England Begins to Stir

Regular readers will recall strange posts appearing on this website from time to time concerning the British Constitution. I have long been warning that the current Labour Government's radical and not-well-thought-out changes to that venerable Constitution posed a dire threat to the British union.

Now, it seems, the merging of: (1) an increasing nationalist awakening in England, (2) the actual fact that both the Religion of Peace and the Religion of Multiculturalism's strangle-hold on public discourse has been forever shattered, (3) the West Lothian Question and Gordon Brown's rise as probable Prime Minister designate, and (4) a re-energized Conservative Party has produced a political moment for those seeking an English voice.

From today's Telegraph, its lead editorial:

Tony Blair was never particularly exercised by the minutiae of constitutional reform when he was leader of the opposition. By all accounts, he found them a bore. Yet when he came to power, he had no option but to make devolution his first-term legislative priority--this, after all, was the "unfinished business" that had been bequeathed him by the late John Smith.

It was a debt of honour he had no option but to settle. Sentimentality is rarely a sensible basis on which to construct such far-reaching changes. For devolution has not--as its cheer-leaders endlessly proclaimed--strengthened the Union. It is weakening it. In Scotland, the clamour for full independence grows apace, while in Wales, the Assembly in Cardiff is hungry for greater power--and is getting it.

Meanwhile, the 49 million people who live in that neglected corner of the United Kingdom called England face a yawning democratic deficit. This slumbering giant has yet to be particularly exercised by the intrinsically unfair nature of New Labour's half-cocked constitutional settlement.

This is hardly surprising: it is hardly the stuff to set the political pulse racing. Yet the dangers of this Government's constitution by accretion are great. That is why we welcome the establishment of the English Constitutional Convention, in the hope that it will ignite a real national debate about the way the English are governed.

At the heart of it must be the role of the Westminster Parliament. The West Lothian Question remains as pertinent today as when it was first posed by Tam Dalyell in the run-up to the 1979 devolution referendums. Scottish and Welsh MPs can vote on matters affecting English constituencies, while English MPs have no such reciprocal rights over what happens in Scotland and Wales.

This potential instability needs to be addressed now. If there is any "unfinished business" in New Labour's constitutional reforms, it is giving the English greater control over their affairs. Specifically English laws ought to be dealt with by English MPs--just as the Scottish Parliament deals exclusively with Scottish measures and the Welsh Assembly, in the new powers it gained in July, deals with Welsh matters.

This is not a novel concept. The Conservatives have toyed with the idea of English votes for English laws--indeed, William Hague made it part of his platform for the 2001 general election. Then it was an idea ahead of its time.

Unless England's post-devolution settlement is addressed urgently, we may find the question becoming toxic. This newspaper is committed to the Union - but we fear it is at grave risk of being undermined by stealth and collateral damage.

While in the letters page, we find this:

Sir--The current "post-devolution settlement" is iniquitous to England.

Scotland and Wales have their own Parliament and Assembly, and yet are still over-represented in the House of Commons; the West Lothian Question has yet to be answered--why should Scottish and Welsh MPs preside over English matters when MPs representing English constituencies have no reciprocal right?

And the long-discredited Barnett formula, the system by which regional funding is allocated, remains grossly unfair to the taxpayers of England.

It has been nearly 10 years since the people of Scotland and Wales were consulted in a referendum prior to devolution. No such courtesy has been extended to the people of England, and our politicians seem reluctant even to allow open debate on the subject.

Dividing England into "regions", while leaving Scotland and Wales as "nations", is rightly unpopular and undemocratic. Stopping Scottish and Welsh MPs voting on English issues will cause as many problems as it solves.

The question of the establishment of an English parliament must be considered and the option placed in front of the electorate.

At a meeting in the House of Commons today, the English Constitutional Convention will be formally established, with the aim of promoting debate and raising public awareness of England's democratic deficit. As patrons to the convention, we urge the Government, Opposition and all the people of the United Kingdom actively to participate in that debate. England will be heard. The time for silence is over.

Lord Beaumont of Whitley; Lord Stoddart of Swindon; John Horam MP; Professor Hugo De Burgh; Professor Jeremy Dibble; Prof Roger Scruton; Dr. Gerald Morgan Trinity Dublin; Jervis Kay QC; Garry Bushell Journalist; Iain Dale Conservative commentator; Neil Addison Barrister; Mike Knowles, Chairman, Campaign for an English Parliament; Robin Tilbrook, Chairman, English Democrats; Christine Constable, Chairman, English Lobby; Bishop Michael Reid; Rev Richard Martin; Richard Long, Solicitor; Andy Smith, Past President, Chartered Institute of Journalists; Simon Lee, Lecturer, Hull University; Prof Charles Greenawalt

The plot, as they say over there, thickens....