|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Fri 20 Jun 15:46
I see this has been passed by the House of Commons at Westminster by a majority of 23. Looking at the voting list it would appear that no SNP MPs voted but Scottish MPs from other parties did. As the Bill only applies to England and Wales I assumed MPs for Scottish constituencies would not be able to vote. Can anyone clarify this?
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: ipswichpar
Date: Fri 20 Jun 16:53
Just the West Lothian Question isn`t it?
Makes sense to me....it kind of undermines a key SNP argument if they start voting on devolved stuff.
It does mean that the SNP level of success could start to influence decisions elsewhere in the UK indirectly though.
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Tenruh
Date: Fri 20 Jun 16:59
Quote:
ipswichpar, Fri 20 Jun 16:53
Just the West Lothian Question isn`t it?
Makes sense to me....it kind of undermines a key SNP argument if they start voting on devolved stuff.
It does mean that the SNP level of success could start to influence decisions elsewhere in the UK indirectly though.
But it still raises the question: Should the Unionist Scottish MPs have a vote on a bill that doesn`t affect them?
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Fri 20 Jun 17:12
I thought David Cameron passed English Votes for English Legislation (EVEL) after the 2014 referendum? Has that been scrapped?
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: ipswichpar
Date: Fri 20 Jun 17:29
Quote:
Tenruh, Fri 20 Jun 16:59
Quote:
ipswichpar, Fri 20 Jun 16:53
Just the West Lothian Question isn`t it?
Makes sense to me....it kind of undermines a key SNP argument if they start voting on devolved stuff.
It does mean that the SNP level of success could start to influence decisions elsewhere in the UK indirectly though.
But it still raises the question: Should the Unionist Scottish MPs have a vote on a bill that doesn`t affect them?
One of those questions where both answers will be seen as wrong.
From my perspective they should have the right, and it`s a matter of their own opinion if they choose to use that vote or not.
I think the SNP approach is honorable. It would be bonkers for unionists to not vote and you`re straight into a discrimination argument is the law says people can`t vote who wins the seat next door just because they want independence.
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Fri 20 Jun 17:40
I see Gove and Rees-Mogg were the main advocates for scrapping it. I don`t think they liked the inference that Westminster wasn`t the Parliament of the whole of the UK.
ETA - Come to think of it, how can you say Westminster is the Parliament for the whole of the UK if it can pass Bills that only apply to England and Wales? You can see why they don`t want a written Constitution.
Post Edited (Fri 20 Jun 18:08)
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: ipswichpar
Date: Fri 20 Jun 18:47
I`d look at it the other way.....it does cover all of the UK but some matters are devolved.
So all UK MPs *can* vote on all matters.
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Fri 20 Jun 18:58
But isn`t Assisted Dying devolved? I`m sure there`s a Bill going through Holyrood about it.
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: ipswichpar
Date: Fri 20 Jun 19:49
There is.
I agree it`s messy.
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Fri 20 Jun 20:36
It`s a fudge. They can`t have non-English MPs being treated differently from the rest, so just let them vote on English Bills.
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Bletchley_Par
Date: Sat 21 Jun 21:36
I like foxes.
Parliament spent 700 hours debating the killing of foxes.
It spent 100 hours debating the killing of adult humans.
It spent 5 (FIVE) hours on the Abortion bill which allows the killing of babies up until the day they are born.
I do not value foxes more than humans.
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Sun 22 Jun 09:09
What more could be debated on AD? It`s established effectively elsewhere already.
It appears too much time was spent dealing with objections to fix hunting bans, which is why they were debated so long. Even big policy changes don`t typically get more than a few hours debate.
|
|
|
|
|