Cllr. Gavin Ayling

I won’t make any commentary on this yet until I have had time to let it marinate… But read and comment away!

This is Menzies Campbell’s reply to a letter I wrote to him about an answer he gave to Adam Boulton on Sky News:

Thank you for your letter regarding Scottish MPs voting rights on English only matters, which raises some interesting debates. Let me take this opportunity to express my views on this subject in more detail than I was able to do during my interview with Adam Boulton.

Tam Dayell famously posed his West Lothian question, which effectively asked why a Scottish MP could vote on issues which concerned England but which did not concern his own constituents, over 25 years ago. Now that we have devolution in Scotland it is clear that it is the wrong question. What we should be asking is the West Dorset question. Why should a citizen of West Dorset have less democratic representation than his or her counterparts in Scotland? It is the asymmetric nature of the current devolution settlement, and consequent democratic deficit for English citizens, which must be challenged.

A historical note often forgotten when discussing the legislative relationship between England and Scotland is that the 1707 Act of Union dissolved both the Scottish and the English Parliaments creating in their stead a single new parliament for Great Britain. The seductive argument that Scottish MPs should not vote on England only matters ignores the reality of both the Act of Union and the 1998 Scotland Act. The 1998 Act delegated authority to legislate on Scottish matters to the Scottish Parliament but, crucially, it did not cede any power of the UK parliament to legislate for Scotland. Under the terms of the Act Westminster may at any time enforce any legislation it passes, whether on devolved matters or not, throughout the UK by simple Order in Council (section 30) whilst section 29(7) makes it clear that the power of Westminster to legislate for Scotland remains intact. Therefore any Act passed at Westminster could be applied in Scotland. To deprive Scottish MPs of the right to debate and vote on legislation, without removing the power of the UK parliament to legislate for Scotland, would remove the representation of Scots on legislation which any government could decide to impose upon them in the future, however unlikely.

The real debate therefore is twofold. First it is not about what the Scots have but rather what the English do not have – a lack of any devolved government for England. Second it is about creating a properly balanced federal framework to best serve all the citizens of the United Kingdom. There are those who would argue for an English Parliament with the identical powers to the Scottish Parliament. This has the merit of simplicity and would at a stroke create a symmetrical devolution settlement. However there are arguments against it, not least the danger of creating a parliament which did not properly represent the balance of interests of the regions. Others therefore argue for a regional model. As a Scot I do not feel it is for me to prescribe the best solution for England. It is however clear that until England is in some shape or another devolved the federal structure of the United Kingdom will remain out of balance.

Scotland achieved a wide consensus by convening a constitutional convention whose recommendations formed the basis for the current settlement. England deserves no less. It is time for an English constitutional convention.

Thank you again for writing to me on this most important issue.

Yours sincerely,

Sir Menzies Campbell
Acting Leader of the Liberal Democrats

Very interesting… (Okay, some commentary!)