Legally, could England be a devolved country from the rest of the UK?

[JennyPiccolo]

If there was enough demand for it? Would it be unconstitutional? would it be as easy as for other devolved countries? I'm Scottish, would support equal government for England though.

A genuine question, if somebody more knowledgable than me could explain things.

First of all, no-one is looking to break up the UK; Her Maj will still be the Her Maj even if Scots vote yes to independence. What we're looking at is rescinding the Treaty and Acts of Union (there were two Acts, one in the Scottish Parliament agreeing to the Union of Parliaments with England, and one in the English Parliament agreeing to the same) which created Great Britain. And yes, imvho, there is no reason the English could not break the Union.

Except maybe that there isn't currently an English Parliament.

sorry, i didnt make myself clear. I support independence, and i know we'll never be rid of the old bat.

I was just wondering about Devo Max, maybe a fair option would be more devolved powers for Scotland, and a devolved parliament for England. I don't think anyone is 100% happy with the status quo.

I think i read somewhere that creating an English parliament would be more difficult, though, than it was in Scotland/Wales/N.Ireland, but i can't remember the reasons.

I actually agree with you, and I'm sorry I got a bit snotty re Her Maj, I'm just fed up of people (even the sodding BBC!) talking about the break up of the UK, when that simply isn't an issue.

The fact that Scottish MPs can vote on England-only matters is wrong, and in the event we are (yes, I'm Scottish too) permitted devo-max I would support curtailing the rights of Scottish/Welsh/Irish MPs to do this. I'm not sure that anyone wants yet another Parliament, and when offered regional devolution the English said no.

Though I suspect that was because they asked one of the more poverty-stricken regions first.

Would be interested to see the response if they asked the Cornish, though!

I know than Scottish MPs can vote on English issues, but do they? I know some SNP ones abstain, on principle.

It's certainly unfair on England, but im not sure it's as much of an issue as is made out.

Would people in England be happy if Scotland had devo max and they didnt even have devolution? That seems like more of an injustice to me.

I'm getting fed up of the coverage of the referendum already, there's loads of bitching about semantics. Nobody's really addressed the pros and cons of independence, and nobody's actually offered a case FOR the union yet, without accusing Scotland of sponging.

Yes, it's been a surprise to me too that most of the pro-Union stuff has been quite nastily anti-Scots. We'll have to pay to get that (American-controlled!) nuclear shite out of our waters, we'll need border controls, different (UK!) passports and so on. Blatant scaremongering, most of Europe has open borders!

Ooh, too many ! and I have to go to bed soon.

Oh well, was nice having a sensible discussion about it!

Yes Scottish MPs vote on English only issues. I think you'd find that, if it was put to the vote in England, Scotland would be more likely to get independence rather than less. But I don't think a 'Devo Max' solution really cuts it... I believe that's seen as a 'having cake and eating it' scenario from an English perspective and more would support a total break. Stop all the complaining and accusations of interference.

I'd be careful of criticising any side for 'bitching about semantics'. Semantics are crucial legal and practical details and they are what will make the project succeed or fail ultimately. It's far more comfortable for the separatists, I'm sure, to keep the debate as one of emotion and patriotism.... whatever the Scottish version of 'mom and apple pie' is, you can't argue against that. But, as many small EU countries are now finding, the devil is in the detail and, if you go into any treaty with nothing more than optimism and big ideas, you risk putting yourself in a highly vulnerable position.

I was asking about the possibility of English independence, not about whether England should decide on Scottish independence.

I'll stand by my comment about semantics, most of the debate happening is about when a referendum should take place etc, rather than debating the issues surrounding independence. I know these details have to be done right, but I want to learn more about the bigger picture

England voting for English Independence means that Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland become independent by default. I don't believe there's any legal difficulty in shedding parts of the United Kingdom... anything is possible.... but neither do I think there's a particular appetite for doing so.

I'm personally glad that some pressure has been brought to bear on 'semantics' like a date for the referendum and the wording. The first draft of the question proposed by Salmond already demonstrates how wording can be used in a leading fashion.

I was surprised by the emotive language used in the proposal, but i can't help but feel that it might be a shrewd move by Salmond. Westminster will pick him up on it, get it changed and look like they're interfering again. Last time David Cameron got involved in the discussion, SNP support went up dramatically.

I'm not alex Salmond's biggest fan, but you can't deny that he's had a long time to figure out how to play this game.

I'm very certain Westminster will want the wording changed to something less leading and they'll do it early, same as they did with the date of the election. SNP support rose briefly last time but it's a full 2.5 years to the referendum. Memories are not that long. Salmond's had a long time to work on his strategy but 'keep the interfering English out of our business' is not a solid platform for nationhood and it's going to get pretty tired, pretty quickly.