BS: Scots impose regime on England

Subject: RE: BS: Scots impose regime on England
From: Gareth
Date: 18 Jan 04 - 07:55 PM

Oooops ! While diving into the Mudcat after a weekend of serious political work I forgot.

The No. of Scots MPs will be reduced to 59 at the next election.

And the political work ? Trying to put statistical outcomes on the revised boundaries for Assembly and Parliamentary seats in Wales with particular emphasis on South East Wales. And budgets for June 10th 2004.

Gareth

Subject: RE: BS: Scots impose regime on England
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 18 Jan 04 - 07:37 PM

"Territory names almost invariably follow on from the tribal inhabitants & not vice versa."

The exceptions are colonial places, such as Australia and countries in America, where the name for the place generally preceded the adoption of the name by people who went to live there, or lived there already.

It's a puzzle why "England", in English, took its name from the Angles, rather than the Saxons, since the Saxon Kingdom of Wessex was the one that ended up being particularly important, what with Alfred and all. It strikes me that the Irish and Scots got it right.

Subject: RE: BS: Scots impose regime on England
From: Gareth
Date: 18 Jan 04 - 07:37 PM

Yes - Churchill was the MP for Dundee, tho I can not be sure in what interest, for he turned his coat with a degree of regularity.

Tho locally the rule of the thumb is that any arsehole who insists on a Welsh Name Plate, and the Cymgaig version of address etc. is usually an incomer from North Wales, or England, and has learnt the tongue of Heaven as an Adult.

Picture the scene - The Royal Oak Public House not a million months ago. In comes a "Yackida" And to prove the point tries to order his pint in "Welsh" - Bad mistake - Bron the Barmaid (and she's of 70 years or more)is a first toungue Welsh Speaker, and she don't like being patronised particullaly br "incomers" from England.

He got his pint - eventually, after a humiliating Welsh Lesson.

Second mistake, trying to trail his linguistic coat in front of the customers. There were more Afrikaans and Arabic speakers present than Welsh (or at least those who were prepared to admit to speaking Welsh in the circumstances)

We haven't seen the 'Erbert since !

Gareth

Subject: RE: BS: Scots impose regime on England
From: Strupag
Date: 18 Jan 04 - 06:42 PM

As Dougie said,
"You don't own the Land.
The land owns you"

Subject: RE: BS: Scots impose regime on England
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 18 Jan 04 - 06:38 PM

I ran my own company delivering throughout the whole of the west coast of Scotland, from Ardnamurchan to Tongue, so I know of what I speak. If a house has a Gaelic name, and is ex-directory, and added to that it is miles from anywhere with no visible name plate, then you can be 90% certain that the consignee is an incomer, and most likely to be English to boot. I got heartily fed up with people who wanted to get away from the rat race, and then complained that Harrods didn't deliver. In the main they bring their suburban mentality with them, and do not fit in, along with which they push the price of housing up out of the reach of the locals. Anybody is welcome providing they take us as they find us, don't try to change us, and join in with the local community.
John

Subject: RE: BS: Scots impose regime on England
From: akenaton
Date: 18 Jan 04 - 05:41 PM

Well said SM...That is exactly what I meant by "English suburban mentality"..It does not sit well against the lochs and mountains of our "Dear native land".   Instead of enjoying and marvelling at the wilderness,they want to cover everything with concrete and garden gnomes....And fortifications!!!
Iv lived all my life overlooking Loch Fyne,and Iv come to realise ,nobody actually owns anything in nature,its an illusion
I dont believe in fences, the land, the scenery ,the ocean,belong to everyone....Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Scots impose regime on England
From: The Stage Manager
Date: 18 Jan 04 - 05:14 PM

Having genes 'in both camps' and having lived in on both sides of the Tweed, I can only wish that the Scots could actually impose a regime on England, it would undoubtedly make the country a better place to live in.

However, the general consensus in the parts of Scotland I have lived is that they would actually be happier, if not necessarily better off, if they were separated from everything south of the Tweed, (or in some cases the Great Glen).

I found myself deeply embarrased and angered when moving into some temporary accommodation on the Black Isle, my partner and I found ourselves being welcomed to the "English Enclave". It is easy to understand why many English people moving into the Highlands earn themselves the soubriquet "White Settler". Frankly, it is the way they behave and the attitude they bring with them.

I don't expect many of you contributing to this thread to agree with me. Sorry, I don't give a toss. My observation is that Westminster has had far too much influence over what happens in Scotland for too long. Much of it for the worse, and often imposed through sheer ignorance of the impact. Either that, or it was introduced in the interests of the 1% of who owned some 80% of the land.

Now that the tables are turned, be it ever so slightly, I find the cries of 'foul' very amusing indeed. Long may it continue.

The phrase "Chickens coming home to roost" springs to mind.

SM

Subject: RE: BS: Scots impose regime on England
From: Raedwulf
Date: 18 Jan 04 - 01:56 PM

Saxon comes from the region of Germany called Saxoney(spelt wrongly)and the English are called Anglo's hence the merger of the two being Anglo-Saxon. Are we all clear on that one? Good.

Bad. No we're not. Go read a dictionary. Territory names almost invariably follow on from the tribal inhabitants & not vice versa. France is named from presence of the Franks, not the other way round, England (probably - there is a possible non-tribal explanation) ditto, Scotland ditto, Brittany, Lombardy, etcetera ad nauseum. All named from the tribal people, never the people named from the region. Why the hell would a land be named "knife", which is the most probable derivation of the word?

Although it is based on an older west gmc word, possibly related to OE seax (the single-edged knife/weapon commonly worn by the original Englisc) Saxones as a word was first used by the Greeks & Latins (source: OED), & in reference to the people, not the land. And I will say it again - there is no documentary evidence of the early Englisc referring to themselves as Saxon - it is applied only to them by outsiders, AFAIK.

Are you now clear on this, Boab? Because it is right & you are not!

Subject: RE: BS: Scots impose regime on England
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 18 Jan 04 - 12:53 PM

Just wait and see how many foreign numpties they fly in to oppose George Galloway at the next general election!
ohn

Subject: RE: BS: Scots impose regime on England
From: Jim McLean
Date: 18 Jan 04 - 12:21 PM

At one time(I think!) Chrchill was Liberal MP for Dundee.

Subject: RE: BS: Scots impose regime on England
From: Gareth
Date: 18 Jan 04 - 09:37 AM

Mmmm ! Boab D - Yer could be right.

Gareth

Subject: RE: BS: Scots impose regime on England
From: GUEST,Boab D
Date: 18 Jan 04 - 04:06 AM

John Smith was a Monklands resident, I think, up till he kicked the Bucket was he not. As well as Charles Kennedy as me thinks he still lives in his mums hoose in Fort Wullie.

Dylan

Subject: RE: BS: Scots impose regime on England
From: Gareth
Date: 17 Jan 04 - 07:15 PM

You must recall that "Tam O' the Binns" Dalyell (SP) is in fact an old Etonian.

Personally, and purely personally I would love to see a residential quallification for MP's. However if this had been in effect since 1945 the following Prime Ministers, or Party Leaders might have had some difficulty getting elected in thier parlimentary seats. (Tho establishing a legal residence is not difficult - I've done it myself for various reasons.)

Churchill - Seat Woodford in North East London. Residences Eaton Sq SW1 and Chartwell in Kent.

Gateskill - Seat in Leeds, residence in Marylebone - London NW1

Douglas-Home _ Seat in North of Scotland - Main residence London Tho to be fair I believe he may have had estates in the far north

Callaghan - Seat Cardiff South East - Residence London.

Foot - Seat Ebbw Vale South Wales. Residence Hanpstead London NW3

Heath - Seat Bexley Kent. Residence At time of Election Ramsgate, Kent

Thatcher - Seat Finchley North West London, residence Westminster.

And so on.

Actually the only Party Leader that I can think of that actually lived in and represented his own home town was Kinnock.

Still no doubt some pompus and inaccurate "constitutional expert" will deny this.

Gareth

Subject: RE: BS: Scots impose regime on England
From: Jim McLean
Date: 17 Jan 04 - 02:19 PM

Tony Blair was born in Scotland of an Irish mother and unknown father. He was adopted by a Glasgow family and educated in Scotland. All this goes to prove the old adage that 'born in a stable doesn't make you a horse' as I have always believed that nationality is a state of mind. The other points of this debate have been well covered and Tam o' the Binns Dalyell was just being disingenious with his West Lothian question when for years it was really a 'Westminster' question for reasons already given. The Scottish parliament cannot legislate regarding defence or taxation (except alter it by 3p which Labour says it wont) which is dealt with by Westminster and therefore Scotland must have representation there. The sooner England has its own parliament and we have a system in these islands possibly similar to Scandinavia the better.

Subject: RE: BS: Scots impose regime on England
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 17 Jan 04 - 01:30 PM

Now you've really depressed me Kevin.
John

Subject: RE: BS: Scots impose regime on England
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 17 Jan 04 - 01:26 PM

That misses out the fact that the Blairs emigrated to Australia, when Tony was very young, but came back after a few years.

Subject: RE: BS: Scots impose regime on England
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 17 Jan 04 - 06:22 AM

Sheesh!!

Subject: RE: BS: Scots impose regime on England
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 17 Jan 04 - 06:20 AM

TB Try again
Possible correction.....John

Subject: RE: BS: Scots impose regime on England
From: GUEST,Boab D
Date: 17 Jan 04 - 06:15 AM

See the thing is that some of the MP's who had Jobs in the Scottish office actually represented constituancies in England but had to run the Scottish Office due to the lack of sitting Tory MP's who were voted into office in Scotland.

I stand corrected on the issue of TB being Scottish I may change to being english now all be it with a Clydebank accent.

And hey the Jocks can still invent much better things than the english

Dylan

Subject: RE: BS: Scots impose regime on England
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 17 Jan 04 - 06:03 AM

Purely on the basis of demographics, the closure of the Kentish coalfields obviously affected more people that that of the Lanarkshire coalfields.
On the subject of English MPs running the Scottish Office. This raises my hackles for another reason, and it is this. Nobody should be allowed to stand for election in an constituency in which they are not domiciled, and have been so for at least 5 years. The parachuting in of candidates from all parts of the UK to stand in so called safe seats is an insult to the voters of that constituency.
Tam Dalyell [Sp?] was no doubt educated at an an English public school, and my guess is not a minor one. This would account for his accent, in the same way as his antecedents might do for his arrogance.
The reason you may think that Tony Blair is English is because he seems to go out of his way to hide it, in both word and deed.

< a href=http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0771105.html> Tony Blair


John

Subject: RE: BS: Scots impose regime on England
From: GUEST,Boab_d
Date: 17 Jan 04 - 02:42 AM

Interesting to say the least but I will put in my tuppence worth for a laugh.

Saxon comes from the region of Germany called Saxoney(spelt wrongly)and the English are called Anglo's hence the merger of the two being Anglo-Saxon. Are we all clear on that one? Good.

Next Tam Dalziel is definetelly Scottish, due to his education he may sound English. His great great Grandfather many times removed was also called Tam Dalziel who founded the Scots Greys regiment and was a Scottish lord.

Next. The reason that Scottish MP's vote on UK matters is that they belong to the house of commons for the UK. So even if they dont live in the country affected by the voting policy they still have a right to vote as they have been elected to do just that by a constituancy who chose them as a member of parliament of the UK.

Next Now the British Govt still have over all control of the individual countries with in the Union. This is why the Govt had and has the power to close the Northern Irish Assembly and tell them when it is going to start up again.

Next. When the Tories were in power the Scottish office ran with I think 8 MP's representing scottish constituancies. Due to the lack of Scottish MP's they had to have English constituancy MP's into the scottish office to allow to job to get done.

Next the majority of Scott's are actually of Irish decent or from the Highlands so call me old fashioned but people from these areas definetely have the identity of gael's do they not? Even thought they may not speak the language it must be said that they do have gaelic blood running through there veins arteries and cappilleries.

Lastly someone said that Tony Blair was Scottish since when? As far as I know he was born in England Educated in Scotland and Lives in England. See some people will do anything to say they are Scottish even the PM.

Hope that has cleared up some wee issues for you
Cheers for the noo
Dylan

Subject: RE: BS: Scots impose regime on England
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 16 Jan 04 - 07:48 PM

And that was the kind of reason I suggested going back to the Heptarchy. When Kent was its own kingdom.

The national scale is too small and it's too big. I tather hanker after a system of autonomous regions within Europe, with the Nations elevated or reduced to the sporting context.

Subject: RE: BS: Scots impose regime on England
From: Gareth
Date: 16 Jan 04 - 07:40 PM

Hmmm ! I might have my doubts as to how much popular demand there was for develution in Wales and Scotland - But hell, we have it so, that we have to make the best of it.

What the nationalist "bunnies" seem to forget, as Sledge correctly points out, is that industrial and demographic changes are not confined to Wales and Scotland.

Just to remind 'Catters - What happened to industry in that theoretical essance of England, Kent.

No Coal Field, no cement works of note, steel ? Paper Mills ? - Gone !

Incidently when you look at the percentage of the County Land Area scarred by industrialisation Kent was more heavilly scared than, say Glamorgan, Durham or Lanarkshire.

Shipbuilding, Fishing, Explosives Factories, Railway works ? Gone, or reduced to a shadow !

There is a problem, but putting on a Red/Blue Rugby Shirt and getting p*****d on International Match days ain't the answer.

Gareth

Subject: RE: BS: Scots impose regime on England
From: Raedwulf
Date: 16 Jan 04 - 06:33 PM

weerover - my apologies. I should have been a little more precise in my definition of 'they'. Scots people may well echo you. Sure as hell, party 'thinkers', higher civil servants & the like didn't want such awkward questions asked, so they made certain that they were never on the agenda. 'They' - the people who decide, regardless of any claims that we're a democracy... ;)

Piper - nice of you to provide the correct etymology. As a matter of fact, I don't quite know why I wrote that last night (apart from being pissed... ;) ), because I do know better!

To set the matter straight - all the variations on Sassenach derive from Saxon & not vice versa. It remains that Saxon is not a germanic word - it's Latin - & was never used by the 'Saxons' to describe themselves; & the basic meaning has been described to me by knowledgeable celts as (derogatory) 'foreigner'. Though in all honesty, I've never heard it applied to anyone except the English & this is the OED definition.

Welsh, interestingly, also derives from Latin - a name for one of the celtic tribes - but is described in the OED as being germanic for 'foreigner', so I wasn't completely confused yesterday! On a side note, there appears to be no connection between welsh in the sense of "fail to honour" & Welsh, the people!

Subject: RE: BS: Scots impose regime on England
From: akenaton
Date: 16 Jan 04 - 02:39 PM

Once again McGrath, your quite correct in your analysis.
Devolution was given to Scotland as a sop against Nationalism, which was seen then as a big danger to the Status Quo. All problems and contradictions contained within devolution are therefore the fault of the Westminster Govt
This also brings back the sectarian aspect I spoke of earlier.
Devolution gives the impression of a kind of freedom,but still keeps us chained to the Union.Appeasing all those Scots at the bottom of the food chain, like Orangemen, Masons and Tories ...Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Scots impose regime on England
From: Pied Piper
Date: 16 Jan 04 - 09:04 AM

Raedwulf, to say that Saxon is derived from Sasenach is compleetly bogus cod etymology.

Subject: RE: BS: Scots impose regime on England
From: GUEST,Sledge
Date: 16 Jan 04 - 08:19 AM

The Ship building, steel and mining industries etc. accross the UK have all suffered, Scotland is not unique in this, look at Tyneside, South Wales, Yorkshire and so on.

Sledge.

Subject: RE: BS: Scots impose regime on England
From: GUEST,noddy
Date: 16 Jan 04 - 07:19 AM

the English happily destroy the Scots Ship Building, Steel works, the celebrate by drinking our whisky.

Qoute from "The Cheviot, The Stag and the Black Black Oil"
A play about the way English landlords ruined Scotland.
English Landlord to Gillie,"when I die will you pore a bottl of Malt over my grave"
Gillie, " certainly after I hAve passed it through my liver."

Subject: RE: BS: Scots impose regime on England
From: GUEST,weerover
Date: 16 Jan 04 - 07:02 AM

Raedwulf,

"...what they wanted was the power to decide their own affairs without giving up one whit of their influence in Westminster..."

This is far from being the case: in many cases (mine included) the Scots would cheerfully give up 100% of their influence in Westminster.

wr.

Subject: RE: BS: Scots impose regime on England
From: Raedwulf
Date: 15 Jan 04 - 07:57 PM

I'm still highly dubious as to whether I implied anything of the sort, Kevin, but it's a semantic point at best...

As to the other, I have to disagree. Nothing has been 'imposed' on England's neighbours. England's neighbours, from what I remember demanded it. English muscle? Didn't take much muscle to pass it, either. And no, they didn't impose devolution on England. That particular subject was conspicuously passed over. Each region carefully made sure that it got what IT was after, & bugger everyone else.

Of course, what they wanted was the power to decide their own affairs without giving up one whit of their influence in Westminster... So who says they're not imposing on England, without English consent? I certainly never got asked for my consent! I don't think much of Tim Dalyell, but he's got this much right, that's for sure.

Subject: RE: BS: Scots impose regime on England
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 15 Jan 04 - 07:20 PM

The thread title carried that implication: "Scots impose regime on England" And it's carried in what you said too, Raedwulf : "My complaint, as many others, is that the Scots (& presumably Welsh & Ulster, subject to correction) get to interfere in English affairs, whilst we have no power over them."

And my point is that the system under which this is true is something which has been imposed on England's neighbours by English legislators and English muscle, not something which they imposed or impose on England.

Subject: RE: BS: Scots impose regime on England
From: Raedwulf
Date: 15 Jan 04 - 06:57 PM

Thank you for that contribution, you {the rest of this post has been edited. Heavily. In the interests of, well, humanity!}

;)

Subject: RE: BS: Scots impose regime on England
From: Gareth
Date: 15 Jan 04 - 06:48 PM

Yup - And our South Welsh MP's enjoy it !

Gareth

Subject: RE: BS: Scots impose regime on England
From: Raedwulf
Date: 15 Jan 04 - 06:13 PM

McG - I was under the impression that all of the celts had their own assemblies? I admit to not knowing the intricacies of the arrangements - does Westminster still have the power to decide what happens in Wales & Ulster then?

As to Sassenach, I can only :o, but my point remains even though I blush! ;)

As to whether the English can change their own governmental arrangements, may I suggest that you display a naivety surprising in a cynical old sod? ;) The English will only be able to change their arrangements if it suits the powers that be. Exactly the same as the celts only got their own assemblies because the Powers thought it was a vote winner.

As to "seek to imply that..." I don't believe I implied anything. My complaint, as many others, is that the Scots (& presumably Welsh & Ulster, subject to correction) get to interfere in English affairs, whilst we have no power over them. What's worse is that this interference isn't even of any interest to them - it's simply a matter of party political manipulation & reflects nothing whatsoever on the interests of the people affected! Is this equitable? I think not...

Subject: RE: BS: Scots impose regime on England
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 15 Jan 04 - 05:44 PM

"No way should celtic MP's be voting on matters.." Raedwulf - are under the impression that Scotland is "Celtic"? Got a few Gaelic speakers,I grant you, and people whose ancestors used to speak Gaelic, but they are a minority.

Incidentally it was "John MacKenzie formerly known as Giok" who said about Sassenach meaning foreigner, not me. I've always understood it as meaning a native of "Sasana", otherwise know as "England" (but called "Saxon Land" rather than "Angle Land")

If the English want to change the constitutional arrangements which mean there isn't an English Parliament, that's entirely up to the English. But it seems a bit absurd to seek to imply that it is somehow the doing of neighbours from the neighbouring countries.

Subject: RE: BS: Scots impose regime on England
From: Raedwulf
Date: 15 Jan 04 - 04:56 PM

As Kevin points out, Sassenach is indeed celtic (generic) for foreigner. In the same way, Welsh is germanic (generic) 'foreigner'. Saxon derives from Sassenach (in Welsh, I believe it's something like 'Saesnaeg'), & there is no record whatsoever of the Engles using the term to describe themselves.

Johnny - I nearly fell off my chair laughing, & you're likely right too!

Ake - speaking as a Sassenach bastard who's crossed words with you before ;), in all seriousness, Johnny probably is right. I'm London born & bred & there's a hell of your lot knocking around dahn 'ere! Along with Irish, Welsh, Geordies, Scousers, Mankies, etc, etc, etc... It's human nature, I'm afraid - the grass is always greener! You've got something us rich southern gits want (space & peace), we've got something you miserly northern gits want (the opportunity to earn a lot more - it's just that living here costs a lot more... :( ). You are wrong to attribute it to racial or national origins. If the capital of the UK was Edinburgh, we'd likely all be flooding north & the situation would be reversed... Count yer blessings! ;)

Giok (I know, but it's easier) - I hope the comment about the body count was tongue-in-cheek too. There are plenty of English, Welsh & Irish (never mind ANZAC & Canadian since WWI) regiments with a high casualty rate too. The fact of the matter is that a 'savage' landscape breeds a 'savage' mentality, which is the military ideal in many respects. If Scots (or any other label) have suffered more than the average, it's not because they were {label of your choice}, it's because they fitted the requirements of the generals better than any other {label} did!

As for the rest of it, I can only agree. I don't think regional parliaments are the way to go, but I am far more unhappy with the biased, self-interested, & confrontational political system with which we are all stuck. No way should celtic MP's be voting on matters that affect the English when the reverse is now impossible.

But Labour won't change it, & if the Tories ever do, it won't be from a sense of justice, it'll be from exactly the same sense of self-interest...

Subject: RE: BS: Scots impose regime on England
From: GUEST,weerover
Date: 15 Jan 04 - 12:01 PM

Couldn't agree more John, incidentally my wife used to live in Burnbank.

wr.

Subject: RE: BS: Scots impose regime on England
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 15 Jan 04 - 11:21 AM

Alba gu brath!!

John

Subject: RE: BS: Scots impose regime on England
From: GUEST,weerover
Date: 15 Jan 04 - 09:30 AM

Eric,

What English government? No such entity currently exists (constitutionally at any rate)

wr.

Subject: RE: BS: Scots impose regime on England
From: Dave Hanson
Date: 15 Jan 04 - 04:48 AM

Perhaps pied piper could do that trick that he did in Hamlin with the rats, only this time with Scots MPs in the English government.
eric

Subject: RE: BS: Scots impose regime on England
From: Gareth
Date: 14 Jan 04 - 07:09 PM

Ah Yes, but is England capable of self Governement ? Personally I would say no.

Mind you I fail to understand the logic in the Welsh Nats point of view - "Independace for Wales - Providing the English Tax Payer will pay for it"

Gareth

Subject: RE: BS: Scots impose regime on England
From: GUEST,weerover
Date: 14 Jan 04 - 03:23 PM

McGrath has it in a nutshell. If you have Scots MPs at Westminster, they must have exactly the same voting rights as English MPs; therefore accept the situation, campaign for an English parliament, or hand Scotland independence.

wr.

Subject: RE: BS: Scots impose regime on England
From: Tam the Bam (Nutter)
Date: 14 Jan 04 - 11:12 AM

I understand now thank you for clearing that up for me.

Tom frae Saltcoats Scotland

Subject: RE: BS: Scots impose regime on England
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 14 Jan 04 - 11:12 AM

The only thing that stops English MPs voting on a range of specifically Scottish issues is because there is a Scottish Parliament.

It is entirely logical that all members of the UK parliament have the right to vote on matters dealt with by that parliament. There isn't an English Parliament, so that includes various matters that would be the concern of such a parliament, if it existed.

Pays your money and you takes your choice.

Subject: RE: BS: Scots impose regime on England
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 14 Jan 04 - 09:23 AM

Sasonach is I believe the Irish version of the word.
I alway understood the word to be derived from the Gaelic for stranger or Saxon, I have come across the expression "sassen dearg" meaning foreign soldier, which Gaelic tongue it comes from I don't know.
John

Subject: RE: BS: Scots impose regime on England
From: Pied Piper
Date: 14 Jan 04 - 08:45 AM

"Sassenach bastards"
Would you like it if we referred to you as an Albanach bastard?
I assume that you are a native Gaelic speaker and therefore actually Irish.
The English-speaking majority of Scotland are equally Sassenach.
When you Irish invaded northern Britain you destroyed Pictish and Brythonic Celtic culture and imposed your language at the point of a sword.
This happened a long time ago but the phenomena of the Scottish nation state is much more recent.
The Scottish regiments were the cannon fodder of the British however in WW2 most of the soldiers were from northern England not Scotland.

TTFN
PP

Subject: RE: BS: Scots impose regime on England
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 14 Jan 04 - 08:09 AM

It's odd in view of the fact that Tam Dalyell has announced his intention to stand down at the next election, that we should be discussing the West Lothian question. It is unanswerable in logic, but will remain in fact a reality of Labour party politics, as they rely so much on Scotland for their [too] large parliamentary majority. The being owed comment was a bit tongue in cheek I admit, although the general point regarding the high attrition rate of Scots infantry regiments [when we had a few]is a matter of record. Tam Dalyell has always been to me an oddity, in representing a very Scottish constituency, while speaking with a very English accent. When Winnie Ewing became the first scot Nat MP in winning the Hamilton by election way back when, the MP who was nastiest to her in the house of commons was the aforementioned Tam Dayell, who apparently went out of his way to make her life miserable. Because he was so mean and ungallant to her I have never liked him. I went to Glenlee Primary Scool in Burnbank with the redoubtable Margo MacDonald sometime Scot Nat MP for Govan, and now largely disinherited by her party, and thus I too became an SNP supporter. I admit however until we find a party leader who has not had a charisma bypass operation, we stand little chance of governing Scotland.

Subject: RE: BS: Scots impose regime on England
From: GUEST,Keith A working
Date: 14 Jan 04 - 08:03 AM

The Tories are being perfidious here. Howard has said that his one Scottish MP will not vote on tuition fees, on principle.
When the Tories were in power, Ulster Unionists often could decide a vote . I recall that the Sunday Trading legislation was got through only because they supported it, and it did not apply in N.I.
Keith

Subject: RE: BS: Scots impose regime on England
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 14 Jan 04 - 07:15 AM

More precisely, MC Fat, it's the West Lothian question, so called because that is the name of the constituency held by Tam Dalyell, who first posed it. In broad terms the question is: how can it be right that MPs representing Scottish constituencies can vote on legislation that affects only England, when MPs in English consitituencies are allowed no say in legislation affecting only Scotland?

It is indeed an absurdity. The more so, because Scotland has 72 MPs in the UK parliament whereas its pro-rata entitlement would be nearer 50. It should in fact be less again, since significant responsibilities have been devolved to the Scottish (sub) parliament.
I believe some Scottish MPs have suggested that any such reduction should follow only after the Scottish parliament has "bedded down." It has already had several years in which to bed down.

I'm not sure that there's much in John McKenzie's point that Scotland "is owed." It may indeed be owed, but I don't see how any debt is repaid by allowing Scottish MPs a deciding voice on legislation for foundation trusts and higher-education fees that will not apply in Scotland. The only beneficiary of this arrangement is the (governing) Labour Party. If the Tories (who hold just one of those 72 seats in Scotland) ever regain power, they would be utterly mad to allow the "West Lothian question" drift unanswered.

Subject: RE: BS: Scots impose regime on England
From: Dave Hanson
Date: 14 Jan 04 - 07:12 AM

If it relavent, several of our current labour MPs are trade union members, including that oaf John Prescott.
eric