Category Archives: english devolution

MY SUBMISSIONS TO THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT ASSOCIATION – Better Devolution for the Whole UK Inquiry

MY SUBMISSIONS TO THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT ASSOCIATION

APPG for Reform, Decentralisation and Devolution in the UK Better Devolution for the Whole UK Inquiry


The Local Government Association, which is a strongly Regionalist association of British Political Establishment apparatchiks, has recently launched an enquiry entitled:- “APP for Reform, Decentralisation and Devolution in the UK Better Devolution for the Whole UK Inquiry.” I thought I ought to respond to this on behalf of, not only the English Democrats, but also of the English Movement generally. I set out the response that I have sent in below, but first here are the terms of the Inquiry.

A panel, appointed by the qualifying officers of the Reform, Decentralisation and Devolution APPG, will consider written evidence and oversee the oral evidence sessions. The panel will be cross-party and drawn from both Houses and the four nations of the UK. The panel may appoint external expert advisers where it deems this necessary. As part of this inquiry, the Group would like to hear from businesses and voluntary organisations and their representative bodies, academics, and local government. The panel will seek evidence on the following areas:

1. Devolved nations: –

Devolution of legislative and fiscal competence to and within England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, including in the Scotland Bill and the Wales Bill. 
Federalism in the UK.
English Votes for English Laws.

2. Local government: –

Devolution of legislative and fiscal competence to local authorities within the United Kingdom, including in the Cities and Local Government Devolution Bill.

Governance arrangements for decentralisation.

Sustainable funding system for local government.

3. Central powers in the UK and intra-UK relations: –

Implications for the role of Whitehall

Implications for the role of the Houses of Parliament

4. Wider constitutional reform: –

The reform of the electoral system

The reform of the House of Lords

Procedures to govern the consideration and implementation of any future constitutional reforms.

Written and oral evidence will inform the final report. The final report and its recommendations will be submitted to the Minister for Constitutional Affairs and the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government.

Here are my submissions to the Local Government Association Inquiry:-

As Chairman of the English Democrats I am writing to submit evidence to your enquiry. Here are some key facts about the English Democrats:-

The English Democrats launched in 2002 and are the only campaigning English nationalist Party. We campaign for a referendum for Independence for England; for St George’s Day to be England’s National holiday; for Jerusalem to be England’s National Anthem; to leave the EU; for an end to mass immigration; for the Cross of St George to be flown on all public buildings in England; and we supported a YES vote for Scottish Independence.

The English Democrats are England’s answer to the Scottish National Party and to Plaid Cymru. The English Democrats’ greatest electoral successes to date include:- in the 2004 EU election we had 130,056 votes; winning the Directly Elected Executive Mayoralty of Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council in 2009 and also the 2012 mayoralty referendum; in the 2009 EU election we gained 279,801 votes after a total EU campaign spend of less than £25,000; we won the 2012 referendum which gave Salford City an Elected Mayor; in 2012 we also saved all our deposits in the Police Commissioner elections and came second in South Yorkshire; and in the 2014 EU election we had 126,024 votes for a total campaign spend of about £40,000 (giving the English Democrats by far the most cost efficient electoral result of any serious Party in the UK!). In the 2015 General Election we had the 8th largest contingent of candidates in England.

We would be happy to give oral evidence to the enquiry.

OUR EVIDENCE

In your Terms of Reference you have stated you want evidence on various defined areas:- 1) Devolved Nations; 2) Local Government; 3) Central Powers; and 4) Wider Constitutional Reform. The English Democrats on behalf of the Party itself and on behalf of the wider English nationalist movement would respond as follows:-

1. Devolved Nations


‘Devolution within England’[ cannot properly be described as “Devolution” at all by comparison to Scottish and Welsh national devolution. The only devolution that would be properly so called for England would be of an English Parliament, First Minister and Government with at least the same powers as the Scottish ones within a Federal UK.

It is the English Democrats opinion that the time for a Federal UK has already passed. For that to happen what should have happened in the first place when devolution occurred was that a coherent and fair national devolution for each of the constituent nations of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland should have been set up with each assembly or parliament having the same powers and a defined relationship with central government, as per every proper Federal State in the world. The fact that this was not done and that England’s just and fair interests have been consistently ignored and derided has led to mounting resentment in England.

It also would have been possible for the UK to have been turned into a Federal Regionalist State in conformity with the EU regionalist objectives but that would have required Scotland and Wales to have been regionalised and not for them to have national devolution. That window of opportunity has now firmly passed.

EVEL or English Votes for English Laws is a bogus, populist positioning policy which does not even properly answer the representational element of the wider English question.

The Conservative Government’s proposals are in any case the weakest of all the proposals for English Votes for English Laws. They will certainly disappoint all those people in England who think that the political system should allow a proper and fair voice for English interests to be expressed. The EVEL proposals do not of course even touch the executive side of the question as there is no proposal to have either a First Minister or Government for England, nor does it touch the administrative side of the question as there is no proposal to have an English Civil Service and not even to have a Secretary of State for England and therefore there is no parity with these proposals with what has been created for Scotland and Wales.

2. Local Government


It is not part of England’s tradition for legislative competence to be devolved from the National Government. However it is part of England’s tradition for our local government structures to be as independent of central government as possible. It is partly the United Kingdom’s increasing obsession with centralisation which has created the demand for Decentralisation. The English Democrats would like to see traditional local government structures re-empowered and there to be a substantial decentralisation of powers.

As the power to raise their own funds is an important part of the effectiveness and independence of governmental structures we would also support decentralisation of tax raising powers to enable local government to fund itself. Those aspects of so-called local government which are little more than local structures being deputised to do exactly what central government wants done should be dealt with by separate agencies rather than continuing with the pretence that they are genuinely part of local government.

The governance of Local government should also be made more democratically accountable with the universal implementation of Directly Elected Executive Mayors for all principal local authorities.

3. Central Powers


The role of Whitehall should be reduced and the role of the Houses of Parliament should be confined much more to those areas which under the current and evolving situation have not been devolved to Scotland.

4. Wider Constitutional Reform


Electoral System


Scotland’s electoral system has shown that despite the whiff of gerrymandering that accompanied the way it was set up, it has enabled a diversity of political opinion to be expressed in the Scottish Parliament. It is therefore to be preferred to an electoral system, such as the current first past the post system for the House of Commons which gives a bogus cloak of democratic majority to a party voted for by only 26% of the electorate in the last election and, with one sole exception, almost wholly denied representation for the votes of nearly 4 million voters. Such an electoral system is not only unfair but it is undemocratic.

House of Lords


The current composition of the House of Lords is completely unsatisfactory and too often appears to rest on cronyism, patronage and donations. Having moved from the original composition of mainly hereditary peers, there are only three options:- 1) Abolition of the House of Lords; 2) Reform to be a democratic UK Senate, as suggested by Lord Salisbury; or 3) A wholly elected Upper Chamber.

Those are the basic submissions of the English Democrats which we would be happy to expand upon in oral evidence if called.

What do you think?

Letter to Mr Dominic Raab MP Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for English Devolution Ministry of Justice


I recently suggested that supporters of our Cause might like to write to the new Minister of English Devolution. Here is a sample of what one has written which is perhaps long for a Lobbying letter but comes from the heart and makes the point well.

Mr Dominic Raab MP

Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for English Devolution

Ministry of Justice

102 Petty France

London

SW1H 9AJ

7th August 2015

Dear Mr Raab,

Re: English Devolution

I was pleased to learn of your appointment, as resolving the “English question” was a Conservative manifesto pledge, and consequently, I am expecting a resolution acceptable to us English including an English Parliament.

As an Englishman, I, and many of my colleagues, friends, business acquaintances, and family, have strong views on the subject, and have had these for many years, especially as we are now strangers in our own country. My thoughts, and those of others, follow below.

In September 2014 the people of Scotland voted 55% to 45% against independence after a long and sometimes antagonistic campaign by both sides of the divide. Just two days before the people of Scotland cast their votes in the referendum, the leaders of the three unionist parties – David Cameron, Ed Miliband and Nick Clegg made a public vow to give Holyrood more powers. Mr Cameron promised the day after the referendum that if he won the 2015 general election he would deliver on the ‘vow’.

The Queen’s Speech after the election demonstrated that the ‘vow’ to Scotland discussed prior to the referendum had indeed been kept by the incoming Conservative Party. The Scottish Parliament will now be able to raise 40% of taxes and decide on 60% of public spending. There are a number of other devolved powers that the Scottish Parliament will receive, including new welfare powers worth £2.5bn. The people of Scotland now have a devolved Scottish Parliament with its own Executive, First Minister and almost full control over how it shapes the future of Scotland.

We must remember that Wales too has its own assembly with a number of devolved powers and there are promises by the new government that there will be a further devolution of powers to Wales, including more powers over energy, transport and local government elections in Wales (pity they can’t run their NHS).

Northern Ireland has control over areas such as agriculture, education, health and social services, economic development and the environment with further devolution of powers in the pipeline.

Many commentators have suggested that the present constitutional settlement in relation to devolution is grossly unfair to England. The English people indeed are the only people in the Union who have no dedicated political representation. It must be remembered that there is no English government or parliament, no devolved English assembly and therefore no one to speak up for the people of England or represent their interests. The unfairness of the present constitutional discrimination against us English has been recognised by David Cameron who wants to introduce ‘English votes for English laws’, thus ensuring that only MPs representing English constituencies could vote on legislation affecting England alone.

However, what does this mean in practice? English laws will still be proposed by a British government and scrutinised by a House of Lords containing members from across the UK and abroad. There will be no administration devoted to English affairs and British MPs will still vote on British party lines. It simply ends up being a blocking device which can be used by English MPs to stop laws that they do not think are suitable for England. Why can’t England be treated like the other constituent parts of the UK? Why not an English assembly like Wales? Why not devolved powers like Northern Ireland? Why not an English parliament with an Executive, First Minister and devolved powers like Scotland?

The British government and the establishment afford England no recognition as a legitimate nation. In many ways they have made every effort to keep England invisible, and discriminate against the people of England at every opportunity; indeed one gets the impression at times that the British state would like to abolish England, e.g., by breaking it up into regions. Many British politicians have expressed their contempt for England and the English and they are very anxious that England should not assert her identity.

It is a matter of fact that the British state refuses to acknowledge that England is a nation like Scotland or Wales. One can discuss whether these are true nations, but it is very clear that if that designation is afforded to both Scotland and Wales then it surely must be to England also.

No other nation is delegitimised and deconstructed in the way that England is. We English are constantly told that there is no such people as the English or that they are just a ‘mongrel race’, a nation of immigrants. The question, ‘What does it mean to be English ?’, is constantly thrown at anyone who identifies as English, in a way that it would never be thrown at a member of any other ethnic group. Have you ever heard of a multiculturalist MP asking Pakistanis to explain what it means to be Pakistani?

The British state also, clearly, has no problem promoting Scottish and Welsh identities and indeed celebrates these; however there is no focus on English identity or English culture. Scottish and Welsh children are rooted in their respective heritages in a way that English children have not been for a very long time. English children must make do with British identity rooted in a make-believe multicultural past.

Whilst Scottish and Welsh nationalism is actively promoted, English nationalism is characterised as ‘racist’ and ‘xenophobic’; it’s seen as the preserve of the ‘far Right’. It has become totally acceptable amongst the middle class metropolitan elites to castigate the English, and they simply do not care what impact these statements have on the collective dignity and psychological well-being of English men, women and children. These politicians are quite willing to undermine our collective self-esteem whilst all the time going to great lengths not to offend minorities.

As long as the British state remains, England will continue to be subjected to second class status within the Union and the people of England subjected to the abuse meted out to them. We English need to develop a sense of Englishness again if things are to change and begin to assert ourselves in the way that the people of Scotland and Wales have done in recent decades. Thankfully, there are signs that this is starting to happen. More and more people living in England are rejecting British identity and simply identifying themselves as English. There is also emerging what might be called an “English political community”. This is clearly a response to the gross injustices of the devolution settlement and the privileging of the other constituent parts of the UK, especially Scotland.

Many English people are asking why the people of England must pay ever increasing prescription charges whilst people north of the border don’t pay anything! English people want to know why lifesaving cancer drugs are available in Scotland but not in England. They want to know why more money is spent in Scotland per head of population than in England and why this privilege is paid for by the English taxpayer via the Barnett Formula. They also want to know why Scottish MPs can vote on matters affecting England (e.g., the introduction of student fees) but English MPs cannot vote on matters affecting Scotland. Many English people are beginning to wonder whether we would be better off without the Union!

I think that the Union is effectively over. The SNP will use its position in Westminster to manoeuvre for another referendum in the not too distant future – regardless of what Sturgeon and co. are saying at the moment – and I am convinced that if this is held within the next decade Scotland will vote for independence. We English must now seek a constitutional settlement that reflects our interests of us, the people of England. We demand either a devolved English parliament with exactly the same powers as Scotland within a federal UK, as long as the union remains, or they must vote for independence.

It should also be borne in mind that we English have recourse to the UN regarding the elimination of race and cultures and I am aware the certain people are following this up.

My apologies for this rather long letter, but this matter is close to my heart because I no longer recognize the country I grew up in and, like many, feel betrayed and dismissed by a ruling elite who regard us English with contempt. I do not want my country split into regions or “power-houses” and will support anybody and anything that will promote England and Englishness.

Yours sincerely

D P Fair