Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Cameron: there will be no more extentions of devolution for Scotland watch

    • Political Ambassador
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by The Independent)

    David Cameron made it defiantly clear today that the extra powers being granted to the Scottish Parliament represented the end of the road for Scottish devolution.

    “This is the right resting place,” he declared, after championing the UK Government’s blueprint for more devolution, which he published today.

    The Prime Minister said he expected others to keep arguing for more powers for the Scottish Parliament but, as far as he was concerned, today’s settlement represented the final stage on Scotland’s devolution journey.

    Mr Cameron also warned Nicola Sturgeon and her SNP Government in Edinburgh that it was time to stop squabbling over the powers and start focusing on using those powers to improve the lives of Scots.

    The Prime Minister came to Scotland to launch the UK Government’s draft legislation to hand over more powers to the Scottish Parliament.

    But he made it clear that, after the creation of the Scottish Parliament in 1999, the handover of more powers through the Scotland Act in 2012 and now this latest move, there would be no more incremental transfer of powers from Westminster to Holyrood in the future.

    The Prime Minister said: “From my point of view, this is the right resting place because we have got a very strong Scottish Parliament - raising the majority of its revenue, more powers than most other devolved parliaments in the developed world.

    “I certainly don’t want to spend the five years debating, is that the right balance of powers, I want to spend the next five years debating how together we make the Scottish economy stronger, make opportunity more equal in Scotland.”

    And he added: “We should talk about how the powers are going to be used, talk about the things that people really care about, what happens in our schools and hospitals and our apprenticeships and opportunities. So, we have reached the resting place.”
    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...t-9995837.html

    I'm relieved that Scotland will not be getting any more extensions of devolution after today. In my opinion they shouldn't have had these extra powers granted to them in the first place and only got them after Salmond scaremongered Westminster. Having said that, Cameron, Miliband and Clegg shouldn't have bowed down to Salmond in the first place, so perhaps they are more to blame for this extended devolution than Salmond is.

    I feel as though Scotland has been put on a pedestal because of the indyref and they're getting privileges that other member states of the UK (i.e. Wales) are not. The UK can't have special privileges in the EU, so why should Scotland get special privileges in the UK? This is just my opinion anyway.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Agreed. Considering it has less than a tenth of the population of England far too much time has been spent pleasing the Scots and giving them what they want.

    If we could now focus on the West Lothian question that would be nice.
    • TSR Support Team
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    (Original post by Reluire)
    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...t-9995837.html

    I'm relieved that Scotland will not be getting any more extensions of devolution after today. In my opinion they shouldn't have had these extra powers granted to them in the first place and only got them after Salmond scaremongered Westminster. Having said that, Cameron, Miliband and Clegg shouldn't have bowed down to Salmond in the first place, so perhaps they are more to blame for this extended devolution than Salmond is.

    I feel as though Scotland has been put on a pedestal because of the indyref and they're getting privileges that other member states of the UK (i.e. Wales) are not. The UK can't have special privileges in the EU, so why should Scotland get special privileges in the UK? This is just my opinion anyway.
    "If I can't have it, no-one can".
    • Political Ambassador
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Smack)
    "If I can't have it, no-one can".
    Says the guy in Aberdeen, Scotland - with all due respect. You're not exactly going to complain if you're the one benefiting.
    • TSR Support Team
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    (Original post by Reluire)
    Says the guy in Aberdeen, Scotland - with all due respect. You're not exactly going to complain if you're the one benefiting.
    If other areas of the UK want devolution they should receive it. But first it needs to be established whether they want it.
    Online

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Reluire)
    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...t-9995837.html

    I'm relieved that Scotland will not be getting any more extensions of devolution after today. In my opinion they shouldn't have had these extra powers granted to them in the first place and only got them after Salmond scaremongered Westminster. Having said that, Cameron, Miliband and Clegg shouldn't have bowed down to Salmond in the first place, so perhaps they are more to blame for this extended devolution than Salmond is.

    I feel as though Scotland has been put on a pedestal because of the indyref and they're getting privileges that other member states of the UK (i.e. Wales) are not. The UK can't have special privileges in the EU, so why should Scotland get special privileges in the UK? This is just my opinion anyway.
    Because Wales hasn't asked?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    The SNP will tax Scotland into the ground.
    Online

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The_Mighty_Bush)
    The SNP will tax Scotland into the ground.
    By reducing corporation tax, air passenger duty and land value tax?

    Edit
    By freezing council tax?

    Edit 2
    By cutting tax on North Sea oil projects?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    What North Sea oil projects ?

    If the prices are going to continue to fall as expected and remain this way for the next 3 years as predicted, there will be no North Sea oil.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    They will raise taxes. It's just a matter of time.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I'm Scottish so I probably have a bias, but I think the UK should be federalised and power decentralised. Each country within the UK should have less power over the others (so English vote on English issues, Scots vote on Scottish, etc) and local governments have more control over issues like taxation, welfare spending, etc. As for the claims of "putting Scotland on a pedistal" and other tripe, I live 20 minutes away from Dundee which was a Yes vote area and I spend a lot of time there, and as far as I can tell we're not trying to put ourselves on a pedistal for attempting to become independent like some sort of row row fight tha power masturbatory crap. I'm not a spokesperson for Scotland- it's a country of 5+ million people- but I think granting more powers to each member of the Union should be something to work towards in the future. It should be noted I'm not a supporter of the SNP and voted No.
    • Political Ambassador
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Smack)
    If other areas of the UK want devolution they should receive it. But first it needs to be established whether they want it.
    Many of us want an English parliament, but Cameron has ridiculously ruled one out. As tengentoppa says, concentrating on the West Lothian question seems to be a more pressing issue regarding 'fairness'.

    (Original post by Quady)
    Because Wales hasn't asked?
    Wales aren't pressing for it because as things stand because they actually get a good deal out of their current devolution. They get to have their cake and eat it. They get power over the issues they're most passionate about, and they get to vote in Westminster where all English issues are debated. Being able to vote on another country's issues is obviously easy to exploit to your own country's advantage. I'm sure they wouldn't be so happy if they were barred from voting on English issues.

    Implementing an English Parliament would most likely cause the following effects:

    (Original post by BBC)
    Firstly, implementing the change would reduce the role of Welsh MPs at Westminster.
    Secondly, any moves towards recognising England as a distinct unit within the UK would be simplified if the boundary between Wales and England became more clearly delineated.
    It is also likely that any move towards the England-only votes would be another nail in the coffin of the unified England and Wales legal jurisdiction.
    But clearly, their influence at Westminster would be reduced. Some might argue that the number of roles that Welsh MPs might play in government would also be reduced.
    The whole article is here, I just picked out a couple of the key points.

    Moreover, I am most most frustrated that Scotland gets extended devolution through scaremongering Westminster while England isn't even allowed its own parliament to actually have and make use of any devolution. That is a crime in itself. Why would I want Scottish, Northern Irish and Welsh MPs deciding on whether I should pay £9,000 a year for my university fees whilst my English MPs have no say over the fees situations in their countries? That's just one example, but it exemplifies how unbalanced the British union is becoming.

    So whilst Salmond, and by extension Scotland, moaned about how Westminster was controlling them and making too many important decisions for them, they seemed to forget that Westminster entirely controls England. They were not hard done by in the old state of events, and most of the indyref seemed to be driven by patriotism and anti-Westminster sentiment more than anything else. I think there is a horrible misconception that Westminster is synonymous with English. It's not; Westminster is British.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Reluire)

    So whilst Salmond, and by extension Scotland, moaned about how Westminster was controlling them and making too many important decisions for them, they seemed to forget that Westminster entirely controls England. They were not hard done by in the old state of events, and most of the indyref was driven by patriotism and anti-Westminster sentiment more than anything else. I think there is a horrible misconception that Westminster is synonymous with English. It's not; Westminster is British.
    I'm going to pick this out- Salmond isn't the spokesperson for Scotland. He was the spokeperson for the SNP which were the key party in delivering the indyref, but his views do not represent every Scottish person's views. Him moaning =/= every Scot moaning. That's pretty damn clear considering the 55/45 No win. I should also point out that those that votes Yes voted for a number of reasons that are not limited to nationalism, anti-Westminister sentiment, or anti-England sentiment.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Smack)
    If other areas of the UK want devolution they should receive it. But first it needs to be established whether they want it.
    Agreed, but those impacts should also be assessed. If we want a welfare state and an nhs and equal access to both for all throughout the UK (let's be honest, you get the same treatment no matter where you are in the UK) then it needs to be funded centrally.

    And if you look at the legislation that Holyrood has led the way on, the rUK followed a year or two later. RUK introduced gay marriage, we've just caught up and legalised it.

    Anybody in England and wales think this is a good idea?

    http://m.scotsman.com/news/transport...ined-1-3668028


    Oh, that's right, it's been available for years.

    I voted against devolution in the 90s.

    So far it's cost millions, has created a huge amount of quite frankly poor quality politicians drawing taxpayers money in wages and pensions. The end result is no radical difference between scotland and anywhere else in the UK.

    We already have devolution. They're called councils.
    Online

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Reluire)
    Many of us want an English parliament, but Cameron has ridiculously ruled one out. As tengentoppa says, concentrating on the West Lothian question seems to be a more pressing issue regarding 'fairness'.



    Wales aren't pressing for it because as things stand because they actually get a good deal out of their current devolution. They get to have their cake and eat it. They get power over the issues they're most passionate about, and they get to vote in Westminster where all English issues are debated. Being able to vote on another country's issues is obviously easy to exploit to your own country's advantage. I'm sure they wouldn't be so happy if they were barred from voting on English issues.

    Implementing an English Parliament would most likely cause the following effects:



    The whole article is here, I just picked out a couple of the key points.

    Moreover, I am most most frustrated that Scotland gets extended devolution through scaremongering Westminster while England isn't even allowed its own parliament to actually have and make use of any devolution. That is a crime in itself. Why would I want Scottish, Northern Irish and Welsh MPs deciding on whether I should pay £9,000 a year for my university fees whilst my English MPs have no say over the fees situations in their countries? That's just one example, but it exemplifies how unbalanced the British union is becoming.

    So whilst Salmond, and by extension Scotland, moaned about how Westminster was controlling them and making too many important decisions for them, they seemed to forget that Westminster entirely controls England. They were not hard done by in the old state of events, and most of the indyref seemed to be driven by patriotism and anti-Westminster sentiment more than anything else. I think there is a horrible misconception that Westminster is synonymous with English. It's not; Westminster is British.
    There are barely any 'English only' issues due to the constructs created by Westminister.

    England is allowed its own Parliament if it so choose to have one. Westminister (majority English MPs) has decided not to have one.

    Westminster is British, but is 80%+ English, enough of a weighing to equate the two.
    Online

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Reluire)
    Why would I want Scottish, Northern Irish and Welsh MPs deciding on whether I should pay £9,000 a year for my university fees whilst my English MPs have no say over the fees situations in their countries?
    You wouldn't.

    But the level of fees in NI/Scotland/Wales has no direct baring on the public finances of England. The level of fees in England have a direct baring on the public finances of in NI/Scotland/Wales.
    • TSR Support Team
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    (Original post by Reluire)
    Many of us want an English parliament, but Cameron has ridiculously ruled one out.
    Well start a campaign for it then, maybe even get some MPs elected to try to push it through.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Smack)
    Well start a campaign for it then, maybe even get some MPs elected to try to push it through.
    Better still, to overcome the North south divide, have proper devolution and go for several regional assemblies.

    What was it Holyrood cost to open? £300 million. £80 million a year running costs. Multiply that by seven and we'll all see how beneficial further devolution is to creating yet another layer of mediocre politicians, whilst seeing another one developing in Brussels. Becoming a civil servant can be a growth sector.
    • Political Ambassador
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Quady)
    There are barely any 'English only' issues due to the constructs created by Westminister.

    England is allowed its own Parliament if it so choose to have one. Westminister (majority English MPs) has decided not to have one.

    Westminster is British, but is 80%+ English, enough of a weighing to equate the two.
    England is allowed its own Parliament if its elected representatives choose to have one. As we know, MPs don't always do what their constituents want. Support for an English parliament is rife in England.

    That statistic is irrelevant though because it's not as if it's giving English people any kind of advantage. But in any case, it's 80% British because 80% of the UK constituencies are in England.

    (Original post by Quady)
    You wouldn't.

    But the level of fees in NI/Scotland/Wales has no direct baring on the public finances of England. The level of fees in England have a direct baring on the public finances of in NI/Scotland/Wales.
    Perhaps, but isn't that then a huge flaw in the system?

    (Original post by Smack)
    Well start a campaign for it then, maybe even get some MPs elected to try to push it through.
    It's an issue I feel strongly about so I may pursue a proper effort in the future.
    Online

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Reluire)
    England is allowed its own Parliament if its elected representatives choose to have one. As we know, MPs don't always do what their constituents want. Support for an English parliament is rife in England.

    That statistic is irrelevant though because it's not as if it's giving English people any kind of advantage. But in any case, it's 80% British because 80% of the UK constituencies are in England.



    Perhaps, but isn't that then a huge flaw in the system?



    It's an issue I feel strongly about so I may pursue a proper effort in the future.
    Well that's true, but its a problem which English constituents are pretty fully in control of. If they vote for candidates on an English Parliament platform.

    Well it does, it allows English MPs to act as a majority voting block over NI/Wales/Scotland in a way NI/Wales/Scotland cannot.

    Yes it is, and its one that Westminister (with a majority body of English MPs) has created.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: January 22, 2015
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.