Reply from Ministry of Justice

The Ministry of Justice have replied to my letter to Michael Wills:

Thank you for your email dated 9th September 2008 to Michael Wills MP. Your email has been passed to the Constitutional Settlement Division as the lead division on devolution matters. I note that you have raised similar concerns in previous emails addressed to Helen Goodman MP dated 21 February 2008 and to the Ministry of Justice on 28 March 2008. I apologise for the delay for this letter.

Your first concern is on the voting rights of non-English MPs in Westminster. The Government is against discrimination of any kind and would not consider the introduction of any legislation intended to prevent any British citizen from becoming a member of the UK Parliament solely on the basis of where they were born. More specifically, you referred to Gordon Brown being an MP for a constituency in Scotland. Under our electoral system the public does not elect a Prime Minister. Voters elect a single political party representative within a specified constituency. Gordon Brown, the member for Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath, has been elected to represent his constituents and therefore legitimately holds a seat in the UK Parliament. Gordon Brown is also leader of the Labour Party. As leader of the party with the majority of seats in the House of Commons, Gordon Brown is the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom.

As previously stated in my letter dated 11 April 2008, as indicated by the Prime Minister on 3 july 2008, the Government does not accept the proposal for English votes for English laws. To do so would be to create two distinct classes of MPs - those who could vote on all matters before the House, and those whose voting rights would be curtailed by virtue of constituency location. MPs play a representative role in considering legislation, considering the welfare of the UK as a whole, rather than narrow geographic interests, and it is right that all MPs continue to have equal voting rights on all matters before the UK Parliament.

Your second concern is on the British identity. The Governance of Britain Green Paper published last year set out the Government's commitment to lead an inclusive debate to develop a Statement of Values to help identify what binds us together as a nation.

A nation with a clear, shared view of itself, of its basic values and beliefs, and the behaviour that those within society can expect from each other, will be better prepared to face up to the challenges of the modern world' be they the impacts of globalisation, different working patterns, an increasing mobile population, or the challenges of climate change.

However, a Statement of Values will not take root unless it is brought forward by the British people themselves. Starting in the autumn of 2008, therefore, the Government will begin an inclusive process of discussion and deliberation across the country, involving roundtable events and online engagement. Central to this will be a Citizens' Summit - a broadly representative group of around 500 people from across the UK - who will be asked to deliberate and decide the framework for the Statement of Values and make recommendations on its issues. If you wish to know more about our work then please visit our website - http://governance.justice.gov.uk

Your third concern is policy divergence between Scotland and England. The responsibility for UK fiscal policy, macroeconomic policy and public expenditure remains with the Treasury. The tax system in the UK operates at a national level, and spending is not linked to the area in which the tax revenue was raised. Instead, revenues are pooled centrally and allocated to UK Government departments according to the Government's judgement of relative needs and priorities. In this aspect, benefits are apparent and diverse across the United Kingdom. The Devolved Assemblies and Parliament are of course funded by the Barnett Formula which has provided a stable and transparent means of funding for the last 30 years. The Prime Minister has acknowledged that the fiscal accountability of the Scottish Parliament may need to be looked at and this is specifically included in the remit of the commission on Scottish devolution.

Your final point relates to establishing an English parliament. The Government does not believe that it is necessary to create a separate English Parliament. English MPs currently total over 85% of Members of Parliament and they represent over 85% of the population of the UK therefore England is already the dominant partner and English interests are fully represented. The Scottish Parliament, the National Assembly of Wales and Northern Irish Assembly deal with local issues (devolved) and matters of national importance (reserved) which affect all parts of the UK continue to be dealt with at Westminster. The UK Parliament considers legislation that has a real world impact on people right across the UK and the majority of Bills the Government plans to take forward in the next parliamentary session at Westminster will extend to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

Furthermore, an English Parliament would not be much smaller than the existing Westminster Parliament. Such a Parliament would dominate policy decisions and it would be likely to become bureaucratic and difficult to pass legislation, particularly if there were a different party in Government at Westminster, than that of the suggested Parliament.

I hope this addresses your concerns.