A Populus Poll, which was published in The Times to coincide with the tenth anniversary of Scottish devolution, hit the headlines largely because of the "Only 21% in favour of Scottish Independence" findings.
The responses to several other questions from a Unionist point of view are also worth studying:
1."Comparing the situation now with the period before Scottish devolution, would you say that as a result of devolution… You now support or oppose the idea of there also being an English Parliament, or if you don’t have a view either way please say."
Asked of people in England and Wales:
41% of those questioned in England and Wales support an English parliament as a "result of devolution" with 15% opposed and 44% unsure.
2."Do you now support or oppose the idea of only English MPs being allowed to participate in House of Commons votes on matters only affecting English constituencies, or if you don’t have a view either way please say"
52% of those asked in England and Wales, as a result of devolution, supported banning non-English constituency MPs from votes on English legislation in the House of Commons. 15% were opposed and 32% were unsure.
3. Almost double the number felt that relations had worsened between Scotland and England than got better because of the devolution experiment (although it would perhaps be fair to point out here that 73% also felt there had been no change!).
So, a poll employing a reasonable sample (just below a thousand) delivering just slightly over a 20% percentage wanting Scottish independence (the figure in England and Wales wishing Scotland to separate from the rest of the United Kingdom was even lower, 15%).
But the fact that, as "a result of devolution", the poll shows a total net majority in England and Wales now favour "English votes for English measures" and that a majority of those asked with an opinion wanting an English parliament should ring Unionist alarm bells; if and when an English parliament ever comes into being, then we are beginning the slow but inevitable countdown to the end of the United Kingdom. However, unfortunately, the argument against allowing the English electorate the same choice (via a referendum) as that already offered to N.Ireland, Scotland and Wales doesn’t stack up either logically or morally.
Hattip CEP.
4 comments:
I'd say if England doesn't get its own legislative body the union could be on an equally loose footing.
And I say that if England doesn't get its own Assembly then the Union is finished. I know of no example anywhere in the world which argues for the long-term success of a policy whereby the richest and most populous part of the nation are forced to have fewer and inferior voting rights than the privileged elites in a certain geographic area.
Fewer: We don't have our own Parliament to deal with those matters which the other constituent nations of the UK demand should be determined by themselves alone.
Inferior: English constiuencies are larger, it takes more English votes to elect a single English MP, thus diliuting our influence even further.
Returning to this, I have never forgotten a gentleman at the first CEP National Conference who stood up and said that he never wanted the United Kingdom to break up but as an Englishman he wasn't asked and didn't get a vote on the matter.
Something that will one day rebound quite forcefully.
DW,
I'm more and more convinced that the present scandals engulfing Westminster has the potential to bring completely new thinking into the "body politic". There are going to be so many new MPs in the next parliament that it's impossible to predict how the next session will go constitutionally.
Post a Comment