Nationalist representation
Belfast will witness a moment in British constitutional history today. Though the event is a this is not another development in the "peace process".
The significance of today's get together comes not from the presence of Ian Paisley and Martin McGuiness as first and deputy first ministers (striking though that still is). Nor does it come from the presence of Bertie Ahern, the newly re-elected Irish Taoiseach (striking though that is too).
It's the representation of the other nations of Britain which makes this a historic meeting. You see what's really striking about it is that both Scotland and Wales are being represented by nationalist politicians. The SNP's Alex Salmond is there as first minister of Scotland and joining him is Plaid Cymru's Ieuan Wyn Jones the new deputy first minister of Wales filling in for Labour's Rhodri Morgan who's unwell.
For the first time in British history Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales are governed by parties which are demanding more powers for their own elected parliaments or assemblies and who will, at times, unite to oppose Whitehall's diktats.
Already politics has begun to feature arguments about why voters in this or that part of the UK get something which others are denied. Add to that the presence of Gordon Brown as the first Scot to govern the UK since devolution and it's clear that the constitutional question will be a major feature of British politics for many years to come.
PS: Lest I appear exclusivist can I point out that also attending today are Senator Frank Walker, chief minister of Jersey; Stuart Falla, deputy chief minister of Guernsey and James Anthony Brown on behalf of the Isle of Man.
I'm 
Comments
Tony Blair is a Scot, Gordon Brown is the first PM since devolution with a Scottish constituency is what you meant I think...
What is the point in devolution, when Europe is practically governing the EU?
Devolution is an additional burden on the taxpayer with few, if any, tangible benefits.
Nick, you say that Gordon Brown is the first Scot to be PM since devolution.
What about Tony Blair ? He not only has a Scottish name, but he was born in Edinburgh and educated at Fettes, one of Scotland's most famous public schools. Blair's father (though born in England) grew up in Scotland. And, if you listen carefully,Blair himself has a slight Scottish accent (of the posh variety).
But, of course, Blair wanted to appeal to middle England, so he was presumably happy to let people think he was English.
By population, England is the principal nation of both Britain and the United Kingdom? Where is the representation of England by representatives directly elected by the people of England?
Just contemplating that long line of Prime Ministers stretching back to the mythological 'time before devolution' is making my brain hurt.
Being born in a stable doesnt make you a horse and Tony Blair was about as Scottish as George W Bush.
England since the act of Union has had the say over the rest of the UK through westminster.
While against devolution at the time it has made a massive difference to Scotland.
Politicians up here are listening to what we want and trying to come up with answers. In the old days we just had to accept whatever was the best policy for SE England.
Its North England I feel for - they have the worst of all worlds.
I said on another thread that the lack of devolution for England (as a nation and not a collection of "regions") will haunt Gordon Brown's time in office. The anger that is increasingly building up amongst the English will not simply go away, and the blatant injustice in the present arrangements is highlighted all the more by these sort of gatherings. Every time Gordon Brown opens his mouth to talk about "national" domestic policies he means "English" domestic policies because he has no power at all over those for his own constituents in Scotland. The situation is undemocratic and more importantly untenable.
At last English people are waking up and realising that they are essentially non-existant, politicaly speaking.
Politcial apathy can be a very dangerous thing, as the English are unfortunately finding out, in the worst possible way.
That is, people born here, who have never subscribed to the (IMHO obsolete) notion of 'being British' are going around committing terrorist acts.
Maybe if they could have something which the English people actually belived in i.e. England, then we'd have a chance of building a more cohesive English society.
Unfortunately for us English, there are powerful political forces {of conservatism}, that is Labour, Tory and Lib-Dems and their fellow travellers in the media, which are opposed to that ever happening.
There is no point to devolution and it's only importance is to highlight to the rest of Britain parochial politicians who would have otherwise went unnoticed, firstly for their lack of intelligence etc. This is a talent show without the talent. Please England if you're really upset about this demand that devolution is scrapped.
As an English man I naturally care very much about British Isles as an whole. I would find it weird not to care about what happens in in the rest of the UK because I feel these are my people linked through common langauge, history and culture.
The fact there is strong separatist movements shows how ineffective unionist politians have become because the argument for the UK holding together in soem form out ways the alternative.
Separatists are very good at playing the emotional patriot by asking e.g. "are you English or British"? However, one can be patriotic to both -- they are not mutually exclusive -- I'm a proud English man and a proud British man...
Sandymac, you cannot put the devolution genie back in the bottle.
It is out and as Malcolm (#7) implied, every time that Brown opens his mouth, we English choke.
Its not very fair on Brown as the former PM, Bliar, was just as 'Scottish'.
I suppose the real difference is that Brown actually represents a Scottish constituency and in the post-devolution environment, that effectively means that we English are being governed by professional politicians from another country.
Does it stick in the craw!
We English are being truly punished for our political apathy, we only have ourselves to blame.
I think we need to elect a lot of English independents, to enable us to sort ourselves out.
In many ways I find Britain is comparable to a Japan that hasn't got its act together. There's a lack of unity, opposition for oppositions sake, and a lot of uneven development. A new constitutional settlement could give more power to the regions while removing arbitrary state division on paper. In addition, the governments planned national high speed rail network could help provide the infrastructure for better social and economic development, reduce our dependency on the car, and provide a grand project to entertain and amuse.
I dislike Britain for its excessive localism and negativity. If it's not wealthy areas like London grabbing all the cream, it's isolated rural areas being hostile to people who aren't local. Localism and scepticism are fine but not as a default position. By developing an attitude that balances the individual and society, forward looking without being foolish, people will be happier and industry more productive. As the arrogant demarcation between the boardroom and factory floor has fallen away, so should national favouritism and isolation.
Any successful enterprise depends on focus and teamwork. It doesn't matter if you're a family, a business, or a nation state. It's all the same thing. Retaining individual identity is fine as a contribution to a richer ecosystem but not at the price of contrariness or division. Letting the barriers melt away and more cohesiveness develop will reduce unnecessary distractions and costs, and the success that develops will be for free, whether it's more leisure time, increased quality, or a rise in output. And who can argue against that?
So who is representing England. Oh is it Gordon Brown our First Minister? What an absolute joke. England is being marginalised and excluded. We are denied funding, democracy, identity and self-determination. The English need to be much more assertive and stand up to the injustices they receive form the anti-English government. 91Èȱ¬ rule or no rule. English, never British!
As an Englishman this summit highlights what a joke the "Union" has now become to the English.
England has no representation at this summit whilst a no mandate Scotsman gives away billions of hard earned English taxpayers money to the subsidized Celtic fringe countries so that these countries can enjoy greater public spending per person than the English.
The Celtic occupation of England goes on - the people of England are starting to think the Union only exists to fleece the English taxpayer - it has no other purpose apart from making the UK a terrorist target.
England is not represented by the british council.It is just like the bbc. When England finally gets a national parliament of her own I hope it signals the demise of both.
What an insult this summit is - 50m people are unrepresented whilst the couple of thousand people who live on Guernsey get their own representative.
Sure, No Mandate Brown has gone along to represent "Britain" but he signed the Scottish Claim of Right saying he'd put Scottish interests first in everything he does.
The sooner we're out of this racist union the better.
The British-Irish Council does unfortunately look rather like a conspiracy against the uninvited guest, England. England of course no longer exists as a political unit, and is therefore not recognised either by the UK or the EU. The invisible people of England are beginning to notice this oversight and it is only a question of time before the major stakeholder in the UK, England, calls time on the Union.
It is too late, as others have remarked, to cancel devolution - even now the National Assembly of Wales is gearing up to demand increased powers and autonomy. If England is to be retained in the Union, England must take its place at the table.
Who in hell's name does speak for the English? Our constituency MP's are mute and ignore the growing clamour for English rights.Gordon Brown-"Mr Britain"- thinks we English are mugs and keeps on milking us for his ain folk. The only way out of this bizarre constitutional mess is to establish an English parliament to protect the rights of the English.
#11 John Constable: I was not suggesting devolution should be put back in a bottle, I was saying it does not work and why not admit it then as a United Kingdom stand united for what we all want....
I don't recall Scotland or Wales having their citizens blown up, despite their political participation in teh "the troubles."
So why isn't England represented? We certainly earnt that right, in spilt blood.
Well said Greg - personally I think dissolution of the Union and home rule for the home nations is the way forward.
It looks to me like the British Government's last few acts of oppression will be targeted at the English people.
Time to throw off the yoke of British rule and govern ourselves.
The only thing English at this meeting wiil be the English tax payers cash,I bet the word England never came up in any of these conversations!
The only thing English at this meeting will be the English tax payers cash
The crass double standards of Brown simply astounds me. He rebuffs every single question about the democratic and public spending deficits in England by saying he will not put the union at risk. However, all of the home countries apart from England are either part or fully governed by nationalist politicians.
It seems that Brown is asking the English to suffer all the agonies of non-self government and the appalling exclusion of education and health benefits - standard as of right for everyone else as some kind of price worth paying to preserve the union.
Not only that but Brown, Ming, Gorballs Mick and Charles Kennedy all signed the Scottish Claim of Right
"We, gathered as the Scottish Constitutional Convention, do hereby acknowledge the sovereign right of the Scottish people to determine the form of Government best suited to their needs, and do hereby declare and pledge that in all our actions and deliberations their interests shall be paramount".
He has no problems declaring sovereign rights for Scotland, so what about an English claim of right? What about us having "the sovereign right of the ENGLISH people to determine the form of Government best suited to OUR needs?"
Maybe Gordon Brown can sign it?
And on the subject of Gordon Brown - you know, the 'listening' PM. The man who committed to listening to the people?.... Gordon, the last few national opinion polls have consistently shown over 60% of English people to be in favour of an English Parliament. I know you are supposed to be good at sums, so when can we expect our very own English parliament?
Brown is just rubbing salt into England's wounds. What a crime. This is not democracy.
The slogan 'Brown for Britain' which has adorned Gordon Brown's platforms of late is a joke. He has attended a meeting which has included all of Britain (even Ireland) that has explicitly excluded England. The message that sends to me is loud and clear, that England is politically not part of these Isles. Financially of course, it is another matter.
Next time I see 'Gordon Brown for Britain' I will mentally follow it with 'except England'. I shall not be flying the Union flag as he urges as it means nothing to him and therefore me.
What sickens me even more than this is English constituency MPs don't seem to care about protecting their constituents' interests.
Post #17 (Ian Campbell) points out that England no longer exists as a political unit.
I would imagine that the point at which that occured was in the early 1990's when the EU requested that the Tory 'British Government' specify the regions.
So, Scotland and Wales were designated as 'regions'/countries whilst our dear England got chopped up into several regions.
I don't recall the Tories asking us English if we minded our country being eviscerated.
As far as I'm concerned, these main stream political parties, Labour, Tories or Lib-Dem are obstructing the will of the English people.
The longer it goes on like this, the nastier it will be when the tide finally turns for the English.
We want our England back!
The English not represented again, but no doubt England paid for this Celtic cabal.
From an English perspective there is not one solidarity reason of any merit for England to remain in this so-called Union.
The English should demand independence from the "Celts" immediately.
Perhaps the Celtic League would be a more appropiate name for this silly organisation, of course that name excludes a few thousand Channel Islanders but it is at least more truthful than an organisation that claims to represent all the islands, and carelessly or maliciously forgets about 50 million of its inhabitants
10. At 06:14 PM on 16 Jul 2007, Seb wrote:
"The fact there is strong separatist movements shows how ineffective unionist politians have become because the argument for the UK holding together in soem form out ways the alternative."
Go on then Seb, because all I ever here in defence of the union is, empire orientated sentimentality.
England would be much better off independent, of both the EUSSR and the Union with Scotland.
The English at the moment are like a caged lion, being prodded with sticks by the likes of Gordan Brown and the Celtic fringe. If this democratic imbalance is allowed to continue, the Lion is going to kick that door down and Gordan Brown and the other traitors will be eaten alive.
It is outrageous that England is not represented.
England should declare independence and let Scotland Wales and Ireland get on with it. Let them have their Celtic Council or whatever they want to call it.
Nowdays we English have little in common with the other countries of the British Isles and the sooner we go our own way the better.
An English Parliament would be unworkabe as it would govern a far too large a proportion of the population. Devolution hasn't worked. It should be scrapped but instead of returning to the situation as it was pre-1999 we should either give Scotland and Wales more MPs or better still have the ENTIRE United Kingdom voting as one single constituency with PR. That way, Scotland and Wales would feel they would have some real imput into general election results wouldn't get such a noticiable slant to major party support in various parts of the Kingdom.
The country that has suffered most now pays for everything and to boot gets no representation - great.
The time has come to put devolution to rest. Either we have devolution and that includes a country called England, or we are the United Kingdom and the 4 countries together with their football teams are amalgamated into the United Kingdom.
If I read Gordon Brown correctly I think he believes the latter in which case he should repudiate devolved government in Scotland and Wales.
What he cannot do is ride 2 horses at once.
Representatives from Northern Ireland, Southern Ireland, Britain, Scotland and Wales - Why was there no representative form ENGLAND. Oh yes, I know why, because England is the only country without a parliament and without any representation and as far as the government is concerned does not exist and they will soon break our country up into regions.
Most of my adult life, I think that I have been a fairly typical English person, in that I had a total aversion to 'politics', and as a freelance worker I have been mostly able to keep out of it.
But a tax measure against freelance people introduced by NL early in their tenure, woke me up.
I thought 'Why do these people {politicians} want to push us around? Why can't they just leave us alone to get on with our lives?'.
That is when I decided that I would make the effort and start to learn a bit about politics.
I suppose that within six months I'd come to understand that England/the English, were almost totally disenfranchised, due to their own political apathy.
I learnt that the 'mainstream' political parties no longer represented 'us', the English, but were really just following their own party agendas.
That is very clear now, in the post-devolution environment, where these parties simply ignore the 'English voice'.
The situation is becoming untenable.
Ordinary Scots and Welsh people doing good work in England are sometimes finding themselves being abused, through absolutely no fault of their own, but because some English people are beginning to lash out in frustration at our situation.
The English deserve the right to self-determination just as these other countries on the island of Britain now effectively have.
'Calm down dear'
I didn't see any of these people complaining when Blair (who has some Scotsness about him) was representing them at these council meetings - or John Prescott (he's from Hull, how can he represent the interests of those in Cornwall?)
This isn't some secret cabal that really runs the whole of "these islands" but just an association that helps the national governments (yes that includes the UK Govt, no matter what nationality the PM is) and devolved administrations to build relationships between the different govts, according to their website www.british-irishcouncil.org
And as for suggesting that GB didn't represent England, does that mean that TB didn't represent England, only the NE, or only Sedgefield, or only Trimdon? Did John Major only represent Huntingdon, or the 91Èȱ¬ Counties and not, say, Wales? (Actually, maybe you have a point there....)
Remember that not everything is devolved. The Scots Parliament has no say on lots of things, like having nuclear subs stationed in our waters, or what foreign policy should be, even broadcasting. But if you want an English Parliament/Assembly/whatyouwill, fair enough. You can have yet another level of elected bods, who will each have to be paid out of taxpayers' money (and since the majority of people live in England, the majority of the costs will come from English taxes, presumably) and who will then be able to fiddle their expenses, overspend horribly on a new building in London/SE or perhaps Birmingham? and generally slow down the process of government.
(Here speaks a supporter of devolution, actually. But the trouble is that the actualite doesn't meet the ideal, yet)
Maybe an English Grand Committee? Or just excluding the Scottish Constituency MPs from voting on English-only matters? Or different sessions of Parliament, some for UK wide stuff that all MPs (should) attend, others for English only matters? I don't know.
Mind you, remember that there are lots of things, both historically and more recently, that have been inflicted on Scotland (poll tax anyone?), Wales, (N) Ireland by the concentration of power in London so maybe this is a bit of redressing the balance. But to echo a previous poster, spare a thought for the North of England too...
"An English Parliament would be unworkabe as it would govern a far too large a proportion of the population"
It would govern 100% of the English population, just as the Scottish parliament governs 100% of the Scottish population and the Canadian parliament governs 100% of the Canadian population. How is that unworkable exactly?
I feel strongly that devolution for England should occur. After all, it has happened for the other countries, why not us?
However, I feel that at this time, GB is not the person to lead us. He is a Scot, which therefore makes him not English, but he is also a professionally elected politician from another country, and therefore he should not have any real say over Britain in matters concerning the Union.
Yes, he may be Prime Minister, but I feel we should just use the position of the Prime Minister to act as and when the Union needs/dictates the usage of the office, and have a British High Presentative, or British 91Èȱ¬ Chancellor or whatever to speak on purely English matters, such as the policy of devolution and the West Lothian question.
Right now, devolution may be out of the question, but it should re-appear soon. Well, let's hope it does because quite frankly, if it doesn't, I feel it should be a choice given to all voters henceforth it shall be included in my political manifesto: The NE/NUK (New England/New United Kingdom) Party.
But overall, I feel that devolution is a key and necessary process that must occur in order for England to fulfil her full potential at the Union table.
It's an outrage that Plaid Cymru is in government in the Welsh ssembly. They have been given by the back door what they have miserably failed to achieve in an open political debate at general elections. At the last general election - which must be a better gauge of public opinion on the issue of independence - Plaid had 12% of the vote as opposed to the Tories' 22% and even in the assembly election they had just about the same share as the Conservatives.In order to keep his hands on the levers of power Rhodri Morgan is ready to get into bed with those whose political aims are beyond the pale. And whilst he talks of inclusive politics he wont even consider sharing power with the Conservatives who demonstrably have far more popular support in Wales than Plaid. These third rate politicians in Cardiff Bay - and let's remember that barely 25% of the electorate voted for devolution - are playing with fire. There are already clear signs of an English backlash and if I were English I would foin them. After all we in Wales are subsidised by the English taxpayer!! In the meantime the health service in Wales falls further behind England. Think how many more consultants could be employed for the cost of these useless airbags in the assembly!
@38: here here!
The problem with all this English devolution lark lies with Brown's essentially anti-devolutionary stance, we've already heard his insistance not to work with a democratically elected leader from one of the UK's devolved areas. Devolving England, or in anyway altering the way MP's for Scottish constituencies vote would be a massive step towards saying the Union does not work, whihc rest assured Brown for Britain will never do.
It's really essential that we bear in mind a couple of things - the Scottish people were offered devolution, and jumped at the chance, and why wouldn't they? Having been constantly trodden on and treated either as England's unsocialised cousin, or guinnea pig for those schemes Westminster deemed to moronic for the good people of England since the reign of James VI. However, they weren't given some grand choice to pick and choose the powers of the devolved government - and they did so under the watchful eye of a commited Scottish Labour hero, who delivered what he promised and blazed a fine trail - not the sycophantic Blairite puppy who followed him. Scotland deserves it's voice in Westminster, only because devolution only gave it half of what it needed.
It's not the fault of the Scottish people that the Union finds itself in this mess, rather that of Blair/Brown's staunch attempts to amalgamate the Union into one England under cover of dark, whilst still trying to pander and offer up morsels of independence in the form of devolution - they weren't to know the Scottish people had a modicum of dignity and would rail against it.
The House of Commons comprises 646 MP's, of which 529 represent English constituencies. This works out at 82%; looks to me that England has more than sufficient numbers to dominate the House of Commons. An English Parliament would be nothing more than expensive, additional tier of government adding more tax, but little else. Gordon Brown represents the Government of the United Kingdom at this summit - perhaps some contributors think that when Tony Blair attended he was there representing Sedgefield!
#43:"perhaps some contributors think that when Tony Blair attended he was there representing Sedgefield!"
Actually, that's exactly right.
In this country we elect an MP to put forward our views and vote on our behalf in our representative democracy.
Mr Blair was elected to represent Sedgefield. No more, no less. His fellow party members & MPs then voted him to lead them in the commons.
Mr Brown, however, has been returned by his constituents, to a Parliament that has almost NO authority over them. They have given him the ultimate dream of dictators throughout the ages, power with no accountability.
We need, at a bare minimum, a system whereby Welsh & Scottish MPs do not vote on exclusively English matters, in the same way that English & Welsh MPs do not vote on exclusively Scottish matters.
Finally, Mr Brown must repudiate and renounce is signing of the Scottish Constitutional Convention, as any pledge "that in all our actions and deliberations Scottish interests shall be paramount" is a clear admission that he does not represent the interest of over 80% of the people of the United Kingdom.
Please let England have an Assembly/Parliament of its own, preferably in a few hundred years.
Fly the Union Flag in Wales?
Oh yes!
Cross of St George? Check!
Cross of St Andrew? Check!
Cross of St Patrick? Check!
Cross of St David? Oh dear!
The "Scottish Claim of Right", signed by Gordon Brown in 1988, read:
We, gathered as the Scottish Constitutional Convention, do hereby acknowledge the sovereign right of the Scottish people to determine the form of Government best suited to their needs, and do hereby declare and pledge that in all our actions and deliberations their interests shall be paramount.
Clear enough for me.
Declaration of interests - I'm Scottish. It seems to me, however, that much of this discussion has taken place without anyone seriously qustioning the terms of debate. Surely Gordon Brown, as a well educated rational human being, is capable of representing 'English' interests just as much as 'Scottish'. To suggest that he, along with a 'Celtic cabal', pursues tribalistic national interests at the expense of the English nation seems frankly ridiculous. My nationality is British as is Gordon Brown's. Yet I find myself incapable of identifying with the risible idea of a pernicious Scottish self-interest.
As to his signing the Scottish Constitutional Convention - is it inconceiveable that as a Labour party politician he believes that 'Scottish interests' are best served by remaining a part of the Union? The Scottish Labour party certainly seem to pursue this line. If this is true then does it not also hold that what serves the interests of the United Kingdom serves 'Scottish interests'?
Exclusionary nationalist rhetoric is an empty relic of the last century. Surely we can move beyond this tribalist namecalling. It is my sincere hope that the SN(DA)P are soon drummed out of Holyrood by an electorate tired of hollow promises. Salmond's rhetoric starts by chastising the English, should he succeed his next enemy will be within. Nationalist parties thrive on oppositionary firebrands, why not show them that politics has moved beyond this nonsense?