The aim of this paper is to discuss numerous facets and conflicts surrounding, but especially different possible solutions to the so-called “West-Lothian Question“, a long-running and delicate issue in British politics.
Part one describes the origin, history and background of the question. Part two gives a brief overview of the present situation and recent developments in this matter as well as an explanation for the Government’s supportive attitude towards devolution. Furthermore, it includes information about the controversy surrounding the validity of the West Lothian question. Part three describes several different concepts put forward in order to resolve the conflict, with an emphasis on the proposal of including the ban of Scottish MPs from voting on issues not affecting their constituencies. Part four examines possible future developments and challenges surrounding the debate.
The West Lothian Question – conflicts and solutions
a) Aim and scope of the paper
The aim of this paper is to discuss numerous facets and conflicts surrounding, but especially different possible solutions to the so-called “West-Lothian Question“, a long-running and delicate issue in British politics.
Part one describes the origin, history and background of the question. Part two gives a brief overview of the present situation and recent developments in this matter as well as an explanation for the Government’s supportive attitude towards devolution. Furthermore, it includes information about the controversy surrounding the validity of the West Lothian question. Part three describes several different concepts put forward in order to resolve the conflict, with an emphasis on the proposal of including the ban of Scottish MPs from voting on issues not affecting their constituencies. Part four examines possible future developments and challenges surrounding the debate.
b) Development
Once described as “the single most contentious problem to arise in our debates on the Scotland and Wales Bill (…)“ by former member of the cabinet and now life peer Francis Pym.1 The so-called West Lothian question, surrounding the extent and level of representation of Scottish MPs in the House of Commons, is a long-running issue in British politics. Basically, the original question is:
If power over Scottish affairs is devolved to a Scottish Parliament, how can it be right that MPs representing Scottish constituencies in the Parliament of the United Kingdom still have the power to vote on equivalent issues affecting England and other parts of the UK, but not Scotland?2
The question itself, pointing out a major constitutional conflict, was posed by Tam Dalyell, then labour MP for the Scottish constituency, who conducted a campaign against the introduction of a degree of devolved government during a debate over Scottish devolution in the 1970s. Yet it was Enoch Powell, a Northern Irish Unionist, who coined the name in 1977 during a Westminster debate.
The numerous legal conflicts surrounding the Question have been debated in full in the 1970s. Especially the Conservatives, Northern Irish Unionists and anti-devolutionists didn’t grow tired of discussing the many aspects of the issue.3
Nowadays, the issue dubbed “the West Lothian question“ is more relevant than ever, but the focus of the Question has changed over the years: with the introduction of the Scotland Act and the “Devolution Acts“ in 1998, the Labour government created the Scottish Parliament and devolved powers to national assemblies. This means that functions were transferred to directly elected institutions, such as for instance the Scottish Parliament. Currently, this Parliament can legislate on areas such as health, education, transport, local government, and environment and has limited tax-varying capability.4 This development has led to differences between the policies of the Scottish government (Labour) and the UK government.5
The Labour Government’s commitment to devolution is easily explained:
First of all, since Labour suffered significant losses in the last general election, the party has a reduced majority, reduced from 117 to 43 in Westminster.1 For this reason, government tends to rely more and more on Scottish (and Welsh) votes to get through controversial legislation, exactly as it was the case in 2004, when the Government’s proposal for a partial ban on smoking in English pubs passed in the House of Commons only by one single vote, cast by a Scottish MP. Labour won 355 of a total of 646 seats in the Commons at the last general election, which means that at least 324 votes are needed to carry a vote. If the 40 Scottish Labour MPs and the 19 Scottish MPS from other parties only voted on matters affecting their constituencies, Labour would be left with the small majority of 315 MPs out of 585.2
In addition to that, in Scotland and Wales, Labour has to compete not only with the Liberal Democrats and the Conservative Party, but also with local nationalist parties.3 In order to gain votes and keep their political “pole position“, Labour “tries to state its claim to be the major exponent of Scottish interests against Scottish Nationalists“.4
The controversy was, once again, highlighted last year: the introduction of student top-up fees, a new way of charging tuition to university students, could only be passed due to votes of Scottish MPs, to whose constituencies the legislation obviously didn’t apply.
This development was perceived as an injustice by many and prompted Tam Dalyell to offer an up-dated version of the Question:
How, in a system paid for out of the United Kingdom Treasury, will it be possible to have students in Edinburgh University having fees waived until they are earning over 25.000 Pounds per year…and students at Exeter University paying tuition fees? Worse still, how long can a system last when students at Edinburgh University, domiciled in Scotland, do not have to pay fees, while those doing exactly thee same course, domiciled in England, have to pay? This situation is the tip of an iceberg.5
Before mentioning different answers to the West Lothian question, it is important to stress that not nearly everybody in the British political landscape recognises the existence of the controversy: some claim that, as England has voted Labour and not Conservative, the Question does not apply at present. Another argument deployed is that a potential anomaly is outweighed by the fact that Scotland traditionally votes for one party (Labour), but was governed by the Conservatives for a long period of time. The third rebuttal is that the Parliament of the United Kingdom opted of its own free power to devolve power to Scotland and by doing so created the anomaly itself, which is considered a democratic procedure.6
Several proposals have been made to resolve the delicate Question.
One idea put forward in order to answer the Question is that Scotland should become an independent state. Given the two following facts, this is not likely to happen in the near future: whereas Scottish nationalist parties such as the Scottish Nationalist Party (SNP) demand for Scotland’s political autonomy, the idea is not sufficiently supported by the Scottish people. According to 2003 MORI opinion poll, 38% of Scots support total independence, whereas 49% want to stay within the United Kingdom, but advocate devolution and an extended autonomy. 71% think that a referendum should be held to assess the level of public support for Scottish independence, 21% are opposing them.7
In addition to that, the SNP’s main argument for independence was always that Scotland would do better economically outside the United Kingdom.1 As Scotland suffers from a slight economic slump since the mid-nineties, economic and material economy would currently be more of a risk than a chance. An independent poll conducted by MORI Scotland in 1999 show that 75% of leading Scots businesses fear that independence for Scotland would have negative effects on business.2
Nevertheless, especially the Conservative party seems to endorse the idea lately, arguing that no one should be forced to stay in the Union and that the Scottish people should face the full consequences of their devolutionary policy.
Another variation of this solution would be the total dissolution of the United Kingdom, with Wales, England and Scotland regaining an independent status. This development is yet more unrealistic than Scottish independence and more of a theoretical concept than a real solution.
A more recent plan is that Scottish MPs should be prevented from voting on issues not affecting their constituencies. In a new attempt to resolve the West Lothian question, former Conservative home secretary Lord Baker introduced a new bill: under his proposed law, Scottish and Welsh MPs would be banned from voting on issues that only affect England. The Speaker would certificate a bill defining the “territorial extent“ of a given bill, and by doing so disallow certain groups of MPs (English, Scottish, Welsh or Northern Irish) to debate and vote on a matter not affecting their constituencies. Lord Baker’s proposal would only affect devolved areas, such as transport or education, but it would not affect UK-wide issues, such as immigration policy, economic issues, foreign policy or economic issues.
Concerns have been voiced that preventing MPs from voting on certain issues could throw the whole voting process into confusion: under the present system, it is impossible to tell who has taken part in a vote until after it is concluded, so the MPs would have to be prevented from walking into the room to vote on a bill affecting only England – a system that would be unworkable. In addition to that, determining which parts of the UK are affected, directly or not, by a bill (or also only by certain parts of it) could proof to be unmanageable.
Lord Baker’s bill was debated in the Lords in February, but it stands little chance: up to now, the Government has rejected similar calls for reform, claiming that it would lead to the introduction of a two-class-system of MPs.3 His idea of “English votes on English laws“ is backed by Lib Dem contender Simon Hughes and would have been supported by David Davis, but Tory leader David Cameron has not adopted the policy.4
According to a recent study, the proposal of “England-only votes“ would be “fundamentally unworkable“:
It would in effect create a separate English parliament within Westminster, and the potential for an elected UK government unable to legislate for England, its largest constituent part. This would cause a constitutional crisis far greater than the West Lothian question itself (…). ‘English votes on English laws’ is unworkable, so the British may just have to learn to live with this constitutional anomaly, as they do with many others.5
In 2004, the Conservative party prepared a plan, also based on a system of certification by the Commons speaker deciding which items are of UK-wide interest, to prevent Scottish MPs from voting on English legislation. The Government dismissed the proposal, calling it a “non-issue“.
One proposal linked to the idea of “England-only votes“ is that Scottish MPs should not be prevented from voting, but that they should simply abstain from voting. Under the present system, MPs who have a special interest have to declare it and abstain from voting. Some argue now, that to represent a constituency which would not be affected by a debated bill is to hold a negative interest.6
Members of the Scottish National and the Conservative Party already proceed this way voluntarily, arguing that they feel morally obliged to.
[...]
1 Sear, Chris (2003), p.2
2 adapted from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Lothian_Question
3 Sear, Chris (2003), p.2
4 Crowther, Jonathan & Kavanagh, Kathryn (1999), p. 151
5 Sear, Chris (2003), p.4
1 epolitix.com (2006)
2 Heffer, Simon (2005)
3 Budge, Ian et al. (1999), p. 143
4 Budge, Ian et al. (1999), p. 161
5 Dalyell, Tam (2000)
6 Taylor, Brian (1998), p.2
7 Braunholtz, Simon (2003)
1 Budge, Ian et al. (1999), p. 157
2 Braunholtz, Simon (1999)
3 Jones, George (2006)
4 Glover, Julian (2005)
5 epolitix.com (2006)
6 Whitaker, Charlie (2005)
- Citation du texte
- Mag.phil. Anna Jell (Auteur), 2006, The West Lothian Question – Conflicts and Solutions , Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/150388
