Dear Mr Higgenbottom,
Thank you for your letter of 25th March regarding the campaign for an English Parliament and I reply on behalf of the three Conservative MEPs for the West Midlands as I cover the Shropshire area for the team.
As to your comments regarding that citizens of Member Countries should be able to participate in the political decision making process on an equal basis you are correct. However this is an issue which can only be resolved by the Westminster Parliament and, to my knowledge is being widely discussed.
As it is Westminster MPs who would make any decision by a vote in Parliament I have forwarded your letter to Daniel Kawczynski MP who is the Member for Shrewsbury and I am sure he will be in contact with you on the issues you raise.
Yours sincerely,
Philip Bradbourn OBE MEP
Thursday, March 29, 2007
MP's response to EU Democracy Requirements
Dear Mr Higginbottom,
Further to your previous letter I am also pleased to write to you over the matter of devolution and the West Lothian Questions.
I have asked many times in the House why it is that Scottish MP's can vote on English matters and not vice versa. This is indeed democratically unfair. I support whole heartedly the calls for English votes on English matters.
I also have concern at present over the number of Ministers from Scottish constituencies who are in charge of ministries that only have jurisdiction over English constituents. This too is grossly unfair, and may get worse under a Scottish Prime Minister.
However such hypothesis will be answered if and when Mr Brown moves into Number 10. What is sure however is there is unlikely to be any change whilst he is in control, and the government relies on the Scottish members for its majority over English law.
I assure you that I take every opportunity to raise this matter I in the House, or via questions.
Daniel Kawczynski MP
Further to your previous letter I am also pleased to write to you over the matter of devolution and the West Lothian Questions.
I have asked many times in the House why it is that Scottish MP's can vote on English matters and not vice versa. This is indeed democratically unfair. I support whole heartedly the calls for English votes on English matters.
I also have concern at present over the number of Ministers from Scottish constituencies who are in charge of ministries that only have jurisdiction over English constituents. This too is grossly unfair, and may get worse under a Scottish Prime Minister.
However such hypothesis will be answered if and when Mr Brown moves into Number 10. What is sure however is there is unlikely to be any change whilst he is in control, and the government relies on the Scottish members for its majority over English law.
I assure you that I take every opportunity to raise this matter I in the House, or via questions.
Daniel Kawczynski MP
MP's response to Barnett
Dear Mr Higginbottom,
I would like to take this opportunity to respond to your letter on March 20th regarding the Barnett Formula, and how it may affect the potential subsidising of Welsh and Scottish constituents.
My understanding of the Barnett Formula is that it relates to spending and not taxation directly. As such any extra monies raised will be returned to the treasury, who will then decide where best to allocate the funds. The Barnett Formula only comes into effect when these additional funds are allocated from the treasury for spending within England, when this occurs some extra money is also released to its Welsh and Scottish counterparts in order to maintain the same standard of service.
However, I can understand, and share your concerns over the issue, The Barrett Formula is certainly one aspect of government policy I would like to see re-examined in order to try and establish a fairer system.
Also to address your concerns over potential road pricing I would like to assure you that I am opposed to the idea, as I believe it may harm our constituency.
Thank you for taking the time to let me know of your concerns, I hope that this letter has managed to allay some of your fears.
Regards,
Daniel Kawczynski MP
I would like to take this opportunity to respond to your letter on March 20th regarding the Barnett Formula, and how it may affect the potential subsidising of Welsh and Scottish constituents.
My understanding of the Barnett Formula is that it relates to spending and not taxation directly. As such any extra monies raised will be returned to the treasury, who will then decide where best to allocate the funds. The Barnett Formula only comes into effect when these additional funds are allocated from the treasury for spending within England, when this occurs some extra money is also released to its Welsh and Scottish counterparts in order to maintain the same standard of service.
However, I can understand, and share your concerns over the issue, The Barrett Formula is certainly one aspect of government policy I would like to see re-examined in order to try and establish a fairer system.
Also to address your concerns over potential road pricing I would like to assure you that I am opposed to the idea, as I believe it may harm our constituency.
Thank you for taking the time to let me know of your concerns, I hope that this letter has managed to allay some of your fears.
Regards,
Daniel Kawczynski MP
EU Democracy Regulations
Daniel Kawczynski MP
House of Commons
London
SW1A 0AA
Dear Daniel,
It is my understanding that one of the criteria for European Union membership is that all citizens of a member country should be able to participate in the political decision making process on an equal basis.
If I am correct in this understanding then this is manifestly not the case in the United Kingdom. People in England only elect one law-making representative – to Westminster – who deals with all issues. The people of Scotland however get to elect two representatives to deal with the same matters – one to Westminster and one to Holyrood. This means that England is underrepresented. Conversely, it could be argued that the people of Scotland are being adversely treated – they are being ‘fobbed off’ with most issues being dealt with by an inferior and subordinate parliament – a case of getting the “monkey” not the “organ grinder”.
Either way, the people of England and Scotland are not being treated equally.
Worse is yet to come. It looks likely that Gordon Brown will become Prime Minister of the UK. He is of course only elected by his Scottish constituents to represent them in Westminster on matters such as national taxation, defence, foreign affairs etc. He has no mandate from them (or anyone else) to deal with health, education etc but the bulk of the PM’s job is to oversee such issues in England.
This is hardly equitable treatment. It is a form of apartheid, a person with no electoral mandate governing a majority of the people. If the people of England were black this would incur the wrath of the United Nations, let alone many others.
The Conservative Party seems to me to have decided to sit on its hands, allowing the current iniquitous situation to continue. I believe the Party thinks that by the next election it and Dave Cameron will be popular and Gordon Brown and Labour won’t. But, “There’s many a slip ’twixt cup and lip.”
Any self-respecting representative of the people of England should not be merely “letting sleeping dogs lie” but should be doing their utmost to redress the situation by one means or another rather than being complicit in the continuation of a travesty of democratic inequality. After all, article three of the Acts of Union 1707 also requires “one and the same parliament”.
Perhaps you will be good enough to advise me whether my understanding of the EU’s democratic requirement is correct.
If it is, perhaps you can advise me what you and your Party are doing to redress the situation and to “report” the UK to the appropriate “authorities or court”.
Yours sincerely,
dward Higginbottom
Co-ordinator, Shropshire Branch of the Campaign for an English Parliament
House of Commons
London
SW1A 0AA
Dear Daniel,
It is my understanding that one of the criteria for European Union membership is that all citizens of a member country should be able to participate in the political decision making process on an equal basis.
If I am correct in this understanding then this is manifestly not the case in the United Kingdom. People in England only elect one law-making representative – to Westminster – who deals with all issues. The people of Scotland however get to elect two representatives to deal with the same matters – one to Westminster and one to Holyrood. This means that England is underrepresented. Conversely, it could be argued that the people of Scotland are being adversely treated – they are being ‘fobbed off’ with most issues being dealt with by an inferior and subordinate parliament – a case of getting the “monkey” not the “organ grinder”.
Either way, the people of England and Scotland are not being treated equally.
Worse is yet to come. It looks likely that Gordon Brown will become Prime Minister of the UK. He is of course only elected by his Scottish constituents to represent them in Westminster on matters such as national taxation, defence, foreign affairs etc. He has no mandate from them (or anyone else) to deal with health, education etc but the bulk of the PM’s job is to oversee such issues in England.
This is hardly equitable treatment. It is a form of apartheid, a person with no electoral mandate governing a majority of the people. If the people of England were black this would incur the wrath of the United Nations, let alone many others.
The Conservative Party seems to me to have decided to sit on its hands, allowing the current iniquitous situation to continue. I believe the Party thinks that by the next election it and Dave Cameron will be popular and Gordon Brown and Labour won’t. But, “There’s many a slip ’twixt cup and lip.”
Any self-respecting representative of the people of England should not be merely “letting sleeping dogs lie” but should be doing their utmost to redress the situation by one means or another rather than being complicit in the continuation of a travesty of democratic inequality. After all, article three of the Acts of Union 1707 also requires “one and the same parliament”.
Perhaps you will be good enough to advise me whether my understanding of the EU’s democratic requirement is correct.
If it is, perhaps you can advise me what you and your Party are doing to redress the situation and to “report” the UK to the appropriate “authorities or court”.
Yours sincerely,
dward Higginbottom
Co-ordinator, Shropshire Branch of the Campaign for an English Parliament
Barnett Formula & Prescriptions
Daniel Kawczynski MP
House of Commons
London
SW1A 0AA
Dear Daniel,
I am writing to all of Shropshire’s Members of Parliament on behalf of CEP’s local membership.
As you will be aware, NHS prescription charges will be raised in England as from 1st April whilst they will be abolished in Wales.
As I understand the Barnett Formula it will mean that this increase of tax levied on the patients of England will automatically result in a proportion of the extra monies being ‘hived off’ to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. Neither Scotland nor Wales appear to need this extra money as they already have a better funded NHS than England does.
Likewise, the Government is toying with the idea of introducing a ‘road pricing’ tax. The Scottish Parliament and the Welsh National Assembly have however indicated that they would not introduce this system.
As I understand the Barnett Formula it will mean that this new tax levied on the motorists of England will automatically result in a proportion of the extra monies being ‘hived off’ to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. Neither Scotland nor Wales appear to need this extra money as they have no intention of introducing ‘road pricing’.
Can you confirm that your understanding of the Barnett Formula is the same as mine?
If my assumption about the Barnett Formula is correct, I cannot see how any self-respecting MP representing an English constituency can countenance this manifestly unjust situation. Perhaps you can advise me and my fellow members of your and your Party’s position on the issue.
House of Commons
London
SW1A 0AA
Dear Daniel,
I am writing to all of Shropshire’s Members of Parliament on behalf of CEP’s local membership.
As you will be aware, NHS prescription charges will be raised in England as from 1st April whilst they will be abolished in Wales.
As I understand the Barnett Formula it will mean that this increase of tax levied on the patients of England will automatically result in a proportion of the extra monies being ‘hived off’ to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. Neither Scotland nor Wales appear to need this extra money as they already have a better funded NHS than England does.
Likewise, the Government is toying with the idea of introducing a ‘road pricing’ tax. The Scottish Parliament and the Welsh National Assembly have however indicated that they would not introduce this system.
As I understand the Barnett Formula it will mean that this new tax levied on the motorists of England will automatically result in a proportion of the extra monies being ‘hived off’ to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. Neither Scotland nor Wales appear to need this extra money as they have no intention of introducing ‘road pricing’.
Can you confirm that your understanding of the Barnett Formula is the same as mine?
If my assumption about the Barnett Formula is correct, I cannot see how any self-respecting MP representing an English constituency can countenance this manifestly unjust situation. Perhaps you can advise me and my fellow members of your and your Party’s position on the issue.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
