By Ned Simons - 11th February 2011
Iain Paisley has warned the Conservative Party not to bow to fears of English separatism.
The North Antrim MP said any imposition of "English votes for English laws" out of a fear the English are becoming "bad unionists" would create a two tier House of Commons and risk the break up of the United Kingdom.
"I appeal to my Conservative friends…they should recognise they should not play party politics with constitution of this nation," he said.
"We will have a House of little Englanders," he said. "That does not serve this nation."
"You have a responsibility to lead the people of England into believing passionately in the union as I do.
"You only do that by not encouraging this view that we need another Parliament for the English only."
Paisley was speaking in the Commons as MPs debated a private members Bill tabled by Tory MP Harriet Baldwin
The West Worcestershire MP's Bill was intended as a small step towards solving to so-called "West Lothian question" – the problem of Scottish MPs being allowed to vote on issues that only affect England.
She said her Legislation (Territorial Extent) Bill would allow only English MPs to amend bills which only affected England, but all MPs from would be able to vote at second and third reading.
But Paisley said it represented the start of a "slippery slope to disengagement" of the United Kingdom's separate nations.
Conservative Jacob Rees-Mogg that any attack on the union was most likely to come from English nationalists "fed up with the way they are treated" rather than from any Scottish independence movement.
And he warned that any "English votes for English laws" plan was unsatisfactory as it would
He advocated what he called the "best form of British fudge" with Labour MPs, when in government, be "enormously responsible" about what legislation they passed that affected only England.
Article Comments
But...but....if England and the English get the same rights as us N Oirish, the Scots and Welsh then they may actually have the nerve to put er..er....themselves first and may even cut or stop our Subsidy!!!!!!, Nooooo!....Little Englanders!!!!
End the SHAM that is the 'United Kingdom' NOW!.
ste
22nd Feb 2011 at 10:46 am
Well put Helen, people like paisley are going out of their way to anger the english, with the sheer scale of govern 'mental' incompetence and matters like WLQ, barnet formula, Brown signing the scottish claim of right obliging him to put scottish interests 1st.
Free elderly care for Scots since 2002. Danny Alexander 'save scottish forests sell english forests' etc, etc.
Add to it mistakes like nimrod, blair and wmd, nhs computer, id card scheme, etc.
Add to it apprx half of mp's having to pay some of the second home claims back. Some are in jail now.
10 have had their cases passed to the CPS.
Open door Immigration turned out to be attempt to force us to accept multiculturalism.
If the government was an animal, with this much disease it would be put down.
How far do they think they can go before they do get a civil war?
englandexpectsrespect
14th Feb 2011 at 12:12 pm
Lenny, thank you for your view from NI. Good to see that the inequalities in our system is recognised outside England. Shame that you've had to wade through so much anti-celtic sentiment to offer your view.
Colin, I agree. A federal sytem would be best and is common-place in Europe as well as the former colonies. Individual nations governing taxation, education etc and the federal government defence, foreign policy.
It would be a shame for an institution as old as our Union to dissolve and over 50% of the non-English don't want it to go either but it does need to be more representative.
Ben
14th Feb 2011 at 9:06 am
Helen, I agree with your sentiments about Paisley,We will take no lessons from Paisley, thank you very much.
He is talking a load of bulls**t, I am from N.I. and he is a hypocrite,my Conservative friends, he runs the conservatives down all the time over here. I think it is only logical that the rest of the house votes on any laws etc, that just effect England, we have our own assembly and so does Scotland so what right have we to vote on issues solely concerning England. I fully agree in the Legislation (Territorial Extent) Bill .
Lenny
13th Feb 2011 at 10:55 pm
Well if that is the opinion of Mr Paisley I now withdraw my support for Unionists in Northern Ireland.
bobbyboy
13th Feb 2011 at 5:25 pm
Of course the N.Irish, Scots, Welsh and Europeans don't want an 'English Parliament' why would they???
The 'English Taxpayer' is the largest group of voters in the (Dis-)United Kingdom, they pay the bulk of the 'British' contribution to the EU, they pay the extra funds the Scots, Welsh & N.Irish claim from the 'British' government courtesy of the Barnet Formula.
...... Definition of English Taxpayer.... if you live & work in England regardless of nationality, colour or religion and pay your taxes to the British Government you are an English Taxpayer.
We, the English Taxpayers will repay the bulk of the 15 billion pounds loan the British government borrowed so they could bail out the Irish Banks in December to the tune of 6 billion pounds or was it 8 billion pounds.
.......Definition of a Soft Touch..... An 'English Taxpayer'
Helen is quite right, a civil war looms and the English Taxpayer when they wake up will take what is rightfully theirs... before its too late hopefully!!!!!
Alec Akehurst
13th Feb 2011 at 12:54 pm
Incidently, how come when anyone else speaks with concern about their country they are described as 'patriotic' or 'proud' etc. but the English are derided as 'little Englanders'?
g.e.
13th Feb 2011 at 12:14 pm
The sooner the so called 'union' is ended the better. I am sick and tired of listening to the anti English ranting tirades of the Scots, Welsh and Irish. Let them (especialy the Scot's) have their independence. But lets face it when it comes to the crunch they know when there better off i.e. being kept by English money.
g.e.
13th Feb 2011 at 12:07 pm
So Dr Paisley English home rule would represent the start of a 'slippery slope to disengagement' of the United Kingdom's separate nations would it?
I thought that process was already well and truly started! Not by England though. It started with N.Ireland holding out the begging bowl while demanding more and more powers for its own devolved parliament, Scotland voting in an SNP government but still wanting its own Parliemnt. Same for Wales.
Well I'm afraid the parties over. England is waking up and questioning the benefit that the UK holds for England. Perhaps you would care to spell them out Dr Paisley because I can thing of loads of disadvantages for England but not one advantage.
The Scottish Welsh and Irish have been banging on for centuries about how we English oppressed you and how you wanted to govern yourselves. Now that starts to look like a real possibility you all panic!
Independence for England NOW!.
Home Rule for England
13th Feb 2011 at 10:09 am
The North Antrim MP said any imposition of English votes for English laws .... would create a two tier House of Commons and risk the break up of the United Kingdom.
So, it's OK to have a two tier electorate, one tier with an inalienable right to vote without interference on matters which concern them (Scotland, Wales, NI) and a second tier (in England) whose votes are subject to the inalienable right of MPs from other countries to interfere in votes on matters which don't concern them.
The main risk to the union is that perfectly reasonable demands for true democracy in England will be disregarded for so long that in the end the union will be completely discredited. For an increasing number of people, the union is becoming synonymous with anti-democratic manipulation and second-class treatment (in university fees, prescription charges, per capita spending, sales of national assets such as forests, etc. etc.). If the unionists really care about the union, they had better start caring about England, fast.
Nick Illingworth
12th Feb 2011 at 8:43 pm
Why is it that foreigners like Paisley think they have a divine right to meddle in this nations affairs? It is for the people of England to decide how we wish to be governed, something that the British state would do well to remember too. Whilst I agree that the Tory proposals are half baked and unworkable, it is frankly none of his business.
The sooner England secedes from the British state and we no longer have to listen to people like Paisley, Brown and Kinnock telling us how to run our country the better.
English Republic
12th Feb 2011 at 6:26 pm
Paisley's nasty little Anglophobic tirade is only to be expected. He would do well to reflect, however, that the UK is now very far from united and its continued existence at England's expense, and to the not inconsiderable disadvantage of the fifty million people who live here, merely to keep a million or so insular bigots of his ilk in the state to which they have long been accustomed is increasingly hard to justify.
The union that protects the likes of Paisley exists in name only and its constitutional demise cannot be long delayed. He and his kind will then have the choice of trying to make a province in which more than four fifths of the economy depends upon the public sector, and which is still riven by sectarianism, into a viable independent state or accepting reunification with the Republic of Ireland. Should that eventuality come to pass Paisley's descendants will be citizens of a united Ireland and the people of England will have the last laugh on a nasty, narrow minded little man who has never known when to keep his mouth shut.
Here's to independence for England.
William Gruff
12th Feb 2011 at 3:50 pm
We can no longer afford the luxury of friends like 'little Ulstarians'. They have their parliament, we want ours.
Considering the gifts bestowed by the Barnett formula, reparations during their self destructive civil war and the bribes given to assist the Labour government of Brown I think that Paisley should be satisfied and shove off.
Fred
12th Feb 2011 at 2:33 pm
Paisley's idea of a 'union' is one where England gives all the time, and the Celts take all the time. I always thought the idea of any union or partnership is that each partner should give and take equally. He's just a typical 'Unionist' hypocrite. Maybe he's afraid that his precious six counties will return to their rightful home, with the 26 counties south of the Irish border.
Paisley, grow up, you bigot. You're Irish, not British (whatever 'British' is meant to mean).
Geoff, England
12th Feb 2011 at 2:25 pm
How dare this Northern Irish MP tell the people of England they can't have what his constituents already have. We already have a two tier House of Commons and it is by denying the English equality with the rest of the UK which will break up the Union not the opposite. It is the present system which does not does not serve the nation Mr.Paisley, the ignored nation of england.
JoolsB
12th Feb 2011 at 1:27 pm
Quote: The North Antrim MP said any imposition of 'English votes for English laws' out of a fear the English are becoming 'bad unionists' would create a two tier House of Commons and risk the break up of the United Kingdom.
Just exactly what does Mr. Paisley mean by that? His party enjoys a certain level of autonomy in the Northern Irish Assembly, as do the Welsh and the Scots even more so, being semi independent without any responsibilities.for raising the taxes necessary from their own people for their own needs.
We English already have a two tier Parliament, possibly a three tier Parliament with the Scots, Welsh and Irish voting on purely English affairs secure in the knowledge that their votes will not affect their constituents. English MPs are unable to vote on any matters in the devolved assemblies of Northern Ireland, Wales and the Scottish Parliament.
One glaring example of this is that tuition fees for English students was only passed through the British Parliament on the votes of five Scottish MPs, whose own parliament rejected a similar system for Scottish students.
England is the only nation in Europe without its own representation and calling the Westminster Parliament an effective English Parliament is a facile argument, given the paragraph above, plus many other examples.
The only answer is a federal system, which works well in America, Australia and Canada. There is no reason why it should not work for the UK. Except that politicians from the devolved nations would no longer feed off the English milch cow, providing services for their own people that are denied the English.They would have to be far more fiscally responsible, which is why there is so much opposition to the English being given the same degree of democracy that the so-called 'Nations' enjoy.
I suspect Mr. Paisley's comments are entirely self serving, albeit for the benefit of his own people, given that the spending per head of population in his country is far higher that that for the English, who fund their generous life styles.
If a federal system is beyond the wit of our politicians, which I suspect it is, then Independence for England can be the only other answer. Many English people, myself included, are viewing the Disunited Kingdom as well past its useful shelf life in the post Empire period.
Colin
12th Feb 2011 at 1:21 pm
Better a Parliament of Little Englanders rather than Greater Englanders.
Polls regularly show that 60%-70% of English voters support the exclusion of non-English MPs from votes on English-only legislation. That would be the simplest correction to the present democratic deficit in England.
Alternativley, converting the House of Commons to an English Parliament would enable the House of Lords to be reformed as a British Parliament, in which all the British nations would be represented.
Given that devolution is a continuing process, rather than a settled event, it will be impossible to ignore lack of English home rule indefinitely. Mr Paisley's comments are more of a threat to the Union than he appreciates.
Ian Campbell
12th Feb 2011 at 1:16 pm
Paisley doesn't know what he's talking about. There is already a two-tier House of Commons. There are two classes of member in the UK Commons: those who represent their constituents on matters reserved to the UK parliament and also on devolved matters, and those who represent their constituents on matters reserved to the UK parliament, but who represent no one at all on devolved matters yet are allowed to vote on them.
They vote on their own individual behalf and not on behalf of any constituents. The latter have caused legislation to be imposed on the English even though their English representatives voted against it. This is not democracy, but dictatorship.
It was the original devolution referenda, especially in Scotland, from which England was excluded even though it is the country most affected, that risked the break-up of the UK. Blame the Scots, not the English. The Scots are Little Scotlanders!
IMarcher
12th Feb 2011 at 10:54 am
I could not agree more Helen. I would rather we got our rights peacefully, but i don't think that will happen !! so yer bring it on the sooner the better.
Edward
12th Feb 2011 at 10:36 am
Helen- are you sure you want to risk the curse of the 'big man' when he gets to the other side?
A point to remember in the scamming of English rights is that 'No Surrender' rallying cry doesn't work- if you don't realise you're under attack, like the English have been for decades.
Unionism- Ptahh...more like cronyism, everywhere!
trev
12th Feb 2011 at 10:27 am
Paisley forgets a few things. Firstly, there are already two classes of MPs in the Commons. Those that are elected to serve their constituents on all matters, like English MPs, and those that are elected to serve their constituents on non-devolved issues, like Scottish MPs.
Secondly, the United Kingdom is not a nation, it is a union of nations.
As an Englishman, I take offence at an Irish politician poking his nose into our business. If the English want their own devolved institution, we shall have one. The other nations in the union have theirs, so why can't we have ours? I notice he doesn't object to the Scottish Parliament and doesn't refer to them as 'Little Scotlanders'.
I object to his use of the term 'Little Englanders'. It is insulting and demeaning. The unsolved devolution issue is what will wreck the dis-united kingdom.
Richard
12th Feb 2011 at 9:58 am
I second that Helen, how dare he ! look after your 'little Ire-landers' Mr Paisely I fear it is just the fiancial help from England that you are worried about.
i albion
12th Feb 2011 at 9:54 am
Go Helen
Couldnt agree with you more.
http://necessityisatyrantscryandslavescreed.blogspot.com/
FloTom
12th Feb 2011 at 9:53 am
All people want is to be treated equally in the union. Since Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland all have a separate assemblies, its only fair that England gets one to.
I presume the other nations of the UK getting their own assemblies isn't a threat to the union? So why would that be any different for England? Not allowing a parliament for England would only mean that a break up of the UK more likely.
Michael
12th Feb 2011 at 9:45 am
How dare the MP for North Antrim tell us, in England, how we should be governed. That is our choice not his. We are sick of being the milch cow for the rest of the UK.
The British Government consistently doles out to us less per head on services that it makes available to Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. NI receives a great deal more per head than all the rest. So, perhaps, we must see more than a little self interest in his denial of a democratic voice for England in a devolved UK.
Scilla
12th Feb 2011 at 9:08 am
I'm English not British. This is because of 13 years of devolution about which I have never been given a say. In that time devolution has dumped a manure heap of disadvantages uniquely on England, while the English are expected to pay for the benefits the rest of the UK enjoy, that the English themselves are denied.
Add to that the attempt to erase England by carving it up into reviled, rejected regions, again with the English being refused any say in the matter, then it is time for the UK to be dismantled. I fail to see why we English should be treated as third class on every measure for the sake of the Union.
Stephen Gash
12th Feb 2011 at 12:10 am
Blimey, you are one angry lady.
Civil wars are never overdue. Quiet your angry rhetoric. It helps no-one.
The West Lothian question isn't solvable without damaging change to the union, and few people want that. So its something that everyone is going to have to stomach for the time being.
Anthony
11th Feb 2011 at 11:08 pm
We will take no lessons from Paisley, thank you very much.
The English have been very loyal to the Union, which has, in return, treated our nation and our citizens like sh*t in return.
I hope the British continue to treat my nation the same way they are doing at the moment and aboslutely REFUSE us an English Parliament, so that every single English man and woman will get more and more angry and eventually rise up against the parasites that feed off us for their own convenience.
A Civil War is well overdue IMHO. But its the only way to clear out scum and bottom feeders that seek to deny England the right to equal democracy. Bring it on. They really are begging for it.
Helen
11th Feb 2011 at 3:06 pm
Have your say...
Please enter your comments below.