Metropol

barcode wrote:Part of my response is "England do not require a mid-level of government akin to the Scottish Parliament or Welsh Assembley, because " There rejected the idea ten years ago. As much as you hate this other response, The Tories do have a Bed rock of voters mainly in England, that is where its core vote is While Labours is/was spread across the kingdom. Because of where live you are out voted by the rest of the uk.

An English Parliament would be worse in my mind than the status quo; and would only be better than EVEL if it was populated under a PR-like system. The population of England is 10x the size of Scotland. The way people vote in the North is not the same as the way people vote in the South. I'm repeating myself here.

Why is Scotland allowed to have such a level of separation? Scotland has a population roughly equal to that of Yorkshire, and yet the people of Yorkshire have to accept the government of the whole of the UK - why is that? Why is ancient history the defining factor in all this?

WillPS wrote: An English Parliament would be worse in my mind than the status quo; and would only be better than EVEL if it was populated under a PR-like system. The population of England is 10x the size of Scotland. The way people vote in the North is not the same as the way people vote in the South. I'm repeating myself here.

I take it you have no understanding what was being offered to the voters which rejected the idea of Local Assembley? Ie Local Assembley One of the north, Yorkshire etc...

WillPS wrote:Why is Scotland allowed to have such a level of separation? Scotland has a population roughly equal to that of Yorkshire, and yet the people of Yorkshire have to accept the government of the whole of the UK - why is that? Why is ancient history the defining factor in all this?

Because Scotland is a Country, Yorkshire is not, The Kingdom of the UK is made up of 4 countries.

barcode wrote:
I take it you have no understanding what was being offered to the voters which rejected the idea of Local Assembley? Ie Local Assembley One of the north, Yorkshire etc...

Correct, I have absolutely no idea what you are on about, please fill me in. I'm pretty sure the only UK/England-wide referendums that have been held in the last 100 years are the 70s one on Common Market membership, and the 2011 one on AV.

If you're talking about something which was on a Tory/Liberal manifesto, then I do not accept your argument that it was something the public "voted against".

WillPS wrote:Because Scotland is a Country, Yorkshire is not, The Kingdom of the UK is made up of 4 countries.

And what makes that so? Is it anything which is actually relevant to modern politics, or just something that happened for reasons that mattered hundreds of years ago?

WillPS wrote:Correct, I have absolutely no idea what you are on about, please fill me in. I'm pretty sure the only UK/England-wide referendums that have been held in the last 100 years are the 70s one on Common Market membership, and the 2011 one on AV.

If you're talking about something which was on a Tory/Liberal manifesto, then I do not accept your argument that it was something the public "voted against".

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regional_ ... _(England)
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_ ... dums,_2004
* http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/talking_point/3984991.stm
* http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3984387.stm

WillPS wrote:

Because Scotland is a Country, Yorkshire is not, The Kingdom of the UK is made up of 4 countries.

And what makes that so? Is it anything which is actually relevant to modern politics, or just something that happened for reasons that mattered hundreds of years ago?

That has to be very daft comment. You do know Scotland has different laws, health and Education systems? a Different church the list goes on. The same goes for Northern Ireland.

The UK is not a county what so every, its a Sovereign state.

barcode wrote:Because Scotland is a Country, Yorkshire is not, The Kingdom of the UK is made up of 4 countries.

Scotland was last a sovereign state over 300 years ago. Why should historical kingdoms factor into this in any way?

barcode wrote:Because Scotland is a Country, Yorkshire is not, The Kingdom of the UK is made up of 4 countries.

And what relevance does that have to modern politics, and how much representation a single individual person should get?

There used to be lots more countries on this island that all got amalgamated. It's only a quirk of law that means Scotland is still a country while Wales isn't. That shouldn't mean Scotland is some special snowflake and that people who happen to live there should be treated differently to the rest of the population.

Your argument that everyone in England is adequately represented because there's so many English MP's is nonsense. The only time that would ever be correct is in some England vs Scotland parliamentary war.

barcode wrote:

WillPS wrote:Correct, I have absolutely no idea what you are on about, please fill me in. I'm pretty sure the only UK/England-wide referendums that have been held in the last 100 years are the 70s one on Common Market membership, and the 2011 one on AV.

If you're talking about something which was on a Tory/Liberal manifesto, then I do not accept your argument that it was something the public "voted against".

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regional_ ... _(England)
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_ ... dums,_2004
* http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/talking_point/3984991.stm
* http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3984387.stm

Thank you for filling me in. So one referendum took place 11 years ago in the NE. Rerun that tomorrow and see what happens.

It's not just Scotland with an undercurrent of younger people who feel Westminster does not have their interests at heart.

WillPS wrote:That has to be very daft comment. You do know Scotland has different laws, health and Education systems? a Different church the list goes on. The same goes for Northern Ireland.

The UK is not a county what so every, its a Sovereign state.

...and why? Why does Scotland have different laws/health/education?

I'm not an idiot - I don't need the status of Scotland explaining to me, I'm just trying to point out that what is to all intents and purposes a historical detail has lead to a man one side of Hadrians Wall with just their council and Westminster, and one the other side with a parliament that overrides them on many issues and a real prospect of complete separation.

What is lacking here is an understanding that while it's convenient for the Scottish to separate off in the name of nationalism, the feeling driving that is present this side of the border with no convenient nationalism to fall upon.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/cons ... /E14000878

Scroll down to: 23:28: Booing greets Tory MP's victory speech, that man needs a slap.

Well that one way to protest. http://metro.co.uk/2015/05/10/garden-sh ... e-5190613/

Who came second and where:
[Tweet https://twitter.com/dodsmonitoring/stat ... 72/photo/1]

That guy in the Metro is a twat.

Actually he's a hero. It's about time Ukippers and proto-Ukippers felt what it was like to be unfairly discriminated against.

What about writing graffiti on a war memorial... you know, one of those stones commemorating the very people who died fighting for the right to let you and I choose who runs the country in a democratic election? Bet you're down with that too.

I honestly think some people would prefer us to become a socialist one-party dictatorship.