yet Ken Clarke is even going to recommend backsliding from that promise. USELESS!!!

What England needs is a Parliament with its own Executive to fight for the interests of English people, for as we have seen our so called 'representatives' in the UK Parliament have been nothing short of useless in defending our interests. Top up fees that’s fine by our so called 'representatives', load them on the English young. Cut English health budgets, that's fine for by our so our 'representatives'. Shove our pensioners in to penury, yeah that's OK’d by our so called 'representatives', and above all they have sat on their fat back sides while the British state has made English people Constitutionally second class citizens in their own bloody Parliament, how useless is that? And now the useless opposition aren’t even going to give us the a half decent choice at the next election to rectify the problem. UESLESS , USELESS, USELESS!!!!!!

[Alex Swanson]

Yet another example of why Ken Clarke wouldn't have made a good leader.

[Mr Hare]

Cameron is to blame for this though.
We know that his natural instinct is caution.
Now he's ahead in the polls he retreats to what the Editor has called The Politics of Small Promises.
He opted for some radicalism when he faced political disaster last autumn but that was forced on him by Brown's opinion poll leads.
Now anything slightly risky is off the agenda.
Cameron is back in his tortoise shell.

[Iain]

"Obviously this represents a 'compromise' but I still don't see why there should be a compromise in the first place."

Neither do I, it seems any injustice they heap on the English people is something we have to tolerate, yet to give English parity is a dangerous thought that will split the so called Union. What does that say of the Union that it relies on inequality for its continued existence? (Well past its sell by date I would think ). In light of the fact that the Scots and Welsh have made their decision about what devolution they wanted, its now time for the English people to have their say. If English people want a Parliament, and I do, then its a decision for us to make, and a decision the Scots and Welsh will have to live with, for they must have thought about the consequence of voting for their Parliaments and Assemblies when they did, and when they did they surely didn’t expect to vote something for themselves that they would seek to deny for others?

[Stephen]

What a cop-out - so Labour MPs from Scotland could still vote to impose top-up fees on English students if this was to happen under the new arrangements? The Tories have sold us out on this basic issue of democratic equality with Scotland, again.

[E Justice]

What is Ken Clark for?he is a traitor to his country that is if he is English, I am never sure, all he thinks about is Europe.
He is a yesterday man,time to go time.

[Iain]

"Cameron is to blame for this though."

As the saying goes, you select the person for the type of report you want. Selecting Clarke was always going to result in this lame anaemic solution, after all Clarke wants to turn Westminster into a County Council to the EU, so he was never going to look kindly on English people getting representation, when he is an advocate of balkanising England for his masters in Brussels.

So as we have seen Cameron has precious little liking of English people, seeing us as ‘sour faced little Englanders’ , so appoints Ken Clarke to come up with a report, the result is this report, satisfying Cameron and Clarke, but not English people, who neither have much regard for.

On Wednesday its St Georges day, its also PMQ’s, so will we see Cameron ask questions on behalf of English people, and have the first and only English Questions? I won’t hold my breath!

[John Ledbury]

I wonder why Clarke never became leader? If Cameron can't evolve a full blooded policy to satisfy English concerns about the current injustice he doesn't deserve to win any elections.

[Deborah]

"Labour MPs from Scotland could still vote to impose top-up fees on English students if this was to happen under the new arrangements" - Stephen

This should be the acid test and it seems that Ken Clarke's proposals fail hands down.

[Dave B]

I'm still hoping for the Direct Democracy solution to become Conservative policy; the responsibilities currently devolved to the Welsh Assembly/Scottish Parliament, to be devolved in England to the county councils/local gov't.

[James Matthews]

A classic Clarke fudge, from the wing of the party that brought us membershio of the ERM and which currently favours the Lisbon treaty.

Unless Cameron has the sense to go further, the only way back to a balanced constitution will be to get rid of Scotland, so, efectively, another victory for Alex Salmond.

[cjcjc]

Pathetic.
But, as others have observed, typical of Clarke.

[Man in a Shed]

This is lethal stuff for the Conservative party and for the Union. Fudging the issue and continuing the injustice that only the English should not be recognised as a nation is going to play very badly.

There will be an English parliament. Either the next Conservative government could bring it about in a federal and stable UK, or it will be all that is left after the Welsh, Scots and Irish keep demanding more power and money whilst denying the English the very same things.

The problem is a lack of vision and that the Conservative party thinks that one of two seats in Wales or Scotland are worth selling out its English base for.

[Simon Denis]

This is the sort of fudge which gives compromise a bad name. The plain fact is that without perfectly reciprocal arrangements, Scottish constituencies have no moral right to influence English legislation. Period. That perfect reciprocity was represented by the unitary Kingdom of 1707. 1997 saw it smashed. Timid half-measures of the sort Mr Clarke proposes simply avoid the issue. Doubtless his reasons will include the sheer preponderance of England in the Union - but the Scots should have thought of this before they pursued the business of devolution. England's relative size is no excuse for denying a transparent democracy to her electorate. Of course, being a Europhil, Mr Clarke will not care two hoots for the voter, but we should continue the long and virtuous policy of ignoring him. For all his undoubted brio and charisma, he is a damaging influence. Wilderness time for Clarke, I think.

[Chris]

Ken Clarke yet again proves why he was unfit to lead the party. Personally I feel it's time Ken was put out to pasture.

[Hardcore Conservative]

Ken Clarke and Co have made recommendations, it does not follow that Mr Cameron has to follow them. It would be useful though if Mr Cameron made it clear whether he supports Mr Clarke’s recommendations or Mr Rifkind’s.

Not only does Mr Cameron need to say who he takes more seriously on this, he must also offer a sound explanation as to why he does. Not saying anything will probably be more damaging than taking a line and defending it. There are after all a number of pro’s and cons on both sides of the argument and, like it or not ,we are where we are, so it is decision time by our leadership.

[Toque]

Oh dear, oh dear, this is shockingly poor.

The Conservatives, having first mentioned 'English Votes' in 1999, and having had it in the Conservative Manifesto since 2001 - when everyone told them it wouldn't work - now have a 'Democracy Task Force' that spends 21 months formulating this tripe.

Coming up for ten years of asymmetric democracy and they still can't come up with an answer.

I hope Labour win the next election; I'd rather be governed by an anglophobic Scot than a useless bunch of chinless English imbeciles.

Kiss my vote goodbye.

[Iain]

"The problem is a lack of vision and that the Conservative party thinks that one of two seats in Wales or Scotland are worth selling out its English base for."

The whole constitutional debate has been marked by the complete lack of vision from the Conservative party, and as a result of that our constitution has become the Labour party's plaything, with the Conservative Party waiting to be told what constitutional arrangement suits Labour, with the Conservative party looking fall into line behind that. A pathetic position for the supposed opposition party who have some desire to be the next Government, and dangerous for English people, as they find they have no voice what so ever in Parliament.

[RobD]

Its not often these days that I disagree with the direction the party is moving in, but this is just not good enough. It can hardly be seen as a compromise and I trust that Cameron will kick it into the long grass where it belongs, he has done it with other task force reports so I hope to see him do the same again.

[englandism.com]

Have we seen The Spectator?

http://www.spectator.co.uk

'England Rides Again'

Seems we are back in fashion. Here's 10p tax band Frank Field:

'The issue which should be obsessing Brown is whether the Tories are bright enough to jump out of today's unionist straitjacket with a claim to speak for England alone. While Brown has to make his new unionism work, Cameron has the much easier task of simply mounting a challenge on how devolution has so far cheated England.'

Or how about 'Shame on Scottish Tories for their Vichy sell-out'. Our brethren have whiffed the gravy and boarded the train.

I do hope that ConHome can run a piece this Wednesday providing the English perspective?

So far in time for St. George's Day we have had the most provocative jig related statement by Salmond so far and our party is about abandon England. Again.

[Geoff]

Its all going to go now we have a 10 point lead. No tax cuts, no reform of the NHS (see today's speech), no english votes for english laws, no real tightening of immigration rules

These are not the things you do when ten points ahead

[Iain]

" It would be useful though if Mr Cameron made it clear whether he supports Mr Clarke’s recommendations or Mr Rifkind’s. "

Why should the choice be between a rubbish proposal and a useless proposal?

If our useless representatives can't come up with a satisfactory proposal then its about time they let the people decide, give the English people the various options, from English parliament to Clarke’s lame fudge, and let them decide.

My betting is that they would vote for an English Parliament, which would ask the question why did none of our MP's present this case, and who exactly do they represent?

[MartinW]

I was interested in discovering who sits on Clarke's Democracy Task force, and thought it would be a simple matter of consulting the Conservative Party's website. But there seemes to be no information. Indeed a wider internet search has drawn a complete blank. Does anyone know who sits with Clarke on this task force?

[John]

Don't blame poor Ken, he is only doing what Cameron wants him to do after all is said and done. The cancer at the heart of the Conservative Party is Cameron and his hangers on!

[Idris Francis]

What else would anyone expect from Clarke? Putting him in charge of a democracy task force gave me the biggest laugh for years - until I started to cry.

The man has made it absolutely clear, through his support of the EU taking over everything, and his rejection of a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, that he (like Heath) has no time whatever for democracy.

[johnC]

If Cameron and Clarke really believe that Unionism is paramount, and reject the federal United Kingdom with 4 equal country/provincial parliaments which the rest of us have come to accept as the only realistic option following Scottish and Welsh devolution, why do they not have the courage to take their position to its logical conclusion and propose the abolition of the devolved assemblies altogether and a return to the status quo ante 1997 ?

[Alan S]

Mr Hare at 09:58 is spot on.

[David Jones]

Once again Ken Clarke is completely wrong on something. I'm not surprised. It's no wonder this man lost the leadership contest 3 times in a row, each time having fewer and fewer MPs backing him. Useless man. I hope Cameron ignores him and establishes that English Grand Committee (or something similar).

[Adrian Owens]

Anyone spending any length of time on the doorstep will understand that such a policy will lose votes.

English votes on English matters is messy, but I have yet to hear a credible alternative short of an English Parliament.

[tired and emotional]

Hang on. Be careful what you wish for. If outright Balkanisation is to be avoided - I prefer to be British than just English - then it will have to be us English who act like adults and take one for the team.

I loathe the ground Clarke walks on, but making the Westminster parliament act solely as the English parliament some of the time simply hands Salmond more weight when he asks for tax and revenue powers etc and speeds the wholesave separation of the nations.

Britain is greater than the sum of its parts, England is magnified by its association with Wales, Scotland and the other bit.

We need to swallow our anger and preserve the Union even if it comes at England's expense.

[Hardcore Conservative]

"Why should the choice be between a rubbish proposal and a useless proposal?"

In an ideal world it wouldn’t. Unless I am mistaken, however, Mr Cameron’s inner circle is either benefit of ideas on this subject or too frightened to look at it. So, probably, he will choose either Mr Clarke’s or Mr Rifkind’s recommendations. Not ideal I grant you but I think that is what it will boil down to.

As I say it is decision time for the leadership – what are they going to do? People have a right to know and soon.

[peterbuss]

Ken Clarke was in my view the best Tory Chancellor that we had fom 79-97. I would go so far as to say that if we had him now as Shadow Chancellor we would be 20 points ahead in the Polls - his presence would be far more reassuring to the general public and its that which will count whenever the election is held. He always seems to talk sense and has real depth whenever he is discussing the curent economic woes. For example he had a far more credible line from Day 1 on Nothern Rock than the shadow front bench pursued. And I say this as a strong supporter of Cameron - indeed someone who has returned to the Party because of his leadership.
The constitutoinal proposal seems emninently sensible to me.It preserves the integrity of the Union and also gives English M.P's the real power on English matters.Whats the problem for goodness sake.

[Iain]

"We need to swallow our anger and preserve the Union even if it comes at England's expense."

Why? What good is the Union if it relies on inequality for its existence?

[John Leonard]

Totally unacceptable and cowardly. I will say no more for now I'm too disgusted at this demonstration of total weakness.

[Terry]

Philip Johnston repeats the Government lie that an English Parliament would destroy the Union.

If someone wanted to split the UK, I would recommend they give three nations generous welfare provisions and have the forth nation pick up the bill. I would then suggest the other nations be given greater democratic powers to ensure these wrongs cannot be righted.

Those that deny equal treatment for England (including a Parliament) are threatening the Union. If that is their intent, they should admit it.

Why won't the Conservative party support English equality? It beggars belief!

[Iain]

I am sorry it doesn't preserve the integrity of the union, for it preservers the inequality of the current constitutional arrangement, which is highly divisive, and thus destructive to the Union. Neither does it give the necessary representation to English people, for as we have seen our so called 'representatives’ in Parliament have been nothing short of useless in looking after English peoples interests, for they have voted through one piece of discriminatory legislation to the cost of English people after another, putting their party loyalty above that of their constituents and collective English peoples interests. That is why we need an English executive, to gain a mandate from English people for what they want to do, and to be held accountable by the English people for what they have done.

[Chris Abbott]

So, with health apartheid, the West Lothian Question and Barnett Formula at the foremost of many English voters minds, the Tories decide that the Union comes first?

And those of us who are concerned are, according to David Cameron, "sour little Englanders"?

Try telling that to us poor souls dependent on the English NHS, Mr Privileged!

And David Cameron also talks of Scots blood in his veins.

Is there some kind of anti-English racism at work in the Conservative Party? It seems a bizarre concept - we all know that the English are not a race, but the last time I checked, charges of racism can be brought on grounds of nationality.

I would not have believed that the current state of affairs was possible even a few years ago.

[Mark Fulford]

Despite its length, the Telegraph article doesn’t explain the reported decision beyond saying that it’s approached from the perspective of an English constituent, who currently has less power to influence than a Scot.

I do not see how it’s possible to reasonably debate this report on the information currently available. Having said that, how many on this site are actually interested in reasoned, evidence based debate?

[johnC]

What possible constitutional justification could there be for giving Scottish, Welsh and Northern Ireland MPs a vote, but allowing only English MPs to propose
amendments ?
The whole proposal is ludicrous and unworkable. It is a ridiculous fudge of the issue. What would be the reaction of Scottish Assembly members if it was proposed that while MPs from other countries could vote on their bills, they would only be allowed to take the committee stage on their own ? You only have to transpose this proposal into the Scottish context to see how absurd it is. Why should the English put up with such an insult from that fat oaf Clarke ?

[Peter]

There is one proposal that has been largely ignored by the Tories and I'm very surprised that its not been mentioned or debated more often.

John Redwood MP's solution:

Abolish separately elected Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish devolved bodies. Instead have dual role MP's at Westminster - All MP's debate UK issues and then English, Scot, Welsh and Ulster MP's debate their own nation's issues on separate days.

I would favour complete abolition of devolution and I am a Scot living in Glasgow.

However, John Redwood's idea is a fair compromise in my opinion.

Its time that us Scottish Conservatives stood up to be counted and campaigned for abolishing devolution and the Scottish Parliament.

Don't listen to the separatist policies of Goldie and the Holyrood Tories, they've been a disaster.

Abolishing devolution is the only way forward.

We are British, let's be proud to be British and have one parliament for one country and for one glorious people.

[englandism.com]

Posted by: Peter | April 21, 2008 at 14:34

Yes, with you there all the way but.

The genie is out of the bottle and there are now too many vested interests in Edinburgh and Cardiff to squash him back in. Just think how King Salomond would react to losing his toys?

The only way to solve this is with four legislatures with a British senate. John Redwood is really just over complicating the same outcome.

Ken Clarke is over complicating a different and meaningless outcome.

[Derek W. Buxton]

Why did Cameron give the job to Ken Clarke, a non democrat, and certainly no conservative. He is an EU worker, bought and no doubt handsomely paid. The Union should be maintained but the devolution broke it. England cannot break that which is already destroyed.
Funny though that the EU has not been mentioned, they are behind this whole scandal. They set out to split the union and destroy England with the Regional assemblies. With the aid of our politicians they are succeeding. The whole thing stinks to high heaven.

[Jonathan]

This is appalling. We are throwing away not just a trick but the game

I was going to vote English Democrat in London after their excellent political broadcast and then transfer to Boris. Now I am not going to transfer and waste my vote.

England deserves equal treatment with Scotland. Justice demands it. This is an act of betrayal. It is politically stupid. No one gains from this but the Labour Party and the unimaginative consciences of a few Col Blimp Unionists stuck in a 1970s grovel to Scotland for so long they can't straighten up.

If this is what its going to be like under a Cameron government, its not going to be worth the wait. Better he loses so we can get someone who will make a difference when we win. Victory is conservative laws, not extra Conservative MPs like Clarke.

[Alan.S]

Perhaps a useful solution would be that for matters that affect only England but where a similar decision has been made in Scotland or Wales (such as University fees) then the non-English member's votes must be the same as their devolved government's decision.
It is only right that they should vote the same in Parliament as they do at 'home on bills that do not directly affect them. This will also remove any perceived bias on England only issues

[Toque]

Does anyone know who sits with Clarke on this task force?

Ferdinand Mount
Laura Sandys
Andrew Tyrie MP
Rt Hon Sir George Young Bt MP

George Young is the prat that came up with EVoEL in the first place.

[Tangent]

I agree with Ken Clarke, although I disagree about the solution. In the long run, regional government is the best way to save the Union, and can be interpreted with a great deal of flexibility - giving individual regions the power to change their boundaries and devolve powers to county or city level if they really need to.

[Toque]

Tangent,

Good luck with regional government in Scotland. Do you think it should be split into Highlands - Lowlands, or East Coast - West Coast?

Or are you suggesting that everyone should have national government BUT the English?