“I believe the Speaker of the House of Commons should rule on each bill on whether it applies only to England and Wales. If so, only MPs from England and Wales should vote on it. That will be better than creating an English Parliament. This is the long-term policy work that the Conservatives need to do over the next few years — of how to make devolution work properly for the people in Scotland and for people in the rest of the UK.” - David Cameron
“Only the appropriate MPs should vote. The Scottish MPs would not. Once you get the democratic deficit sorted out, most English people will be happy with that and I do not think the Barnett formula [the Treasury mechanism by which the Scottish block grant is calculated and which gives Scotland a higher per head proportion of Government spending] is important to them.” - David Davis
We learn these policy positions are taken from today's Times. Both candidates are in Scotland today for a Hustings in Perth. Oberon Houston will be reporting from that meeting later today. The candidates visit Scotland at a time when the party north of the border is scoring just 16% in opinion polls.
David Cameron and David Davis both support the Scottish party's freedom to offer income tax cuts. The devolution settlement allows the Edinburgh parliament to set income tax rates up to 3% lower or higher than for the rest of the UK. The ruling Labour-Liberal Democrat coalition has not yet chosen to exercise that freedom.
The Times notes that Mr Cameron holidays on the Scottish island of Jura every year. "The quality of the peace and quiet you get is fantastic,” he is reported as saying. Mr Cameron has Scottish roots with his father - Ian Donald Cameron - having been born in Scotland. The Times also reveals that "the name Cameron is derived from the Scottish Gaelic for “crooked nose”."
Annabel Goldie MSP - the new leader of Scotland's Tories - has declined to endorse a candidate: “Both these men offer to me an attractive prospect.”
Given the answers of Ted and Hotspur the answer then seems clear.
Calculate a budget for Scotland without the Barnett formula but replaced with the small oil revenues they will acquire and then offer it to the people of Scotland as either being in the Union (no Parliament) or independence.
No idea what the outcome of the budget changes might be but I bet they do not look too appealing.
Posted by: Kevin Davis | 21 November 2005 at 18:12
I thought the principle that all mineral rights are vested in The Crown pre-dated the Act of Union 1707.
It would appear therefore that James VI of Scotland must have transferred those rights to James I of England in 1603.
Of course John Major stupidly returning The Stone of Scone to Scotland in 1996 when Edward Longshanks had gone to such trouble to bring in to London. Complete inability to sustain tradition - the problem with Conservatives generally.
Posted by: Rick | 21 November 2005 at 18:40
Having the stone in Westminster was a symbol of oppression and highly inappropriate.
Devolution is here to stay so I think the current situation will prevail. I can't think of anything preventing MPs from voting on a particular matter.
Posted by: wasp | 22 November 2005 at 10:54
re James Hellyer & the Barnet formula.
Is it not right that richer areas of the country should contribute extra to boost services in poorer parts. There are some parts of Glasgow with a life expectancy of about 65? compared to over 80 in Dorset.
Added to which the cost of providing education, healthcare, transport etc in the Highlands is huge because of the massive distances that have to be travelled.
Not necessarily a defense of the Barnet Formula but Scotland does need more money than its equivalent population in London.
Posted by: wasp | 22 November 2005 at 10:58
Having the stone in Westminster was a symbol of oppression and highly inappropriate.
The Monarch resides in London - do you intend to crown the Monarch in Westminster Abbey and Edinburgh in a series of rolling ceremonies ?
Posted by: Rick | 22 November 2005 at 11:51
>>>>>>It would be interesting in Brixton and Peckham to see the street lighting turned off, social security ended, and policing reduced as they ran out of money. Likewise to see areas of Bradford as the benefits and public spending is cut off to Bangladeshis and Kashmiris and to see their healthcare needs no longer funded.
I suppose this kind of policy is what makes Pakistan such a vibrant democracy, and I doubt it would have any law and order implications if the Tories proposed such an idea. If Yet Another Anon could publicise his views more widely I am sure the Labour Party would be most appreciative.<<<<<<
Apart from being rather patronising to South Asians many of whom are very hard working and entrepreneurial it is as well to point out that LED street lighting doesn't actually cost much to fund and anyway street lighting is a major form of light pollution - something that we are greatly deprived of these days is a view of the stars and so a bit less street lighting and certainly more efficent use of light directing it to the ground rather than a large proportion up into the sky as seems to happen currently would be a good thing.
As for expressing my views widely I am happy to express my views to anyone in the world on any site at all regardless of it's orientation and do so.
Posted by: Yet another Anon | 22 November 2005 at 14:26
"Re - whose oil?
The sea boundary will be a continuation of the land boundary. One quirk of the capture of Berwick upon Tweed is that the English/Scottish border makes a jerk northward before hitting the beach, and continuing this makes most of the North Sea oilfields fall into "English waters" - but closer to Scotland, which is why the pipelines run to Aberdeen"
LOL, I do iove this science of extraordinary geography (because it smacks of desparation in my view), there's no oil in English waters whatsoever, based on the international principle of equidistance. The North Sea has been divided up into Scottish and English areas for donkeys, which is why the UK's North Sea oilfields are under Scottish jurisdiction for the purpose of legal administration.
Check BBC Radio 4's documents programme for an insight into to the subsidy England has received from Scottish Oil for the past 40 years.
"England owes Scotland Money"
Posted by: Arete | 10 February 2006 at 22:04