I don't understand

[Explored]

How Gordon Brown has any authority/power to promise anything

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-29289035

It sounds like he's coming over well for the first time in his life and it wouldn't surprise me if he's positioning himself to be First Minister after the next election (don't think SNP will win next time) but how can he make any promises regarding change in his current position?

I've been wondering the same thing

Me three. He can't make anything happen, can he?

i agree, he is a back bench opposition MP, he hardly left Downing Street as a much loved respected PM, I can't imagine he holds much sway with anyone

I don't think he's actually claiming that he does. He's an MP and obv a senior figure in the Opposition so he's not exactly the House of Commons tea boy, but he has not special authority here. I read it as trying to hold the leadership to account by ensuring the details of what they've promised (and indeed what has been agreed by way of immediate action) is kept in the news. At the last minute he seemed to emerge as a bit of a force in the No campaign, and so I suspect he also wants to vindicate the No decision, so he's 'announcing' actions which on the face of it are not things he has caused to happen. (I'm sure he's been moving and shaking behind the scenes).

Would be unprecedented I think to become leader of one of the home countries after being leader of the entire nation, thank god there's no risk of it being Blair or Major!

What he actually said: "Of course there are debates happening in England and Wales and Northern Ireland as well that are separate as well as linked to the debate in Scotland."

"But I am absolutely sure that unconditionally the timetable of the powers that I set out two Mondays ago, where we talked about what would be devolved and the timetable for devolving, that will be delivered."

"I want to give people in Scotland an assurance that when they were told two weeks ago that there would be delivery after decision day - that delivery has started and will continue and people should be assured that it is being monitored, scrutinised and the eyes of me and all of us are upon it."

So, no he doesn't have authority, but he is just saying, he personally will be all over it to make sure it happens. He is trying to get Scotland to unite by reassuring them that they haven't been duped.

It's interesting. I doubt Brown really has that much power. Apparently according to some media reports, Miliband and Douglas Alexander didn't even return some of Brown's phone calls and emails.

But the Tories have done Labour up like a kipper just months before the election. Brown wil be stomping around on stages bellowing about promises and moving his hands about in a staged manner, while Miliband will have to support Brown to keep Labour credible in Scotland and Cameron will say "What about England?" and Farage will be in the background posting letters to Scottish MPs saying "what about England?" and the Engish voters will say "What about us?" and Ed and Gordon won't have an answer.

Claig, if the media reports you cite come from from your usual choice of newspaper, I would put absolutely no faith in their reliability. I'm sure that Brown had been briefed before he got involved - after all, he was essentially put forward to pull Cameron's irons from the fire. And I'm quite certain letters from Farage to Scottish MPs will meet their deserved end filed away in the bin.

'In an article for The Times today Damien McBride, a former Labour adviser, complains that neither Mr Cameron nor Mr Miliband took Gordon Brown’s earlier phone calls warning that the No campaign needed to up its offer to wavering voters.'

www.economist.com/blogs/blighty/2014/09/scotland-brink

Yes, Brown must have been briefed and his speech helped Cameron. But will Cameron return the favour? Have Labour been done up like a kipper? Will they be seen as not being on the side of England by refusing English Votes for English Laws and not agreeing to Scottish MPs not voting on English only matters, in order to be able to allow their 41 Scottish MPs to push through legislation in England if Labour manage to win the election?

Doubtless, Scottish Labour MPs will bin the letters of Mr Farage, but Farage posted them to remind the English public what this is all about - English votes for English laws.

Gordon Brown can promise the moon, but if Cameron can't deliver and if Labour get the blame, then it won't look too good. Will Labour accept English votes for English laws, and if not, what will the English public think and what will the Scottish public think of Labour? - we already know what they think of the Tories.

Labour have been done up like a kipper and they probably never saw it coming. The Tories have played a blinder just months before the election. Gordon Brown, the ex Prime Minister voted out by the public and rarely seen on the public stage until now, stomping about on stage demanding things won't go down too well with English voters months before an election. And if he doesn't get what he wants, then Scottish voters will be disappointed too and may blame Labour along with the Tories for breaking the vow.

"Fired up by a quick curry, Dave drops a bomb in Labour’s lap

Even those who work for David Cameron sometimes forget how ruthless he can be. As the Unionist parties scrambled to save the Union, one of his closest allies tells me Cameron was coming up with a plan ‘to put Labour in a vice’.

When the party leaders agreed to Gordon Brown’s breakneck timetable for handing more powers to Scotland, Ed Miliband had no idea of the trap Cameron was laying for him.

But just after dawn broke over a still United Kingdom on Friday, Cameron marched out of No 10 and declared his determination to settle the West Lothian question once and for all.

Cameron marched out of No 10 and declared his determination to settle the West Lothian question once and for all.

It was a move designed, as one involved in devising it explains, ‘to spear both Ukip and Labour’.

www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2763675/Fired-quick-curry-Dave-drops-bomb-Labour-s-lap-says-JAMES-FORSYTH.html

The West Lothian question does need addressing though. Why is that such an issue or be thought to screw over Labour? It's been an issue ever since devolution.

Because solving it will probably mean stopping Scottish MPs voting on matters that only concern England, and if that happens then that will exclude Labour's 41 Scottish MPs from those votes and will mean that Labour may not have a majority to push through legislation in England.

Labour will probably not want to accept that. They will need all their spinners to get out of this one, because the MPs they have put up on the BBC so far won't cut it. The English public won't understand why Labour won't accept English votes for English laws.

I just looked at some of the Mail on Sunday headlines and this is a nightmare for Labour.

"Don't sell out England, Cameron warns Miliband as Labour accuse PM's plan to stop Scottish MPs from voting on English matters of being a 'Tory trap'

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2763710/Don-t-sell-England-Cameron-warns-Miliband-Labour-accuse-PM-s-plan-block-Scottish-MPs-Tory-trap.html

"You say YES to English votes for English laws: MoS poll shows fury over handouts to Scots"

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2763698/You-say-YES-English-votes-English-laws-MoS-poll-shows-fury-handouts-Scots.html

and Cameron has even decided to pen an article for the country's most influential newspaper

"My challenge to Labour: solve this issue - or explain yourselves to the rest of the UK, by DAVID CAMERON"

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2763732/My-challenge-Labour-solve-issue-explain-rest-UK-DAVID-CAMERON.html

Oh dear, and Gordon Brown stomping about waving his arms around, demanding this and that, may only make the public say what the OP asked

"I don't understand

How Gordon Brown has any authority/power to promise anything"

I think Gordon brown is a decent man and, unlike most politicians, has morals and principles. I was appalled at how the media hounded him in the run up to the election and think we now have the government the Sun, its proprietor and his ilk wanted us to have and, sadly, that the people who fall for this shit deserve.

This whole situation is a nightmare for Labour and we are at serious risk of allowing Shiny Dave to manipulate an everlasting Tory majority in England, God help us.

nooka The West Lothian question is difficult to solve as removing the Scottish MPs would leave England with no credible opposition party.

I have read today that Scotland has a far higher GDP than England yet the Barnett formula dictates a greater payment per head to Scotland. As someone living in a very deprived area in the North of England I cannot see how this is acceptable. Not all the English are rich bankers living in London

I think GB is decent too scousadelic. Stands for what he believes even when it makes him unpopular and is far more "real" than most politicians. Unfortunately that was his downfall - he refused to pander to the press and he doesn't have the slick public persona, line in chat, or good looks that win elections. I still think he was one of the best chancellors we've ever had and an incredibly intelligent and talented man and I am by no means a Labour supporter.

As for the English votes thing, even the most committed Tory can't possibly really want to hand them absolute rule, or put us in a position where the only realistic prospect of an effective opposition is UKIP, surely?

Agree about GB being a fundamentally decent man; and whether he can do anything or not, somebody needs to take responsibility for seeing the further powers are delivered. All Salmond seems to be doing is abandoning ship and loudly saying what all Scots know to be true, the no voters were had.

FWIW, as a Scot, I have no issue with English votes on English laws, but the Scottish debate has been going on for decades, whereas Cameron has tagged this on at the last minute as a piece of (clever) manouevering. There needs to be a proper discussion about how English votes for English laws will work, and that should not slow up the Scottish process.

As for the Barnett formula, if the Westminster parties had not succeeded in the most negative campaign and last minute bribery, Scotland may have voted yes, and the issue would be no more. Scotland would govern its own finances. So, using the Barnett formula as a stick to beat Scots with is more than off.

The opposition wouldn't be ukip. The Labour Party are capable of winning majorities in England. They've done it before. It's s just a bit harder than if they can count on 40 odd Scottish seats. The West Lothian question does need resolution. Ed's going to have to put his thinking cap on.

When's the last time we would have had a Labour government if the Scottish (and Welsh) votes didn't count?

I agree a solution needs to be found, the English votes for English laws soundbite makes perfect sense on an emotional level but I can't see it giving us anything like a democracy without major boundary changes and I can't see a government in power doing that.

Without Scotland, Labour would still have won in 1997 (with a majority of 139, down from 179), in 2001 (129, down from 167) and in 2005 (43, down from 66) ( source New Statesman). Don't know about the exact figures for England without Wales, but according to wikipedia, Wales has 40 MPs in Westminster, so in each of those years Labour would have won in England anyway.

In any case, surely you can't argue against democracy on the basis that you don't like the political party that would win the most votes.

Also if the Labour Party were fighting a general election purely in England they might adapt their policies a touch to be in line with the electorate and hence take votes from the Lib dems, if not the Tories. Given the lib dems are likely to get thoroughly trounced in the 2015 election it's all to play for for Ed.

Good point. Maybe there would have to be more effort by politicians to connect with the electorate?

Firstly, has any one in Westminster said that they will renege on the Scottish Agreement, that Cameron always insisted from the beginning would be a YES or NO vote, not a ‘Devo Max’ others wanted – which please correct me if I’m wrong, Cameron had always said that on a ‘NO’ vote, Scotland would receive more powers.
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scotland/9369801/Alex-Salmond-Devo-max-instead-of-independence-is-very-attractive.html

Yet I heard Mr Darling say today, why the prospects of a delay, Westminster has had yonks to prepare for a ‘NO’ vote – yet didn’t Mr Brown offering the Devo Max option in the LAST week of the campaign, change anything at all re the exact timing?

If there had been a ‘Devo Max’ option when the terms of the Scottish Referendum had been set, then the debate and potential work for ‘Devo Max’ to INCLUDE ENGLAND, WALES & N.IRELAND, could have been done by now – especially why 59 potential MP’s in Scotland can (and do) crucially influence Westminster policies that affect England, with 85% of the UK population.

Clearly history will either judge that Cameron panicked, bottled it (whatever) - or he made a Prime Ministerial last minute decision to try save the Union in clear danger to break up, but ‘Devo Max’ was never put on the Referendum table from the current government.

So as no fair minded politician in Westminster can really argue that Scotland in getting what the SNP leader Salmond probably wanted all alone (see link above), England should NO LONGER have Scottish MP’s voting on English matters and that has to be agreed by all parties by May 2015.

Claig, have you really not discovered that anything the Mail publishes about Labour has to be taken with an absolutely massive pinch of salt?

For a decade The Mail said; we went to war in Iraq on a Blair lie, the details on the sale of our gold was hushed up, the early attack on private pensions decimated the private company Final Salary schemes, the levels of immigration were a problem to the unemployed indigenous population, our education system was not preparing children for work, mentioning immigration was not racist, we were not building enough homes, the cost of ever larger government/Quangos was unbalancing the economy etc etc.

Lucky no one read The Mail then.