What price devolution? The ‘West Lothian question’, whether Scottish MP’s in Westminster should have the right to vote on legislation that only affects England, has yet to be satisfactorily answered.
But the controversy sparked by a member of the Scottish parliament with a petulant bee in his bonnet about wanting to do away with rewarding excellence in medical practice, saw Nicola Sturgeon, Scottish health secretary quoted as saying: “CEAs are outdated and should be reformed on a four-country basis to avoid undermining the competitiveness of any one country when recruiting consultants.”
I simply cannot follow that logic. Why is it then that Scotland has decided social care should be free in that country, but not advocated it on a “four country” basis? Why is it that Wales has abandoned car parking charges whilst others in the UK are forced to pay punitive fees to visit their local hospital? Is that really fair on a “four country basis”?
And, incidentally, why is it that Wales decided to amend the “old” contract rather than adopt the one in place in the other three countries - albeit with minor differences? Many in the other three countries are now wishing they could do the same. Even though the Wales contact is not perfect, it is less open to the flagrant abuses that are being seen elsewhere in the UK.
Either a policy that is good enough for one country should be applied across the UK - or we have genuine devolution where devolved parliaments do what they believe is right for that country and, crucially, be accountable to those they represent for whatever legislation they introduce.
Come on! Politicians can’t have it both ways! If the Scottish health secretary really wants to antagonise consultants in Scotland then that is her decision - and risk the consequences. But to hide behind the cloak of saying that to do so would undermine the competitiveness of her own country, and should therefore be a UK initiative, makes the concept of devolution a mockery.
If Nicola Sturgeon really believes she is onto a winner then that is her decision, but why should England, Wales and Northern Ireland carry her political risk?
Tags: CEAs, Devolution
Well said. Electoral reform is long overdue. But the West Lothian question won’t be addressed until this government - with its preponderance of ‘dour’ Scotsmen - are booted out. Some of my best friends are Scottish, as they say, but it’s an anachronism that shouldn’t be allowed to continue…
The West Lothian Question will only partly be addressed by the Tories. Under their plans Scots will still be able to vote on English legislation, a Scot could still be Secretary of State for Health in England (as John Reid was) and Scots will still be in Cabinet helping to formulate policy over English domestic matters.
A comparison of Ken Clarke and Malcolm Rifkind’s proposals is available here.
What we need is an English parliament and English government, so that we can exclude Scottish politicians to the same degree that they have excluded English politicians with the introduction of a Scottish Parliament and Scottish Government.
Non of the parties will address the question because the answer is an English parliament, preferably independent.
How would Scotland and Wales react if they did not have a single ethnic nationalk in their party leadership.
Here is England’s position. WE WANT OUT!!
Labour Party in England Gordon Brown (Scottish). Labour Party Scotland Iain Gray (Scottish). Labour Party Wales Carwyn Jones (Welsh).
Conservative Party England; David Cameron (London born Scot). Conservative Party Scotland; David Mundell (Scottish). Conservative Party Wales; Cheryl Gillan (Welsh).
Lib Dem Party in England; Nick Clegg (Russo/Dutch). Lib Dem Party in Scotland; Alistair Carmichael (Scottish). Lib Dem Party in Wales; Roger Williams (Welsh)
UKIP Party England Lord Pearson (Scottish)
Not one of the leaders of the main parties has any reason to hold respect or regard for our country.
I am not disputing that in order to rule effectively in the interests of a nation leaders need to hold a shared cultural, ancestral, historic and kindred love of a country and its people.
I do however take exception when they readily recognise it in relation the other countries of the UK whilst totally disregarding it in relation to England.
Why is it that only England is singled out for exemption from this desirable state of affairs?
Whose interest does such discrimination serve?
Is it because we English have no say in either our leadership or governance?
calm down fred. I’ve always liked the idea that old terminator could run for president so I don’t see why it matters where they were born, so long as this is where they choose to live now. Of course when it comes to their second homes that’s another question entirely…
@ jo b
I’m with Fred on this. The post-devolution UK is institutionally Anglophobic. England is not even recognised as a country.
One only has to look at the membership of the British/Irish Council where England does not appear and not a single Englishman sits at the table to discuss the distribution of English taxes. http://www3.british-irishcouncil.org/member/membermain.asp
Barbara Scott Young, Baroness Young of Old Scone, is currently Chairman of the Care Quality Commission. When she headed the Environment Agency (a quango responsible for England only) it was reported that English people need not apply for jobs because they would have no hope of getting one. So I for one hold out no hope that she will have both eyes focused on England in her current position. How many other non-English people hold positions of power and influence in the English Health Service?
This is the problem, the whole British establishment systematically disadvantages England for the sake of the Union. This is especially scandalous when it comes to healthcare, where people in England are expected to literally die for the sake of the Union, but at the same time pay for others outside England to live.
What people in England have to learn pretty sharply is that the only way to shake politicians out of their complacency is to directly challenge their cosy Westminster positions. The Scottish Parliament has made them all redundant in Scotland and an English Parliament would make them all redundant everywhere in the UK. This is the only reason they oppose one.
All medical organisations in England, from health trusts to the Royal College of Physicians should back an English Parliament. That would make those presently corrupting the House of Commons sit up and take notice. They would start making changes to the English Health Service very quickly. Of course that would probably necessitate English people being at the top of such organisations to focus on the English Health Service.