« Project Cameron's key achievements: The renewal of the party's one nation tradition | Main | The EU Treaty in plain English »

Comments

David, you said “…one of the barriers to dealing with it is that unlike Scotland, and to a much leser extent Wales, there is not the same level of 'national' coherence in England.”

Absolutely, demonstrably, untrue! England is by far the most homogenous nation in the UK, Politically, economically, historically and culturally.

Compare industrial, modern south Wales to touristy north Wales. Edinburgh has more in common with London and Manchester than it does the Western Isles and the Highlands that are Celtic in language and culture.

England is Europe’s oldest nation state whereas Wales has not existed as such, pre 1998. Scotland was always torn between the Catholic Highlands and the Protestant lowlands (Glasgow was the first British city to close its gates on Bonnie Prince Charlie). Apart from the civil war, which was more between Parliament and Crown, England has not seen such turmoil within itself.

At least we speak the same language in England.

"Absolutely, demonstrably, untrue! England is by far the most homogenous nation in the UK, Politically, economically, historically and culturally. "

The north-south divide in England is just as marked, if not more so, as those you have mentioned. And if you really want to argue that Yorkshire and Lancashire see themselves as homogenous then be my guest (I'm not even going to start on Cornwall)......

"Absolutely, demonstrably, untrue! England is by far the most homogenous nation in the UK, Politically, economically, historically and culturally. "

The north-south divide in England is just as marked, if not more so, as those you have mentioned. And if you really want to argue that Yorkshire and Lancashire see themselves as homogenous then be my guest (I'm not even going to start on Cornwall)......

David, you also said “There are some issues with funding… you'd struggle to find a country that does not spend proportionately more of its money in areas which are relatively worse off.”

Yes, but you’d struggle even more to find a country that spends most money (excluding NI) on its third richest region, ie. Scotland.

If you want to split the UK just give three nations generous welfare provisions, get one nation to pay for it (and put up with a second class health/education service) and give the other nations greater democratic powers to ensure these wrongs cannot be righted.

Those that oppose an English Parliament are threatening the Union. If that is their intent, they should admit it.

"a country that spends most money (excluding NI) on its third richest region, ie. Scotland"

Aside from the issue of excluding bits that don't meet your case, how many regions are we talking about here?

Because if it's a case of England, Scotland, Wales (and excluding NI as you wish), then the third richest region is the poorest........

David
As regards the homogeneity of Scotland, may I commend to you a sojourn on "The Scotsman" comment threads.

Over a period of time you will perceive stark distinctions between nationalists and unionists and, within each, an interplay of antagonisms between Highland & Lowland, both v Central Belt, and east v west Central Belt, along with a myriad of further sub-divisions.

I participated for a while in the run-up to the Holyrood elections in May (and still occasionally do so) and if you feel that this present CH thread is boisterous, well, you ain't seen nuffink!

"England is under threat as a nation"
‘It isn't at all.’

Here’s some starters for ten:

Regional assemblies. Prescott tried and failed in the North East via the electorate. He imposed them anyway. They are unelected and unaccountable.

The British Irish Council: British and Irish Governments, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales, and Jersey, Guernsey and the Isle of Man.

No England. No participation.

‘BBC Nations and Regions’

No England. Ask yourself, is Ulster a nation or is it a region of England?

Then ask yourself why England has been instructed to fly the Union flag but Scotland has been exempted?

The scottish and the jews have alot to anwer for. We need a a change to the new world order. The lizzard people must be removed and their slaves the jews and the socttish must be removed they know that they are luaghed by the lizzard people.
If cameron is of Scottish blud he must be removed and replcaed by a pure one. Not one more drop of scith blud must enter out land.

"Regional assemblies. Prescott tried and failed in the North East via the electorate. He imposed them anyway. They are unelected and unaccountable"

Questionable democracy sure. Ironic really; regional assemblies may have reduced some of the democratic deficit you are complaining about. The fact that they were resoundingly rejected in England shows a rather distinct lack of worry.

"The British Irish Council: British and Irish Governments, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales, and Jersey, Guernsey and the Isle of Man.

No England. No participation."

Because England is represented by the British government and to say it has no participation is ridiculous. The others have their own legislatures or executives distinct from that of the British one. This is not that much of a problem, as generally due to the size of England it's much more identifiable with the actions of the British Parliament.

"Then ask yourself why England has been instructed to fly the Union flag but Scotland has been exempted?"

Because it was a spectacularly inept action by the Brown government who failed to realise that under devolution they couldn't do what they said.

None of these show that England is at risk as a nation. Hyperbole of the most ridiculous order, and not really a way to get people to support any attempt to deal with the WLQ.

Andrew Lilico,
"I do not recognise an English identity"
And I'll tell you why this is possible, The English being the most tolerant of the four "nations" involved in the Union entered the Union with all their heart and soul, the other three with much reluctance. The English were willing to divest themselves of "English" nationhood in favour of a greater "nationhood" that was Great Britain. That tolerance is now being sorely tested, if the Scots, Welsh and N. Irish wish to rekindle their sense of nationhood, good for them. England is a nation, always has been, always will be. Take your head out of the sand and take a look around. "Englishness", having been sacrificed on the altar of the European Union and seemingly, denied by the other constituent member countries of the UK, is on the rebound, get used to it.

David,
Britain is not represented at the British-Irish Council, Britain is not even mentioned just like England.
The British-Irish Council was established under the Agreement reached in Belfast on Good Friday 1998, it's members are;
The United Kingdom.
ireland.
Wales.
Scotland.
Northern Ireland.
Guernsey.
jersey.
The Isle of Man.
Lifted verbatim from the B-IC website.
Please point to where England is represented.
Please don't say the UK otherwise one must assume that since Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are represented separately The UK consists soley of England.

Thank you for clarifying that. Britain is England. Don’t panic everyone, England is represented by Britain.

Great Britain is the geographical term for the largest island in the British Isles. Britain includes Scotland and Wales but not Northern or Southern Ireland whereas the United Kingdom includes various bits and bobs as a political construct rather than a geographical name for an accumulation of various bits and bobs.

So are we talking about geography or politics? Is England the British Isles and/or the United Kingdom?

Scotland is British and part of the United Kingdom (it is where the term comes from 1707) which logically means that England is therefore Scotland.

Or something.

David, I excluded NI because that is one region where it does make sense to put in more money. You then said “Because if it's a case of England, Scotland, Wales (and excluding NI as you wish), then the third richest region is the poorest........”

I have read this many times and it still doesn’t make sense. Were you thinking that “England” was counted as a “region”? If so I understand where you went wrong.

Scotland and Wales are counted as a single region each. England is divided into nine nations. So the third richest region received the second largest per capita handout… out of twelve regions. The North East, West, Midlands, Wales et al are all far more deserving than Edinburgh.. but not under this settlement. Does that seem fair and equitable to you?

You also seem to suggest that the NE should have gone for regionalisation, because it would have reduced the democratic deficit. No, no, no (as someone once famously said), we want equality and nothing less!

Can you please outline why you think we should not be equal with the rest of the UK?

er, that was meant to say England is divided into nine regions, not "nations". I must have been listening to Broon for too long.

No, no, no (as someone once famously said), we want equality and nothing less!

Good work Terry.

Or as Cromwell once said when an English Parliament existed once upon a time:

'Necessity hath no law'

To those who dismiss Scottish devolution as just an ethnic variant of ordinary local government, may I suggest a browse on The Scotsman website:

http://news.scotsman.com/politics.cfm?id=1234052007

"...Direct political contact with other countries has already been given a higher profile under the new Holyrood regime with the creation of an external affairs role within the Office of the First Minister....

...In a recent exclusive interview with The Scotsman, Scotland's top civil servant said officials were prepared for a greater emphasis on international relations under the SNP regime... ‘…We already have a directorate concentrating on international relationships. It would be easy for that directorate to evolve as the scale of our work develops.’..."

Some local authority!

It's great to see politicians voicing an idea that has been bouncing around the public domain for a while (even my Welsh husband thought it was a good idea). But at what point is the concept going to reach the ears and eyes of the general public rather than just those politically motivated enough to trawl the web looking for these nuggets.

The present government seem to believe that they can ignore calls for an English Parliament because there simply isn't enough interest from the general public... but until this becomes a mainstream debate they cannot know what the will of the people is in this matter.

Is Mr Field going to use his position to push the debate out of political blogs and into the mainstream media?

@Saz Lavender. Yes.

Is Mr Field going to use his position to push the debate out of political blogs and into the mainstream media?

It is getting there. The English card will be played. Interestingly, on the Labour benches, another Mr Field (Frank) has endorsed the need for an English settlement.

I find the whole Scots can be Scots, Welsh can be Welsh but English have to be British totally rascist, are the English not allowed to exist like the other nations of the UK do?

Posted by: Simon Cumiskey

Hear hear well said that man.

"You know, the one with the scottish blood in his veins! He is a stooge."

What an absolutely distasteful comment. Some of the views expressed here are absolutely ridiculous and bordering on very nasty territory indeed.

Posted by: David

Where as you are no doubt one of our nations do-gooders and so PC that you cannot accept
that being English and proud of it is for
some strange reason considered racist.

I really don't know how this came in to being but can only assume it gathered momentum as did many of the things now
plaguing our green and pleasant land,
from the start of our ascent in to
multiculturalism in the early years after WW2 back in the 20th century.

Its really odd how immigrants from our former colonies seem content to live
in Scotland,Northern Ireland or Wales
and consider themselves Scots,Irish or
Welsh,and yet if they live in England
then they are British because being English
is distasteful and in some odd way racist.

There has been and continues to be a clever
marketing campaign going on here to undermine the concept of being English and to blame everything from our colonial past to recent events such as the
arrest of Shambo from his Skanda Vale sanctuary in Carmarthenshire on England.

The fact that local government and the judiciary in India was run by Scots
seems to have escaped the attention of
the masses in our former colonies in much the same way that many of the oldest trading houses based in Hong Kong are also from
Scotland.

The notion often seen from the SNP and the
WNP that only England benefited from Empire
is absolute nonsense although unknown to
the vast majority of UK voters.

In short its not always the fault of the
English when things don't go well for the commonwealth as it now is and its not racist to be proud to be English.

Its simply a matter of equal rights within
the Union and of being proud to be forever
England.

Saz said “The present government seem to believe that they can ignore calls for an English Parliament because there simply isn't enough interest from the general public... but until this becomes a mainstream debate they cannot know what the will of the people is in this matter.”

This Government’s answer to the English question, is to not ask it and hope it goes away.

I am pleased to say however that there is enormous support for an English Parliament (1 & 2) and opposition to regionalism (3). Even Blair admitted it (4).

This is a phenomenal show of heartfelt, groundswell opinion, especially when one considers that there has been no newspaper campaign, nor political party pushing the agenda. The growth in support for this idea has come about by word of mouth.

A national campaign would reap great rewards for the party that has the courage to make it their own. Is this to be the Conservatives?

1 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6264823.stm
2 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/11/26/nunion26.xml
3 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3984387.stm
4 http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/ViewArticle.aspx?SectionID=55&ArticleID=1900767

Scotland and Wales are counted as a single region each.
Both vary hugely - much of North Wales and much of the Scottish Borders, much of Edinburgh, Southern Highlands are filthy rich; then there are the Welsh Valleys, parts of Cardiff & Swansea, parts of the West of Scotlands, Western Isles, parts of the Scottish Lowlands that are very deprived - too much UK spending is focused on London, too much Scottish spending goes to Edinburgh and Glasgow, too much money in the North West goes to Central Manchester and Central Liverpool etc... etc....

EDM 1204 is about making St Georges day
a public holiday in England.

'That this House looks forward to celebrating St. George's Day on Monday 23rd April; believes that the day of England's patron saint is an opportunity for all the people of England to celebrate their country's heritage, culture and traditions; calls upon Her Majesty's Government to mark the occasion by ensuring that the Cross of St. George flag is flown from all public buildings on this day; encourages local authorities, schools, organisations and businesses to do likewise; and further calls upon all hon. Members to support the campaign to establish 23rd April as an annual public holiday for England in celebration of the country's great achievements, pride and history'.

Mark Field MP has signed as has my local
Labour MP Louise Ellman.

To all those posting here I have one question.....

Has your local MP signed ?

http://edmi.parliament.uk/EDMi/EDMDetails.aspx?EDMID=32961

While I accept that the EU wanted to salami slice us up (and I am not a supporter of the EU) I really worry about those who are so obsessed with the EU that they can't even think rationally about how Britain might be ordered. It's ironic that there are those who wish to prevent Britain's own will to decide what it wants because they are so paranoid they always think its an EU plot! Equally I really don't like the sound of some of the nationalism that is bubbling away, whichever part of the UK it is coming from. Nationalism can all too easily become something very nasty in which people try to define themselves as better because they are not another tribe. That would signal a country beginning to go dangerously backward. There is no doubt that Blairs botched devolution settlement made this worse but by far the main driving force of late has been sections of the media behaving totally irresponsibly,

Matt

I would have to give the result to those opposed to David et/al, whose comments do seem to have dried up as the argument put forward by those opposed obviously became superior to theirs.

I really find it quite interesting to read comments by people who contend that Scotland be deserving of special treatment, ie the Barnett formula, due to the deprivation there within.

I spent thirty years of my working life in the W/Highlands, as a sporting and stock holding estate manager, throughout the seventies and until 2003. During that time there never was any sign of depression outside of some of the poorer parts of Glasgow/Edinburgh and possibly Dundee. At no stage throughout the late eighties and through the ninties did we witness a drastic fall in house price values, in fact in the Highlands the prices never ceased to rise, even through the worst times of the depression, that affected England severely.

I and my family resided in an area that Scots, mostly, refused to inhabit, in fract many made it plain to us that they considered us mad to live in area that always suffered drought in dry summers ( oh yes they were not too infrequent) and got cut off almost each and every winter, sometimes for months on end! This always wrankled whenever we heard mention of the B/Formula, awarded, supposedly to the Scots for the harsher conditions ( one reason ) with which they had to contend.

When ninety nine per cent of them lived urbanly or coastal, the latter mainly in detached houses and with ample land to enjoy large comfortable gardens.

The NHS, schooling and quality of life are all at a better standard for the Scots, how do I know: I and my family benifitted from all of them for thirty plus years.

David, Mr Lirico, etc and all others so bent on preserving the 'Union!' should aqcuaint themselves with fact rather than fiction when voicing their fixated views. They have not the right to pontificate to others, views of their own without having experienced what they themselves are claiming to be valid reasons for the retainment of the UK or whatever anyone wishes to name it anymore. They ought to realise without any need for doubt that it is the Scots: Politicians, media and people who have started the ball rolling that will lead to the disintegration of not only the UK but of the concept of Greater Britain also.

As long ago as 1971 I listened, and argued with, agents/agitators in Scotland claiming that independence for Scots and the recently discoverd N/sea oil bonanza was the desired way for them to go.

They are with the help of Brown and all those other signatories from 1988, well on the way to achieveing that goal, god haste them on their way.......

Andrew [email protected]:38 07/08:

Apologies if in the brevity of my previous response I failed to make my point clear.

I believe in the Union and believe that we do not need to submit to the political fragmentation of the English Nation to continue that Union. Quite Frankly, your argument sounds like one that a Labour politician would use.

I will reiterate my previous point in different terms. If I am forced to make the choice between the Union and retaining a united political structure for my country of birth then I will always choose my country of birth.

I will not support any political party that would politically split England and I suggest to you that if the Conservatives ever supported such a stance that they would be finished as a serious party in England.

With little support in Scotland and still in the early stages of rebuilding in Wales they would be finished as a party altogether if they tried such a stance.

If you are right, and the Union breaks up, it will be sad to no longer be able to wax lyrical about Scottish & Welsh successes in the major sporting events such as the World (Football, Rugby and Cricket) Cups, The Champions League and so forth. We will just have to accept those little successes that England and English teams might achieve and reminisce about Wilkins J., Charlton B., Moore, Hutton, Botham and Cowdrey.

It will also be sad not to consider, as our own, such great men as Smith and Watt (as I often do). We will just have to console ourselves with Churchill, Wellington, Nelson, Newton, Shakespeare, Tennyson, Turner, Constable and Brunel to name just a few.........

To All:

On a slightly related matter it occurred to me:

Charles I, James II, Gordon The Pretender...

Does anyone else see a pattern here?

John

Yes indeed, England will have to contend with its miserly record when it comes to shaping the modern world. Such things as…

- industrialisation, the Derby’s foundry in Shropshire
- the English language, a cast of thousands
- the jet engine, Whittle
- the steam engine, Newcomen
- the Steam locomotive, Stephenson
- the electronic computer, Tommy Flowers’ Colossus

To think, we can’t count the likes of Scotland’s football team and the Crankies as one of our own! Sigh.

Don't forget Tim Berners-Lee, the Englishman who just happened to invent this little thing known as the world wide web...

The Labour Party has broken up the UK, now only England requires the Parliament that completes the final act.

phil taylor

'They ought to realise without any need for doubt that it is the Scots: Politicians, media and people who have started the ball rolling that will lead to the disintegration of not only the UK but of the concept of Greater Britain also'.

How true and I have also experienced similar
over the last 20 or so years as I traveled
on business across Scotland.

'The Labour Party has broken up the UK, now only England requires the Parliament that completes the final act'.

Equally so and one wonders if Blair although
with an English seat and a polished accent
came to power with his fellow Scotsmen like
Brown determined to break the Union.

Brown could well be leader of a Federal
Britain / UK but in no way should he be
leader of England without an English seat.

Its almost conquest via the back door without a shot being fired.

At the end of the day the Tories need to get off the fence and elect a leader prepared to make the tough choices and lead England first and a Union if one is to exist second.

If the Tories are not prepared to do this then step aside and let the EDP do it for them as we and many others will not surrender until we have an English Parliament and control over our own affairs.

If that puts the final nail in a coffin we never constructed and sees the end of the
Union then so be it as the Union does not seem to matter at all to any voters
from Wales,Northern Ireland or Scotland who have been so obviously absent in this debate.

How wonderfull to have Englishman Mark Feild show his colours for ENGLAND. I too would vote for the ENGLISH DEMOCRATIC PARTY, but their is no candidate standing in Cheltenham unfortunately.

One thing is certain though,that unless the Conservatives make their voices heard,loud and clear, (that the usually tollerant/ fair English people have had enough of this influx of Anti ENGLISHNESS ie The MacDowning St clan,) they will certinly loose the English elections and will have only themselves to blame for not listening to the English voters instead of `cowtowing` to everyone else.
The indigenous English have had their Human Rights violated time and time again:

Artical 7: Indigenous peoples have the collective and individual right not to be subjected to ethnocide and cultural genocide, including prevention and redress for:
(a) any action which has the aim of depriving them of their integrity as a distinct peoples, or of their cultural values or ethnic identities
Artical 8:Indigenous peoples have the collective and individual right to maintain and develop their distictive identities and charactoristics, including the right to identify themselves as such in accordance with the traditions and customs.
The BBC and the English MP`s would do well to look at the Human Rights Legislation.

The ENGLISH Nation must stand up and demand OUR HUMAN RIGHTS as never before. Every one else has.
Fly our National St Georges Cross and badge in our lapels with pride.

PETER D.GRANVILLE-EDMUNDS

At last an honest politician with the guts to speak his mind and with clear ideas as to how the wrongs currently suffered by the English could be righted. Perhaps Mark should get together with his namesake, and equally sensible colleague from the other side of the house, Frank Field, who is also campaigning on behalf of the oppressed English. I wish we could persuade both these gentlemen to cut loose from their useless hidebound parties and defect to the English Democrats - the only party committed to bringing about an English Parliament

"You know, the one with the scottish blood in his veins! He is a stooge."

What an absolutely distasteful comment.

Posted by: David | August 08, 2007 at 07:43

Firstly, I note that you said NOTHING about me calling him a stooge. I wonder why?

It was an absolutely irrelevant and ridiculous comment; not a distasteful one. You should complain to Cameron if you have a problem.
However, it does definitely indicate how Cameron feels about himself. Oh, he is so proud of his scotch blood. I gather from his comment that he thinks he's scottish!

David, if you have concerns about David Cameron's quotes, you should e-mail him; you should definitely not attempt to slag me off! I was after all, merely pointing out what HE said! He! he!
I don't think you care what Cameron says, I think it was just the chance you needed to try and tar all pro-English posters in this thread? Wasn't it? By the way, it was a very amateur attempt! Us English folk can smell a loony left hypocritical bigot at 1,000 yards. Yes David, YARDS not metres!


David

'Some of the views expressed here are absolutely ridiculous and bordering on very nasty territory indeed.'

Yes, Jack Straw has made the very same point in trying to entirely avoid even thinking about the issue.

As above, England is under threat as a nation and up with this we will not put.

Matt 23:17:

"I have to laugh at those who think Wales and Scotland are doing better on Englands money eg re the NHS."

I was born in Scotland, I've worked in the Scottish NHS, my family has had recent direct experience of both Scottish (broken hip) & English (maternity) NHS.

It's absolutely clear to me that the NHS in Scotland is far, far better funded.

Posted by: Simon Newman | August 08, 2007 at 09:10


"Jack Straw has made the very same point"

David:

"Then he's absolutely right. Referring to people's 'blood' has horrific antecendents"

Reply:
No, Jack Straw is not correct about the English. Jack Straw is a dubious individual. I always think of a weasel when his name comes up. I wonder why?
I want to know why Jack Straw hasn't come out and condemned David [I have scotch blood in my viens don't you know] Cameron seeing as he feel so strongly about right wing views! If ever Jack Straw of new labour had a chance to attack the tories about their supposed views then this was it. So, why didn't he speak up?

David, Cameron referred to his own ancestors.

David, what do your posts have to do with anti-English discrimination? Nothing! Oh for crying out loud, can't you people debate the issue instead of trying to force the debate onto other superfluous tripe?

Like I said David, if you have a problem with "scotch" David Cameron's comments e-mail him!


"England is under threat as a nation"

This is correct!

David:

"...there is not the same level of 'national' coherence in England..."

Oh David, you go from whining about "Scotch" David Cameron to deciding all on your own that "...there is not the same level of 'national' coherence in England..."!
"National coherance"? Ha! ha! The old rubbish that somehow the scots and welsh are more conscious of being nations than the English are and somehow, they care more about their country than the English do. Wrong again!
We know why you're stating this David. You are scared of a resurgent English nation. You are scared of an English nation that decides for itself! No more free handouts?
Firstly, how dare you think you have the right to decide what we think. You are displaying the well-known arrogance associated with your countrymen David. And if not, you're doing a great job impersonating Blair, Darling and Brown!

Talking of national coherance David, what were the results of the votes for the welsh and scottish devolved institutions? In other words, how many people in scotland and wales voted for their respective political institutions?

"...the Scotland Act 1978 became law in 1978. The Act required that 40% of the Scottish electorate (not just of those who voted) had to support the Act for it to come into force. In the referendum of 1 March 1979, the devolution scheme was supported only 33% of the electorate.

Only 33% David. They even got a head start at 40%. National cohesion David?

In 1997:

Agree: 1,775,054 (74.30%) (44% of electorate)

Disagree: 614,400 (25.70%)
(Only 60% turnout)

The Welsh assembly referendum held in September 1997 saw a narrow vote in favour of devolution didn't it David? 9 September 1997: The result of the poll is announced. It is a Yes vote, but only just. The margin in favour is only 6,721. 6721 David? Imagine that. There are millions of English people saying they want their parliament back and you lot wont have it. Yet, 6721 welsh people more voted for an assembly and you lot can't wait to celebrate it. It puts it in perspective - your bigotry I mean.


What were the results in the 1970's? the referendum held on 1 March 1979 - St David's Day - resulted in a resounding four-to-one vote AGAINST devolution for Wales didn't it David? Talk about no national cohesion!

David:

"The majority identify with their region/county rather than England as a whole."

Tell me, what evidence can you post to prove this theory of yours? That is all it is after all. It's your bigoted opinion that's all. I identify with my county AND my country! Just like most English people do.
And what do you mean, "identify with their region"? There have never been regions in England. Never. It's all an invention! Counties are another thing entirely.
American colonists’ collective memory of English county organization had roots nearly a millennium deep. When years still had only three digits, English kings had divided the country into districts called shires, a nomenclature that survives today in such place names as Yorkshire and Hampshire. Essex = East Saxons Wessex = West Saxons East Anglia = East Angles Middlesex = Middle Saxons North Humber land - Angles north of the river Humber


"...the pressures that could create such a coherence are largely absent"

Ha! ha! What rot. By "pressures" I take it you mean that the English aren't attacked enough as a group to become cohesive? What a lie. We are attacked constantly. Er, that's why we are all here arguing with you David. Quite ironically, people like you make us more cohesive. I bet you can't even understand what I mean. Well, that's one of the problems with attacking entire groups. You can't win. If you don't attack; they don't feel apprehension/anxiety; if you do they get their backs up and retaliate. You can't win jimmy!

"England makes up a good 90% of the UK with the result that it is much easier to correspond to the overall 'national' politic in a way that smaller administrative regions may not, however unjustifiable the latter view may be"

Unjustifiable! There David, you admitted it. Thanks! You just indirectly stated that in your view, it's okay to attack the English nation and deny the English people equal treatment. You also admitted that you agree that the English shouldnt have self-determination. What a bigot you are. Not only that, you're a fascist in the tradition of Mussolini, Saddam Hussein and Idi Amin.

"There are some issues with funding, but there are relatively minor"

Liar!
From the Scotsman newspaper:
"The [Barnett formula] has [consistently] delivered higher per-head spending in Scotland than in England. [UK] Government spending on public services such as health and education is about £1,500 per head higher [in scotland than England]

A "minor" issue ah David? Notice that the scotsman stated "in scotland"; not in some parts of scotland. The Barnett formula was started to fund "poorer" areas of scotland; not all of it!
In the 1970's/80's/90/s I seem to remember scots whining about how "the English" exploited them; it's funny how I NEVER heard any belly aching about the Barnett formula! Oh no, they kept very quiet about it. I wonder why? Fascist!


"You'd struggle to find a country that does not spend proportionately more of its money in areas which are relatively worse off."

We're not talking about anywhere else so your comment trying to justify the anti-English Barnett formula is irrelevant. Besides the UK is not a country any longer. Not when scotland has a parliament that makes 75% of it's own business. How is the UK a country? It isn't!

"In fact the area with the largest per head spending is Northern Ireland, then Scotland"

Are you saying that this justifies scotland getting more money than England? How pathetic!

"Much of the comment here is reminiscent of some Scots complaining that it wasn't fair they had to put up with Margaret Thatcher despite not returning a Conservative majority of MPs; one wonders whether many of those here would accept that"

Liar! The comment is not "reminiscent" of Scots complaining about Thatcher! No UK government of the past has EVER acted towards scotland like the present supposed
UK government
IS acting towards England! It just hasnt happened. You are a liar! There has never been an entirely English-dominated UK government that has refused scots (and only scots) cancer drugs. There has never been an English-dominated UK government that has denied scottish students the same treatment as other students. That's just two things I can bring up.


Posted by: David | August 08, 2007 at 09:19

David | August 08, 09:19
"..Referring to people's 'blood' has horrific antecendents."

References in this thread stemmed from the quote of DC "..I’m a Cameron, there is quite a lot of Scottish blood flowing through these veins."

Come on English MPs, stand up for your constituents and don't allow this unfair and undemocratic situation to continue. Like Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, England must have its own parliament.

"Regionalism is proceeding as never before in England, actually calling into question, England itself" - Charles Kennedy.

"England is nothig more than a collection of Regions" - The late and unlamented Robin Cook.

"There is no such thing as an English nation" - The Scottish Raj at Westminster

England has a Scottish Prime Minister who has no remit over devolved matters in his own country, elected by Scottish constituents and therefore unaccountable to the people over whom most of his policies will affect. Gordon Brown, England's unelected, de facto First Minister has no mandate in England.

Yet, the Tories who could have had a field day at PMQs over this matter said nothing. Since devolution, the Conservative Party has said and done nothing to challenge the asymmetric devolution settlement that has placed England at democratic, political, social and economic disadvantage.

By pandering to Scotland and shamelessly trying to improve their electoral chances there, they have betrayed their core vote strength, which is Middle England. Not only are the Tories finished in Scotland, they are becoming an electoral handicap in England also.

Given the lukewarm, cavalier attitude of English politicians (of all parties) to England and the English by refusing to acknowledge and redress the injustice of asymmetric devolution, by not opposing the state sponsered racist, discrimination against the English, I believe that it is now time for the English themselves to take our country back and restore our rightful status as a nation.

If that means English independence, then so be it.

England is being dismantled covertly right across the spectrum and yet we are expected to simply sit here and take it.

There have been rumours for some time that Scottish regiments serving with the
British Army were said to have handed out leaflets at the start of the current Iraq
war claiming they were Scottish and not English and that they came in peace.

Recently I saw an advertisement for the Scottish branch of the Army Benevolent fund
which showed a British Army armoured vehicle racing across what looked like a desert flying the cross of St Andrew.

I realise Scotland has been given the right to fly its flag rather than the Union Jack on some buildings at specific times,but,I was unaware that Scotland now had the right to fly its flag on British Military Equipment.

If this is now to be the case then is the British Army also going to be flying the English flag,the Cross of St George on its vehicles also ?

Two days ago the BBC aired a slot about the
new Royal Navy Type 45 destroyer HMS Dauntless which was built on the Clyde.

http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/ConWebDoc.7847

Odd that there should be 3000 jobs on the
Clyde building new ships for the Royal Navy
and only 600 jobs in Portsmouth one of the
Royal Navy's oldest dock yards.

One could get the impression that the Scots MP's governing England from Westminster were making sure that if they did have to leave they already had a Navy and Army to go.

Not to mention where our nuclear submarine deterrent was moored most of the time....

The comments to this entry are closed.

#####here####

Categories

ConHome on Twitter

    follow me on Twitter

    Conservative blogs

    Today's public spending saving

    New on other blogs

    • Receive our daily email
      Enter your details below:
      Name:
      Email:
      Subscribe    
      Unsubscribe 

    • Tracker 2
    • Extreme Tracker