Total Visits

Friday, 8 February 2013

A Conservative notices the hole where his English pride should be

The “Conservative Home” on-line blog has begun to notice that the Conservative Party is not even attempting to engage in the argument about the future of the English Nation.

This is now beginning to produce the odd bat-squeak of dissent as the article below shows.

The author however clearly hasn’t realised that the Conservative leadership is simply part of the manifestation of the neo-liberal Lib/Lab/Con consensus for the last 35 years. Not only has his Leader said that he wouldn’t do anything for England because “I am a Cameron and there is plenty of Scottish blood flowing in these veins”, but also his Foreign Secretary and former Leader, William Hague has gone so far as to say that “England nationalism is the most dangerous form of all nationalisms”.

Indeed it does seem that Conservative politicians with Scottish heritage are most hostile to any expression of Englishness. They always claim that this is because of their historic attachment to “unionism” and the “United Kingdom”, but some of their remarks are so excessively emotionally that they could only come from a visceral hatred of the very idea of England and of Englishness.

This in England where, despite decades of State propaganda against Englishness and the impact of mass immigration and multi-culturalism, over 60% (over 32 million people) have self-identified their National Identity in the 2011 Census as “English Only”.

Here is the article:-

Harriett Baldwin MP and Justice for England

By Paul Goodman

A fortnight ago, Harriett Baldwin MP asked the following question to Tom Brake, the Deputy Leader of the Commons, during Business Questions:

"I am delighted to hear that we will get the report in this session of Parliament. Does the Deputy Leader of the House share my aspiration that by the end of this Parliament we will ensure that English-only legislation is voted on with a majority of English MPs?"

Brake replied:

"I am aware that my hon. Friend is pursuing this matter vigorously—indeed, she made her own submission—but it is right that we wait until we have carefully considered the arguments and options in the report before taking a view. I am sure the House will want to do the same."

That question-and-answer highlighted an injustice to England; a Coalition tension; an uneven playing field - and a campaign by a tenacious backbencher.
Injustice to England: Since the Blair devolution settlement, MPs who sit for Scottish, Wales and Northern Ireland have been able to vote on English business, but MPs from English constituencies have not always been able to vote on theirs. This is a special problem for the relationship between England and Scotland because of the combination of the extent of devolution in Scotland and the number of Scottish constituencies.
A Coalition tension: Eleven of the Liberal Democrats' 57 seats are in Scotland. These include the Scottish Secretary, the Chief Secretary to the Treasury and the Government's third most senior Whip. We, by contrast, have a single Scottish seat. Rebalancing the Parliamentary relationship thus has bigger implications for the Liberal Democrats than for the Tories - and they thus have far less of an incentive to give England justice.
Uneven playing field: Depending on who you listen to, we need a 7 or even an 11 point lead over Labour to scrape a bare majority. The present boundaries and the Opposition's strength outside England aren't the main reason for this disparity: Labour's vote is spread more efficiently. But this week's demise of the boundary review is a reminder that the present injustice to England censors the self-expression of its natural Tory majority.
A tenacious backbencher: How should you deploy your energies as a new MP in the Commons? One answer is: find a campaign to fight. This is exactly what Harriet Baldwin, the MP for West Worcestershire, did after 2010. Two years ago, I reported debate on Harriet Baldwin's Legislation (Territorial Extent) Bill on this site. It proposed what its author called "a lower-strength version of English votes for English laws".

However, her intention was less to pass the bill than to stick a spur, repeatedly, into the lethargic horse of the commission examining the West Lothian Commission - and into the Ministers responsible for it. The McKay Commission, set up under the Coalition Agreement, has vanished amidst the long-grass for the past two years. But it is apparently due to report by the end of the coming session - in other words, by the summer.

David Cameron won't want to see the pitch queered during the run-up to Scotland's referendum. But if it produces, as it hopefully will, a "Yes" vote, the way will be clear for a future trade-off of further devolution, north of the border (Peter Duncan has argued the case for "Devo Plus" on this site), and justice for England, south of it. This won't be possible under the Coalition, but the Prime Minister should give the idea a big push come the end of 2014.

Indeed, he should wrap himself in the flag of St George after the referendum is safely out of the way. It will be claimed that justice for England - which Tim Montgomerie, I and Roger Scruton (in a beautifully-argued recent piece on this site) have all put the case for - is not exactly top of the list of voters' priorities. True enough. But it is part of the business of politicians to try to shift public opinion. I would like to see:
David Cameron give a big speech or interview, or write a big newspaper piece, about Justice for England after the referendum on Scottish independence.
Once given or written, the theme shouldn't simply vanish into the ether: Grant Shapps, Lynton Crosby and CCHQ should be charged with following it up.
With Michael Moore in the Scottish Office, and no Conservative Minister charged with pushing England's cause, Cameron will need to find one - fast.
I'm not sure whether an exiled Scot is the right man for the task, but Michael Gove's immense media savvy and intellectual grasp commend him for it. Any other ideas?
Cameron could also make a big thing of St George's Day, if the business is done in a suitably groovy way.

And the campaign should also have a role for Harriett Baldwin, the determined backbencher who saw this ball on the ground, picked it up, and is running with it to this day. 

Here is the link to the original piece>>>


  1. One commenter on Conservative Home points out that 'the badge of belonging is becoming a badge of rebellion'. A pithy and accurate observation.

    William Haig has need to worry about English nationalism. We are slow to anger but dreadful when roused, and like Pike, his name is on the list.

  2. are English Democrats standing in Eastleigh?

  3. Harriett Baldwin is re-running the English votes for English laws within an English Grand Committee theme. That was once the Tories' semi-official line, but even they have had to accept that it is a non-starter. There has to be an English parliament within a UK federation (which might, or might not, include Scotland)

    by Rudyard Kipling

    It was not part of their blood,
    It came to them very late,
    With long arrears to make good,
    When the Saxon began to hate.

    They were not easily moved,
    They were icy -- willing to wait
    Till every count should be proved,
    Ere the Saxon began to hate.

    Their voices were even and low.
    Their eyes were level and straight.
    There was neither sign nor show
    When the Saxon began to hate.

    It was not preached to the crowd.
    It was not taught by the state.
    No man spoke it aloud
    When the Saxon began to hate.

    It was not suddently bred.
    It will not swiftly abate.
    Through the chilled years ahead,
    When Time shall count from the date
    That the Saxon began to hate.

         "This destiny does not tire, nor can it be broken, and its mantle of
    strength descends upon those in its service." - Francis Parker Yockey,