To not understand why the SNP are so anti EVEL?

[ninaricci]

They have always abstained from voting (except on fox hunting ) on EVEL.

It's so hypocritical.

Yes, that's true. I read the poster as giving it as a general principle, which I extrapolated. Could have been wrong though!

MSPs set the budget for
Scotland. MPs have nothing to do with it.

Kardamyli, yes, in theory it could, but as the Queen has to sign it they wouldn't, as if she refused it could get unpleasant.

In theory, the Queen could also declare Parliament dissolved and her authority absolute, but again if Parliament objected to this it would be messy.

It works because everyone ignores the fact when they can. That's the reason for the Queen's Speech, why she says 'My government will do such and such' it maintains the polite fiction that she has instructed them to act on her behalf, rather than they have decided which legislation to pass themselves.

This is why I loved the amendment so much, it cut across that antiquated notion and said the Scottish Parliament would exist by the will of the Scottish people and itself only. Parliament should really belong to the people, not the monarch.

"MSPs set the budget for
Scotland. MPs have nothing to do with it."

Within the block grant, but the block grant is worked out from English public spending...and I don't think things that have their own special funding are part of that? I could be wrong though.

coffee just remind us all how active the Queen has been in what you suggest. And maybe also the last monarch to exercise their power and in what year that happened?

I know the teaching of history in Scottish schools is bad (I've had the misfortune of experiencing it), but this takes the biscuit!

They keep going on about being second-class MPs in Westminster. But Westminster MPs aren't even second-class MSPs in Holyrood - they're just members of the public.

Parliament is the supreme lawmaking power, and has been since the Bill of Rights 1690. It I'd arguable that until then, the monarch held extensive powers, however, a good deal of blood had been spilt over the matter in the previous 50 years.

Now, the monarch is part of Parliament, holds minimal powers of her own, and exercises then within strict constitutional conventions. If the monarch started to throw her weight around, she would be put in her place very quickly.

The UK is really a monarchy in name only.

Tabulah,

Scottish funding is determined by the UK Budget. No one is suggesting that Scottish MPs be excluded from that.

I understand that if spending allocations in England are varied during the financial year, the Scottish allocation is automatically affected via the Barnett formula. There are two clear alternative solutions. 1. Scots vote on English budget changes. 2. Reform Barnett to remove the flow on effect.

Simple.

"They keep going on about being second-class MPs in Westminster. But Westminster MPs aren't even second-class MSPs in Holyrood - they're just members of the public."

Why wouldn't they be? They're not elected members in that parliament, MPs are in Westminster.

"Scottish funding is determined by the UK Budget. No one is suggesting that Scottish MPs be excluded from that."

I know...someone mentioned HS2 as potential England only matter where because it's publicly funded, actually it's not.

There will be things that seem like country specific issues that actually aren't because they're not part of normal spending, I can't imagine that spending on the Olympics for instance counted towards public spending in Scotland or that conversely the spending for the commonwealth games came out of Scotland's budget.

YABU

on the fox hunting ban they were just trying to make a point.

EVEL is problematic because although issues such as NHS in England or english education seem to have nothing to do with Scotland on the surface, but changes to legislation or funding decisions can have impact on Scotland (via the Barnett formula but also directly). It is not easy to disentangle those areas where changes in England would not effect Scotland (or Wales/NI).

Therefore, EVEL (as it currently stands) is not providing a "level playing field" preventing Scottish MPs voting on English laws.

EVEL also creates constitutional difficulties too- how can you have a PM or minister of state from a Scottish constituency, for instance?

While Scottish taxes did help pay for the London Olympics, (I don't know whether there were Barnett consequences), the Scottish Gvt did pay for the Commonwealth Games in Glasgow, without funding from WM.

Within the block grant, but the block grant is worked out from English public spending...and I don't think things that have their own special funding are part of that? I could be wrong though.

No, sorry, you're not right. Barnett only deals with increases/decreases to departmental budgets that cover devolved functions, not the whole block. So if the Dept of Health gets an increase, a consequential filters through to Scotland (as health is almost 100% devolved). If the Ministry of Defense gets an increase, nothing flows to the devolved administrations because Defense is not devolved. NOne of the grant that goes to Scotland:"/Wales/Northern Ireland is ringfenced, so if MSPs want to spend every penny on penny sweets, they can.* Once the Westminster budget is set, and money is given to Scotland, MPs have nothing to do with it.

• subject to statutory provisions.

The cost of the London Olympics was designated as UK expenditure and as such there were no Barnett consequentials.

Thank you, prettybird. Like Scottish taxes paying for updating London sewers, their Crossrail, their HS2 etc - no extra for Scotland.

"Once the Westminster budget is set, and money is given to Scotland, MPs have nothing to do with it."

Yes I know, I wasn't saying that they did though.

I was saying that while MSPs decide how to spend the money, it's MPs that actually set the amount...indirectly, yes, but they still set it.

Where there will be one off things that have public money spent on them that are not counted as part of that budget that decides the block grants so all 4 countries taxes will pay for them, but potentially under EVEL would only be decided by English MPs.

But those one-off items would presumably have funding allocated as part of the annual UK budget, which Scots would vote on.

There is no 'English budget' that I know of.

Well the HS2 had it's own preparation vote releasing funding to start it... HS2 could quite easily be regarded as an England only matter, except because of the public finding it's not.

Which is back where we started.

A fair point, but one which could be cleared up by having a standing order stating that funding allocated from general taxation were not England-only.

The problem is that as yet no one knows what they will say.

No they don't - that's why I'm unhappy about it.

Well that and that it seems to be mostly about stopping SNP MPs from voting when whether people like it or not they are elected MPs.

David Cameron hasn't stopped David Mundell from voting in English only matters...

The process should be a separate issue and nothing to do with which party MPs belong to.

The Scottish people stripped their own MPs of power when they voted to have their own devolved parliament. A Scottish Member of the Westminster parliament has no say on health or education in their own constituency. He/ has no influence on many Scottish laws. Does the average Scot want their MP debating English problems?

Devolution has been a piecemeal mess. Different parliaments have different powers. We also have the London assembly which has more powers than the average council. I am coming to the conclusion we really need a royal commission to decide the best way forward so that the UK is governed fairly.

The Queen would indeed have to sign any dissolution of the monarchy act - aka giving it Royal assent - and she has apparently always said that if such an act was presented to her she would sign it.

I agreeReallyTired - particularly with more cities being encouraged to have their own directly elected mayor with new spending powers

Good on Nicola I say challenging Cameron in this way. I find her refreshing.

We need a properly thought out constitutional change. With the currently proposed EVEL how could we have a Scottish prime minister? Also why should ministers whose departments are English only have a seat in Cabinet? English MPs roll have disproportionate influence in government.

Roll? Will