Friday, April 23, 2010

A Parliament for England

Two thirds of voters (68%) in England believe England should have its own Parliament with similar powers to those of the Scottish Parliament, according to a new ICM poll for the Rowntree-backed democracy campaign group POWER2010 published on St George’s Day.

The findings come as POWER2010 stage a huge guerrilla-style projection of the St George’s flag with the words ‘Home Rule’ onto the Palace of Westminster to brand it English for a day.

The ICM poll shows a large majority (70%) of voters say that laws for England should be made by the House of Commons but only MPs representing English constituencies should be able to vote on them. English Votes on English Laws (EVoEL) is one of the five changes to fix politics backed by over 100,000 votes which now forms the POWER Pledge being put to all candidates standing in the General Election.

The poll of 1033 people across England also shows that less than a quarter (23%) of people in England feels either “more English than British” or “English not British”. Almost half – or 46% - of those questioned in the poll say they feel “equally British and English”. 24% of those questioned said they feel either “British not English” or “more British than English”, according to the poll. POWER2010 says this means that the fairness of decision-making matters more to people than Englishness.

Director of POWER2010, Pam Giddy, said today:

England was not mentioned once in the leaders’ debate and has not featured at all during this campaign so far. Yet we now know people want a fairer way of making decisions that affect England.

It suddenly feels like we are on the cusp of seismic changes to the way our politics is done. But so long as the unfair system we have at the moment persists it can only play into the hands of undemocratic voices like the BNP. With all the talk of reform in the air politicians should not duck the English question, but use the opportunity of St George’s day to say where they stand.
Cranmer would like to wish all of his readers and communicants a happy St George's Day, and a day of reflection, appreciation and gratitude for the Bard, who was born (and died) today.

40 Comments:

Anonymous Simon said...

Claiming that there should be an English Parliament might be fair enough on the one hand, if it were not for all the complaints on the other that the UK parliament is now impotent, having given away all the important decisions to the EU.

If there were an English Parliament, it can only be devolved powers that the UK parliament has. If people think all that has gone, then why the clamour ?

23 April 2010 at 07:56  
Blogger D. Singh said...

Your Grace

Hope you have a happy St George’s Day. And of course something from William Shakespeare as it is his birthday today. It is from his play Henry V Act II where English forces are preparing to invade France (I am sure the Eurocrats who keep an eye on this blog will love it! Cheers boys!):


Now all the youth of England are on fire,
And silken dalliance in the wardrobe lies:
Now thrive the armourers, and honour's thought
Reigns solely in the breast of every man:
They sell the pasture now to buy the horse,
Following the mirror of all Christian kings,
With winged heels, as English Mercuries.
For now sits Expectation in the air,
And hides a sword from hilts unto the point
With crowns imperial, crowns and coronets,
Promised to Harry and his followers.
The French, advised by good intelligence
Of this most dreadful preparation,
Shake in their fear and with pale policy
Seek to divert the English purposes.
O England! model to thy inward greatness,
Like little body with a mighty heart,
What mightst thou do, that honour would thee do,
Were all thy children kind and natural!
But see thy fault! France hath in thee found out
A nest of hollow bosoms, which he fills
With treacherous crowns; and three corrupted men,
One, Richard Earl of Cambridge, and the second,
Henry Lord Scroop of Masham, and the third,
Sir Thomas Grey, knight, of Northumberland,
Have, for the gilt of France,--O guilt indeed!
Confirm'd conspiracy with fearful France;
And by their hands this grace of kings must die,
If hell and treason hold their promises,
Ere he take ship for France, and in Southampton.
Linger your patience on; and we'll digest
The abuse of distance; force a play:
The sum is paid; the traitors are agreed;
The king is set from London; and the scene
Is now transported, gentles, to Southampton;
There is the playhouse now, there must you sit:
And thence to France shall we convey you safe,
And bring you back, charming the narrow seas
To give you gentle pass; for, if we may,
We'll not offend one stomach with our play.
But, till the king come forth, and not till then,
Unto Southampton do we shift our scene.

23 April 2010 at 08:06  
Blogger UKViewer said...

An English Parliament will not resolve anything, apart from creating more expensive forums for over the top politicians to strut and preen themselves.

It would also be a natural platform for extremist parties to gain a foothold.

The two parliaments in Cardiff and Edinburgh should be abolished and the United Kingdom should be governed as one country, with one parliament.

If Scotland and Wales wish to be independant than let them go it alone - they would not survive without the subsidies from taxpayers in England.

23 April 2010 at 08:07  
Blogger Gnostic said...

A nice idea, Your Grace and a wishful pipedream. However, Simon has a point. If we remain inside the EU a devolved English parliament is nothing more than window dressing.

I've said it before and I'll say it again:

BOO!

PS Happy St George's day. I'll be out celebrating tonight.

23 April 2010 at 08:09  
Anonymous Graham Davis said...

How about giving government a sabbatical for 12 months and see if we can get on without them?

23 April 2010 at 08:20  
Blogger Anabaptist said...

As UKIP never tire of saying, we are not voting for a government, but for a local authority. There may be some point in making the authority slightly more local (that is, English), but really all this talk of devolved parliaments and assemblies is simply a displacement activity. It is a distraction from the reality that we have ceased to be a self-governing nation.

The coffin was fashioned at Rome, the lid put in place at Maastricht, and the screws inserted and tightened at Lisbon.

Some people say that we need to get real and accept the modern world. What is wrong, they ask, with being a region rather than a nation? And that is certainly a point of view that people are free to hold -- indeed, there may even be a case for it. But what angers me is that they keep lying about it. The pretence is maintained that we are still a self-governing nation. The general election is made out to be about the government of the UK. The Westminster parliament is spoken of as though it has great significance. Nobody admits the truth that with 80 percent of our laws made in Brussels (not Strasbourg: the EU parliament makes no laws), we are no longer in any meaningful sense self-governing.

We have been serially deceived for years by the very class of people who are now sucking up to us for our votes.

So really, although there are some interesting apects to the English parliament idea, it is a side show. It avoids asking the real question: Are we happy to be a province, a region, a county? Or do we wish to regain our status as a self-governing country?

23 April 2010 at 08:44  
Blogger Jared Gaites said...

"But so long as the unfair system we have at the moment persists it can only play into the hands of undemocratic voices like the BNP."

Can someone explain what the logic is behind the above sentence?

Is it that we need to change the unfair system so it reflects what the BNP are saying? (Don't answer because I already know).

Happy day1

23 April 2010 at 08:57  
Anonymous Voyager said...

Better to have a Council Of The North to provide a regional platform in Northern England with the political parties becomes federated rather than metropolitan.

If Parties became coalitions and federations of regional political parties it would stop the centralised imposition of ideological lunacies from cliques in London

23 April 2010 at 09:55  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

No, we need an English parliament to be the political forum of the English. Located away from London, just like the majority of mediaeval English parliaments were located all over England eg Durham, Norfolk , Winchester, Coventry, York, and a whole lot of other places. My choice is in the centre of England ie somewhere near Birmingham.

We have been occupied for too long by a supercilious British political class which not only has no loyalty to England but sees the English as a threat and wants to keep us supressed forever. The sooner it is over the better and we can resume being our own country.

As for the other countries in this "union" that the English never asked for, can't say I am paerticularly bothered about them.I suppose we could continue in "union" with them

or not, if a referendum of the people of England said not.

23 April 2010 at 10:40  
Anonymous no nonny said...

Happy St. George's Day Your Grace! And all Communicants too.

Oh - and thanks to WS.

******
P.S. I don't know about Home Rule just for England. I like the sound of it for all of us, if we want it. I'm with Gnostic. BOO, and let's ban Brussels.

23 April 2010 at 11:00  
Blogger Preacher said...

It seems to me that the Bard would have had a great time portraying the protaganists in the stage show of the debates, or perhaps we need Lloyd-Webber to put it to music, an oratorio would at least be more viewable. Shakespeare could write it as the tragedy of a once great nation, or divide & rule.
Thank you for the stirring words Mr Singh, let's hope we get a leader to fill the shoes of good king Hal before the nation is sold further into slavery by the Merchants of Menace.

23 April 2010 at 11:25  
Anonymous bluedog said...

Your Grace, Simon said 'If there were an English Parliament, it can only be devolved powers that the UK parliament has. If people think all that has gone, then why the clamour ?'.

There are plenty of powers that can be devolved to an English Parliament as North British communicant William Wallace may attest. In particular, local government, policing, education and the administration of health can be devolved to an English state. These are typically functions of US and Australian states, or German lander if you are looking for an EU exemplar. Re-structuring the UK along federal lines seems highly desirable to this communicant. Any thought of reversing devolution to the Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish parliaments is in the same league of political fantasy as thoughts of returning the hereditary peers to a position of power. The caravan has moved on. It is important to see the establishment of an English parliament as one step in a range of measures necessary to reform the British constitution.

The aim is to curb the power of the executive and to limit the damage that be done by the next charlatan that the British people may choose to govern them. The name Nikolas van der Cleggstra springs to mind.

23 April 2010 at 12:08  
Anonymous A Democratic U.K. said...

Big mistake. Like our lot at Holyrood, it would just be a bolt hole for interfering fifth raters which you would pay for in more ways than one.

23 April 2010 at 12:13  
Blogger Johnny Rottenborough said...

Your Grace, today is also the anniversary of the birth of England’s greatest painter, Turner.

23 April 2010 at 14:15  
Anonymous not a machine said...

I think a few less politicians and fancy assembly buildings , the reality is our success as a nation has been built on the union being there at the start of the industrial revolution , I somehow cant make the sums work when the balkanisers disassemble it.

Not my cup of tea its just another branch of the cheese parers collective .

23 April 2010 at 15:05  
Blogger Dr.D said...

OT Comment: At the Conservative Party website, they are proudly proclaiming that they intend to use the tactics of Saul Alinsky.

Alinsky was a Chicago Communist who developed the "community organizer" model, the idea of creating internal strife within the community to bring down the existing governmental structure. He wrote a famous book titled "Rules for Radicals" in which he laid out his whole approach, all very evil and destructive of family, Church, and society at large. Please Google "Rules for Radicals Alinsky" and read the posts that come up to see what this man said and what the Conservative Party is planning to foist upon the UK. For shame!!

23 April 2010 at 15:32  
Blogger D. Singh said...

Your Grace

Mr Anabaptist at 8.44 am makes an interesting point:

‘Some people say that we need to get real and accept the modern world. What is wrong, they ask, with being a region rather than a nation? And that is certainly a point of view that people are free to hold --…’

It was the philosopher John Stuart Mill (1806 – 1873) who pointed out that it is an empirical reality of multi-national states that they kill liberty, security and freedom – as the European Union is doing today and will continue to do tomorrow.

The destruction of our liberty, security and freedom is a logical inevitability of the European Union.

As the philosopher Hazony puts it into the modern context:

"[T]he order of the national state is superior to that of anarchic order in that it renounces the corruption of loyalty to individuals, and bases the state on the loyalty of each individual to the abstraction of the nation. ... [T]he depersonalization of warfare and the depersonalization of justice are the bedrock of the national state that separates it from the feudal or anarchic order. Upon these it is possible to build a rigorous understanding of the common interest and therefore sentiments of loyalty with a broad public. And these, in turn, permit the emergence of doctrines of the rule of law, representative government, and civil equality. ... [T]he national state differs from the imperial state [in our case the European Union] in being premised on the principle of national liberty. As such, it tends to disdain conquest, preferring to allow neighboring peoples to govern themselves in peace so long as they do not pose a threat to its citizens - a revision in the nature of the state that permits the emergence of the intuition that the state has fulfilled its principal worldly mission if it succeeds in redeeming the one people it represents and governs; and that it is absolved of the responsibility of bringing the remainder of mankind under its grace. To the degree, then, that national liberty and sovereignty can become the common ordering principle of an order of states, each can, for the first time, find itself secure in its pursuit of domestic tranquility, as a result of the common renunciation by each civilized nation state of its need to be the liberator and conqueror of all others."

As Kirchhof noted in his standard text book on German constitutional law (Query)

"An army composed of various nationalities has no other allegiance than the flag. Such armies have been the executioners of liberty through the whole duration of modern history. The sole bond that holds them together is their officers and the government which they serve; and their only idea, if they have one, of public duty is obedience to orders."

In other words, those who hold to the view that there is nothing wrong in destroying the nation-state: ultimately, find that their own liberty, security and freedom are destroyed.

23 April 2010 at 15:43  
Blogger Bred in the bone said...

John Sentamu uses St Georges Day to support the idea of embracing regional assemblies, which we know are an EU platform.

Yet for the English psyche George and the Dragon is more synonymous with the Anglo Saxon defeat of pendragon chief Naud by Cedric, hence resistance to dictatorial powers, especially foreign ones.

I believe the Archbishop of York could still be worshiping the God Mumbojumbo, as did his ancestors.

One thing is for sure, Dragons Teeth have been sown and civil strife is rising from the soil.

Signed: Demonio Bossum

23 April 2010 at 16:49  
Blogger D. Singh said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

23 April 2010 at 16:57  
Blogger D. Singh said...

Mr Bred in the bone

The difficulty for York is three-fold:

1. In my opinion, he is not that well read; and
2. His advisors are unlikely to be well read.
3. The Church of England's official position on the fascist European Union is supportive (much to my regret).

It could be the case that he was appointed simply because he is a black man (I hope not).

A much better candiadte would have been the Rt Rev. Michael Nazir-Ali (a Cambridge man).

23 April 2010 at 17:00  
Anonymous Oswin said...

Graham Davis - for once I'm in some form of agreement with you!

...........

The greatest crime that history will record of our blessed Isles, from the era of 'New Labour', will not be Iraq, Afghanistan or even the parlous state of our econony. It will be their inept and incompetent 'tinkering' with what ought not to be messed with: the sacred nature of the Union!

To my mind this is not only a gross treason; but a defamation of all our history and a curse upon our future.

The 'curse' that is 'Europe' will not last; we will depart one day, I am sure. The curse of a broken Union would be a crime that ought never be forgiven. I would have its perpetrators forever reviled.

23 April 2010 at 17:02  
Blogger D. Singh said...

Mr Davis and Mr Oswin

Outstanding.

23 April 2010 at 17:05  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anonymous (10.40) were you not so (sic), you too would be numbered amongst the reviled!

23 April 2010 at 17:11  
Anonymous Oswin said...

Above..it was 'Oswin said' - not 'Anonymous' - I don't know how that happened!

23 April 2010 at 17:14  
Blogger ENGLISHMAN said...

Would any party offer us an English parliament,if it would empower the English people?Certainly not ,they would offer us an English parliament knowing that it would further fragment the countries of the British isles,and make it easier to force true regionalisation upon us,2010 is just another eu front,masquerading as the champions of the English people and a clear instance of the tried and trusted eussr method,problem/reaction/solution.If we are prevented from ruling ourselves now,who is insane enough to believe that we would be permitted to rule ourselves by the sop of an "English parliament"?we would just be easier for our masters in berlin to control.

23 April 2010 at 17:20  
Blogger D. Singh said...

Mr ENGLISHMAN

Brilliant analysis.

23 April 2010 at 17:23  
Anonymous Oswin said...

Englishman - exactly so! Well said Sir!

23 April 2010 at 17:44  
Blogger Lakester91 said...

I was all ready to denounce the idea of an English Parliament as divisive and unhelpful; as something that would further destroy our delicate union. However I don't think I can say it better than Oswin or Englishman.

UKViewer has two important points

1. A centralised Government. We must be careful to balance centralised and devolved control of power. If power is too centralised (i.e. Europe), then the views of each member are overlooked; If power is too devolved (i.e. anarchy) then the devolved groups descend into petty fights over self-interests. I think that one parliament for the UK can be the appropriate balance if the considerations of all country members are taken into account.

2. Unlike the EU, member states of the UK are dependent on one another for survival. If Scotland or Wales were to leave, then they would both collapse economically as they have manufacturing sectors that are inferior even to England. England would be a shadow of her former self with a crippled economic and military. Together, however, we are greater than the sum of our parts. We have a stronger diplomatic weight; we have a stronger military; we have a stronger shared culture; we have a stronger economy. To give that up due to petty squabbles would be a great shame.

Perhaps if our idea of 'Britishness' didn't involve loose airy fairy 'values', but rather the culture, history and faith that we share with our closest neighbours and friends, then this nationalism wouldn't be so prevalent.

23 April 2010 at 18:20  
Anonymous Atlas shrugged said...

If there were an English Parliament, it can only be devolved powers that the UK parliament has. If people think all that has gone, then why the clamour ?

23 April 2010 07:56

Simple.

An English parliament would make the possibility of a true Nationalist combination of parties getting control over a large and relatively useful section of The EU sometime in the future. This could cause what is known as a domino effect all over the rest of Europe, if not also the world.

Which of course is why The REAL Powers that be will allow this to happen only over their dead bodies. Which is literally what it would take or indeed possibly lead to.

These powers would gladly murder you and your entire family in your beds before taking so much as a slight chance of you murdering them in theirs. Always assuming you could find them, and then get past their masses of extremely well armed guards. Not even Gordon Brown knows where his puppet masters live from one moment to another, so your chances are small enough anyway.

That all said.

It is important to remember that the establishment does not always get its own way, all of the time. Although they have several hundred pairs of braces holding up even more pairs of trousers covering their incredibly fat back-sides, they still fear the retribution of the half starving masses to a pathologically insane degree.

23 April 2010 at 18:27  
Anonymous Atlas shrugged said...

Perhaps if our idea of 'Britishness' didn't involve loose airy fairy 'values', but rather the culture, history and faith that we share with our closest neighbours and friends, then this nationalism wouldn't be so prevalent.

23 April 2010 18:20

Firstly it is a common LANGUAGE that mainly binds common peoples, not so much the other things you mention.

I could be wrong, however I dont believe you fully understand WHY this has all happened in quite the manner it so clearly has.

( it is one thing to see that you have a problem, it is quite another to properly understand WHY you have it. If you don't know the why, you will never know the answer.)

Irish, Welsh, and Scottish nationalism has been deliberately encouraged by our establishment to help them divide and rule over us. English nationalism on the other hand has been deliberately discouraged for precisely the same reason.

This because England is powerful enough all by itself. Which is far too powerful and anti-EU for our REAL masters to be at all comfortable with. England was also to be divided using regional government, but the proverbial THEY, could not get any form of popular support for it. Although they have absolutely no intention of giving up, as you will one day find out.

You will I hope note, that the major difference between English type nationalism ( The EPP, BNP, UKIP, and large sections of the Conservative Party's voters ) and the other forms of UK based Nationalism is its collective stance towards EU membership. The establishment long since subverted, and therefore utterly perverted the policies of the SN, PC, and SF party's.

It would seem inconceivable that the Irish and The Scots would try so hard to gain independence for so very long. Only to swiftly give it all away to a bunch of people a long way away that they don't understand, can not vote for, and could not give a flying toss whether they all live or die. However they have respectively already done so, or are committed to doing so.

If you can not see, because you are not even looking for the unseen hand of the establishment, you can not even shake it, never mind slap it, or indeed cut it off.

23 April 2010 at 19:04  
Blogger Lakester91 said...

Atlas,

I do indeed understand that it is our language that partly binds us (like Germany and Italy), but I think that such a bind needs more substance. My post was a blind attempt at describing what else there is, but also at what it isn't.

I'm not sure whether there is a real conspiracy to grant the EU our sovereignty. I think it's more a collective incompetence that has scared our Government into selling our independence for a stronger economy. Whether we have received what we invested our freedom in is debatable of course, but when did governments ever question their previous decisions? (Mr Cameron could easily have beaten back Mr Clegg's nuclear weapon plans if he had compared it to his own party's plans to remove our aircraft carriers prior to 1982)

23 April 2010 at 19:31  
Blogger Lord Lavendon said...

Your Grace, I am in favour of 'home rule all round' as the logical way of dealing with Labour's botched devolution plans for their Scottish heartlands. I would have Parliaments for all of the countries of the UK (Ulster, Scotland, Wales,England. The English Parliament would be based in Winchester (a few glasses of red).

This would of course happen, after withdrawl from the EU, the House of Lords would throw out the crony "life peers" and restored to the proper Guardians of the land.

Our nation would prosper and get back her self-respect. We would be able to live under the Union flag as free men. Otherwise we should set up an English version of the SNP.

23 April 2010 at 20:12  
Anonymous Atlas shrugged said...

Lakester91 said...

I'm not sure whether there is a real conspiracy to grant the EU our sovereignty.

NOT SURE??????????

Well then please try to educate yourself on the matter, preferably ASAP.

I hope the below helps, but some people are unfortunately way beyond reach however much very real historically well documented, as well as self-evident evidence you put before them.

Firstly; stop taking at face value ANYTHING WHATSOEVER you see or hear on the TV, especially regarding all things to do with The EU. The same goes for all of our news-papers including local ones, whether they claim to be either right or left wing, religiously sound, or affiliated or not, and especially if they claim to be somehow independent, or somewhere in the middle. The BBC, and The Independent News-paper for just two examples.

Then prepare yourself for a shock that will force you I hope to finally realise that virtually everything you thought you knew was either a very real lie, or was based on an even bigger lie.

Then if you can not afford to buy a book on the subject or can't be bothered to read very much, type in NWO into Google and enjoy.

However don't stop there, and certainly don't stop quickly.

BE WARNED; the internet is positively crammed to overflowing with as much information and truth as it is also with vile disinformation and even more lies.

So far the closest to the truth I have come across is to be found within the words and works of Bill/William Cooper, may he rest in peace. Perhaps you may like to try him.

Please understand nothing or virtually nothing important that has ever taken place in this entire world happened by accident, however much you may have been fooled into believing it did.

Virtually everything political is achieve using differing degrees of secretive conspiracies. However please try to understand that when it comes down to it although there are many conspiracies, there is only one GREAT conspiracy that drives all of the rest.

Knowledge is POWER.

Ignorance is often Bliss, but it can also be extremely costly, as well as not at all empowering.

But much much much worse then this, ignorance endangers your eternal spirit.

Be warned again; trust no one, not even any on the internet. Try your best to filter the truth from the lies, and above all come to your own conclusion based on known facts, along with your own common sense and personal experience.

Oh and another bit of advice AVOID people like David Icke and Alex Jones like you would the Black Death.

23 April 2010 at 22:21  
Anonymous no nonny said...

Yes, Lord Lavendon. I would suggest that movement towards such independence took shape shortly after 597. Then indigenes (and Anglo-Saxons) began to share Christian ideals; and so they could argue that, within our shores, rulers and all people should unite in answering to God, not to earthly powers.

And before this day is done, YG - in honor of WS - may I recall the following? From, and about 1000 years later, I think one of his most shining jewels reflects much that is apposite to present considerations:

The warrior John of Gaunt prophesies (of/R2: 2.1.38-68):
[...;]
Light vanity, insatiate cormorant,
Consuming means, soon preys upon itself.
This royal throne of kings, this sceptred isle,
This earth of majesty, this seat of Mars,
This other Eden, demi-paradise,
This fortress built by Nature for herself
Against infection and the hand of war,
This happy breed of men, this little world,
This precious stone set in the silver sea,
Which serves it in the office of a wall,
Or as [a] moat defensive to a house,
Against the envy of less happier lands;
This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England,
This nurse, this teeming womb of royal kings,
Fear'd by their breed, and famous by their birth,
Renowned for their deeds as far from home,
For Christian service and true chivalry,
As is the sepulcher in stubborn Jewry
Of the world's ransom, blessed Mary's son;
This land of such dear souls, this dear dear land,
Dear for her reputation through the world,
Is now leas'd out—I die pronouncing it–
Like to a tenement or pelting farm.
England, bound in with the triumphant sea,
Whose rocky shore beats back the envious siege
Of wat'ry Neptune, is now bound in with shame,
That England, that was wont to conquer others,
Hath made a shameful conquest of itself.
Ah, would the scandal vanish with my life,
How happy then were my ensuing death!

23 April 2010 at 22:54  
Anonymous Truthseeker said...

Atlas Shrugged, why should you avoid people like David Icke? Surely he speaks some truth, even though the majority is bs

24 April 2010 at 00:05  
Anonymous Atlas shrugged said...

Atlas Shrugged, why should you avoid people like David Icke? Surely he speaks some truth, even though the majority is bs

Because there are much better informed and nicer people to get proper information from. David Icke is EX BBC, Jones and Icke are Jesuit trained therefore mind controlled, need I say more?

Of course Icke speaks much truth, the greatest liars always do. The best liars of all are of course people that don't even know they not telling the truth. For they are simply repeating some ones else's lies. Even Hitler told the truth far more then he told untruths, that is precisely the nature of the beast we are now confronting.

If a women seemed to you just about everything you ever wished from in a women ( I admit you will have to use your own imagination at this point ) but however forget to mention that she had a long established history of stabbing her husbands to death for no apparent reason at 4 in the morning. You might get a little pissed off, or indeed dead.

Therefore someone that diverts truth to somewhere where only perfectly deranged fruitcakes go, which is LIZARD bound, deserve all they get.

24 April 2010 at 02:08  
Anonymous bluedog said...

Englishman @ 17.20, I couldn't disagree with you more, and by the way I'm British.

A strong English parliament would act as a formidable conscience to the UK national parliament which really has ceded power to the EU. An English parliament therefore becomes a tool for reclaiming lost sovereignty. It is simply wrong to argue that an English parliament will fracture the union. If the UK constitution is properly redrafted and mandated by referendums held in the constituent parts (England, Scotland, Wales & NI) the vows of marriage are renewed and confirmed, so to speak.

The biggest disaster that ever befell the United Kingdom was the chain of events starting in 1886 when the House of Lords blocked Gladstone's Irish Home Rule Bill leading ultimately to the Irish Free State of 1921. It will take the Irish a while to admit this but by any objective analysis their experiment is at risk of failing comprehensively through no fault of their own. The Irish have been grievously manipulated by Brussels and trapped economically by the Euro. The Irish should now be allowed the option, should they wish it, of returning to a broader devolved version of the UK. Quite simply a small state on the periphery of Europe, and it could be Scotland or Wales not Ireland, is not a viable proposition as an independent unit. The UK itself may even be a marginal proposition. By way of example, look at Canada. For fifty years the Partie Quebequois has flirted with indendence but never takes the plunge. Why? Because the Quebeckers are sufficiently shrewd to recognise that it won't work. They would either end up in a forced merger with the USA, or even worse, as a colony of France & the EU. Quebec can be as French as it likes under the Canadian umbrella, and that suits all parties to the Canadian union. I would like to think that Ireland could find a similar accommodation within a broader union of the nations bordering the Irish Sea, to put it tactfully. This could be a potential solution to the endless heat and light generated by the sectarian conflict in Ulster.

If the union described above can be accomplished the position of the new entity may permit withdrawal from the EU without economic collapse. The combined coastal waters and fishing rights alone would be a powerhouse. Remaining in the EU will see the UK drawn deeper and deeper in to the German web.

24 April 2010 at 11:33  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

bluedog - a nice assessment of the possiblities of the Irish situation. One day perhaps?

Mind you, alhough I mostly agree with what you have to say; it is nonetheless so, that the Irish were not wholly without fault - if only they'd agreed to a 'British Isles' defence policy!

24 April 2010 at 19:10  
Anonymous William Wallace said...

Did I miss St George's day?

Best wishes to you all and I hope England thrives and prospers.

However I do notice quite a lot of loopy thinking about others on this thread.

"Brussels" as the source of all evil."Fascist" etc.

Scotland and Wales as hopelessly dependent on England.( what, after all those years of a Union so beneficial to their economies?).

Ireland secretely wishing to rejoin the UK.

Is England ready for self government? I think this is the question.

24 April 2010 at 22:32  
Anonymous Oswin said...

William Wallace - the trouble with peering out, from beneath your celtic fringe, is a distortion of vision. I recommend an 'Alice band'...

25 April 2010 at 15:00  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older