English voters face ‘democratic deficit' without devolved parliament
Andrew Rosindell described himself as a 'strong supporter' of the UK Parliament in Westminster but told the Commons that English people suffer with a 'rather diminished democratic voice'.
Unlike Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales, where some decisions are taken by lawmakers in Stormont, Holyrood and Cardiff Bay, England does not have a devolved national assembly.
Mr Rosindell told MPs that after the devolution process in the late 1990s, 'for the first time in centuries, the unifying lynchpin of these islands – the crown in Parliament – seemed to have been wrenched out of place'.Speaking in a debate about English Affairs, the Conservative MP later added: 'What must in any case be acknowledged is that England, the most populous region with the biggest economy, is the only home nation not to have her own devolved parliament.
'This has created a democratic deficit in which the proud people of England, such as those in my constituency of Romford, Essex, are left with a rich cultural heritage, as I've outlined earlier, and without a fully developed but rather diminished democratic voice.'
Father of the House Sir Edward Leigh, the Conservative MP for Gainsborough, urged Mr Rosindell to 'please spare us another parliament'.
The Romford MP replied that he was a 'very strong supporter of this Parliament and of this United Kingdom', added he 'would have most certainly not voted to break up our United Kingdom in the way that we have done', and said he would 'love to see' the London Assembly abolished in the capital.
Liberal Democrat Scotland spokeswoman Christine Jardine intervened and said: 'What we did was devolve some of the power closer to the people so that they felt more represented, not in an attempt to break up the country, but – as a member of the party who was instrumental with the Labour Party in achieving it – so that we held the country together but gave people the feeling of being closer to where decisions were made.'
Mr Rosindell replied that he thought 'all members of Parliament should be equal and elected representatives should be equal, but if you make different types of elected representation at different levels, it obviously means that English MPs have a different role than Scottish MPs, because they have Members of the Scottish Parliament in Scotland, which have another role'.
Labour MP Adam Jogee, who opened the debate, had earlier said: 'We must work to ensure that people across England, and indeed all those across the United Kingdom, continue to feel pride in our flag and in our communities, and feel hope for the future and respect for our past.'
The Newcastle-under-Lyme MP added that 'any talk about love for flag and country must be matched by an investment in the people who make them what they are – investment in our national health service, in our education and employment support services, in our arts and culture, and in our villages, towns and cities'.
Communities minister Rushanara Ali said St George's day was an opportunity to 'fight against the forces of division' that present the English identity as 'an exclusive identity, that is a white only identity'.
Mr Rosindell intervened and asked: 'Would the Government consider St George's Day to become a public holiday in England?'
Ms Ali replied that she could not 'respond with a positive answer right now'.
She added: 'We must inspire the next generation to carry forward the best of England through education, opportunity and the belief that no matter who you are or where you come from, you belong and you can help shape this country's future.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Herald Scotland
an hour ago
- The Herald Scotland
Fact check: 2025 spending review claims
We've taken a look at some of the key claims. How much is spending increasing by? At the start of her speech Ms Reeves announced that 'total departmental budgets will grow by 2.3% a year in real terms'. That headline figure doesn't tell the full story, however. Firstly, 2.3% is the average annual real-terms growth in total departmental budgets between 2023/24 and 2028/29. That means it includes spending changes that have already been implemented, for both the current (2025/26) and previous (2024/25) financial years. The average annual increase between this year and 2028/29 is 1.5%. Therefore, as the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) has said, 'most departments will have larger real-terms budgets at the end of the Parliament than the beginning, but in many cases much of that extra cash will have arrived by April'. Secondly, it's worth noting that the 2.3% figure includes both day-to-day (Resource DEL) and investment (Capital DEL) spending. Capital spending (which funds things like infrastructure projects) is increasing by 3.6% a year on average in real terms between 2023/24 and 2029/30, and by 1.8% between 2025/26 and 2029/30. Day-to-day departmental budgets meanwhile are seeing a smaller average annual real-terms increase – of 1.7% between 2023/24 and 2028/29 and 1.2% between 2025/26 and 2028/29. Which departments are the winners and losers? Ms Reeves touted substantial spending increases in some areas (for example, the 3% rise in day-to-day NHS spending in England), but unsurprisingly her statement did not focus on areas where spending will decrease. Changes to Government spending are not uniform across all departments, and alongside increases in spending on things like the NHS, defence and the justice system, a number of Government departments will see their budgets decrease in real terms. Departments facing real-terms reductions in overall and day-to-day spending include the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (this factors in reductions in aid spending announced earlier this year to offset increased defence spending), the Home Office (although the Government says the Home Office's budget grows in real terms if a planned reduction in asylum spending is excluded) and the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. Did the Conservatives leave a '£22 billion black hole'? Ms Reeves made a claim we've heard a number of times since it first surfaced in July 2024 – that the previous Conservative government left a '£22 billion black hole in the public finances'. That figure comes from a Treasury audit that forecast a £22 billion overspend in departmental day-to-day spending in 2024/25, but the extent to which it was unexpected or inherited is disputed. The IFS said last year that some of the pressures the Government claimed contributed to this so-called 'black hole' could have been anticipated, but others did 'indeed seem to be greater than could be discerned from the outside'. An Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) review of its March 2024 forecast found an estimated £9.5 billion of additional spending pressures were known to the Treasury at that point in time, but were not known to the OBR as it prepared its forecast. It's true that this review didn't confirm the £22 billion figure, but it also did not necessarily prove that it was incorrect, because Labour's figure included pressures which were identified after the OBR prepared its forecast and so were beyond the scope of the OBR's review. We've written more about how the Government reached the figure of £22 billion in our explainer on this topic. How big is the increase in NHS appointments? Ms Reeves took the opportunity to congratulate Health Secretary Wes Streeting for delivering 'three-and-a-half million extra' hospital appointments in England. The Government has previously celebrated this as a 'massive increase', particularly in light of its manifesto pledge to deliver an extra two million appointments a year. Ms Reeves' claim was broadly accurate – data published last month shows there were 3.6 million additional appointments between July 2024 and February 2025 compared to the previous year. But importantly that increase is actually smaller than the 4.2 million rise that happened in the equivalent period the year before, under the Conservative government – as data obtained by Full Fact under the Freedom of Information Act and published last month revealed. What do announcements on asylum hotels, policing, nurseries and more mean for the Government's pledges? Ms Reeves made a number of announcements that appear to directly impact the delivery of several pre-existing Labour pledges, many of which we're already monitoring in our Government Tracker. (We'll be updating the tracker to reflect these announcements in due course, and reviewing how we rate progress on pledges as necessary). The Chancellor announced an average increase in 'police spending power' of 2.3% a year in real terms over the course of the review period, which she said was the equivalent of an additional £2 billion. However, as police budgets comprise a mix of central Government funding and local council tax receipts, some of this extra spending is expected to be funded by increases in council tax precepts. Ms Reeves said this funding would help the Government achieve its commitment of 'putting 13,000 additional police officers, PCSOs and special constables into neighbourhood policing roles in England and Wales', a pledge we're monitoring here. The spending review also includes funding of 'almost £370 million across the next four years to support the Government's commitment to deliver school-based nurseries across England', which Ms Reeves said would help the Government deliver its pledge to have 'a record number of children being school-ready'. The Chancellor also committed to ending the use of hotels to house asylum seekers by the end of this Parliament, with an additional £200 million announced to 'accelerate the transformation of the asylum system'. When we looked last month at progress on the Government's pledge to 'end asylum hotels' we said it appeared off track, as figures showed the number of asylum seekers housed in hotels was higher at the end of March 2025 than it was when Labour came into Government.
Scottish Sun
2 hours ago
- Scottish Sun
SNP warned not to ‘squander' £9.1bn boost after Chancellor Rachel Reeves unleashed £300bn UK-wide splurge
LABOUR challenged the SNP not to 'squander' a £9.1billion boost to Holyrood's coffers after the Chancellor turned on the taps at her spending review. Rachel Reeves unveiled a £300billion UK-wide splurge in a bid to appease voters after her party's rocky first year in power. 2 Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar labelled the extra money as 'game-changing' 2 Finance Secretary Shona Robison claimed that if Ms Reeves was being fair, she'd have sent an extra £1bn a year to Holyrood Announcing her long-term spending plans for the years from 2026, she confirmed major investment in defence and nuclear power plus a three per cent above-inflation increase to NHS spending down south. Ms Reeves admitted 'too many people in too many parts of our country' were yet to feel the benefits of the 'change' they voted for when Labour swept back into power last July. The knock-on effect of the Chancellor's funding pledges means a massive cash boost for the Scottish Government to spend as it sees fit. Nats ministers will get an average annual boost of £2.4billion on day-to-day spending and £400million for major projects in the years to 2029. That's on top of the £4billion-plus yearly bonus delivered last October from the first Budget of Sir Keir Starmer's government. Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar labelled the extra money as 'game-changing'. He said: 'These plans will bring billions of pounds of investment to Scotland — on top of the record Budget settlement. 'But the massive increase in funds must not be squandered by the SNP government, which has a track record of waste and failure.' Scottish Secretary Ian Murray said voters would face a clear choice at next May's Holyrood election. He said: 'It's either a third decade of the SNP, who've squandered their opportunity over the last 18 years and squandered the £4.9billion extra the UK Government gave earlier. Top 5 takeaways from Spending review 'Or a government that's committed to investing in public services and infrastructure, renewing Scotland and working with a UK Labour government to deliver jobs right across the country.' But experts warned the extra cash could be swallowed by Scottish Government pledges such as pay hikes for public sector workers and higher devolved benefits. FUEL AID HOPE NATS' Finance Secretary indicated the SNP might dish out more cash to pensioners after Labour's winter fuel payment U-turn. But Shona Robison refused to commit to passing on all of an estimated extra £120million from Westminster to struggling Scots OAPs. Labour has now said older people down south with an income below £35,000 will receive the handouts, following an outcry when they were axed. Experts reckon the extra funds now due to Holyrood will be enough to cover £100 payments Nats have already pledged to pensioners. Asked if the payments could be increased, Ms Robison said: 'There's other things we need to fund as well which is why we're looking at the options. We'll deliver the best deal for pensioners.' Nats ministers are already set to spend £2billion more on welfare by the end of the decade than they receive from Westminster. But SNP Finance Secretary Shona Robison claimed that if Ms Reeves was being fair, she'd have sent an extra £1billion a year to Holyrood. She said: 'This review is business as usual from the UK Government, which is yet again treating Scotland as an afterthought and failing to provide the funding we need. 'Had our resource funding for day-to-day priorities grown in line with the UK Government's overall spending, we'd have £1.1billion more to spend on our priorities over the next three years. In effect, Scotland has been short-changed by more than a billion pounds.' But despite the extra cash, an expert warned SNP policy decisions mean tax rises or spending cuts may be needed to balance Scotland's books by 2027/28. David Phillips, associate director at the Institute for Fiscal Studies, said the winner of next year's election 'will face tough choices' due to increased NHS, benefits, and public sector pay costs. Earlier, Ms Reeves told the Commons her plans were the start of Labour's project to 'renew Britain'. She vowed to back the Acorn carbon capture project in Aberdeenshire. But official documents raised questions about how the scheme, to store gas emissions under the North Sea, would be funded. NUCLEAR SWIPE AT FM & CO RACHEL Reeves slammed the SNP's opposition to arms factories and nuclear power as she confirmed defence spending hikes. The Chancellor announced an £11billion boost for the armed forces plus a £600million increase for security and intelligence agencies. She also confirmed a £250million redevelopment of the Faslane base on the Clyde, where new nuclear submarines will be stationed. It means defence spending will be upped to 2.6 per cent of GDP by April 2027. Ms Reeves blasted Nats' opposition to nuclear weapons and munitions. She said: 'Investment in Scotland, jobs in Scotland, defence for the United Kingdom, opposed by the Scottish National Party, delivered by this Labour Government.' Sir Keir Starmer previously set out the UK Government's Strategic Defence Review in a speech in Glasgow last week. Nats and Labour clashed as the No10 chief claimed Nats' goal of scrapping Trident nuclear missiles would make Scotland less safe. Sir Keir said: 'Imagine the effect that would have on the safety and security of the UK and of Scotland.' They concluded: 'A final investment decision will be taken later.' Scottish Tory finance spokesman Craig Hoy warned UK taxes will probably have to rise at the Budget this autumn. He said: 'This spend-now-tax-later statement will offer no comfort to those betrayed by the first year of a disastrous Labour Government. 'Taxes remain sky-high and the Chancellor will almost certainly have to hike them further to pay for her spending plans, breaking yet another of her promises.' Mr Hoy added: 'Scots are saddled with two failing, high-tax, left-wing governments — one at Westminster and the other at Holyrood.'
ITV News
2 hours ago
- ITV News
Treasury technicalities plus party politics bring more attention for the North East
The Chancellor's big ticket items for the North East came early - which is somewhere between encouraging and disconcerting when we're talking about public transport projects. Around £2.8 billion from the Spending Review was announced last Wednesday for infrastructure in our region, including extending the Tyne and Wear Metro to Washington. By comparison, Rachel Reeves' big speech today was a bit of an anticlimax. In the small print afterwards, we found that areas of Newcastle, Middlesbrough and Stockton that 'have been too easily left behind' are to receive up to £20m over the next decade for things like improving parks and tackling graffiti. The government are calling them 'trailblazer neighbourhoods', which sounds a bit like a spoof initiative from The Thick Of It, and a lot like the Conservative governments' various funding pots for local regeneration schemes. The Tories talked a lot about what they called 'levelling up', with mixed results. Labour have talked less about tackling regional inequalities, but have made a technical tweak that might make a big difference. They've revised the Treasury's 'Green Book', used to judge value-for-money for investment. London and the South East normally deliver bigger bang for your buck, so have often been prioritised for new infrastructure. The government says: no more, wider impacts will be considered, so regions like ours will be able to compete. Despite some government departments having their budgets squeezed when it comes to day-to-day spending, there is money around for investment due to another tweak to government rules, around borrowing. Rachel Reeves made a passing promise today to set out the government's plans for 'Northern Powerhouse Rail' in the coming weeks. Campaigners say it should mean a high speed rail line from Liverpool to Hull, and up to the North East. It's hard not to be sceptical, given it's been talked about in many forms over many years. The Chancellor spoke quite a bit today about the government being focused on ensuring there's economic growth, and people have opportunity, in every part of the country. She also dedicated a fair amount of time to attacking Reform UK, reflecting the threat they pose to Labour, after their local election successes in places like County Durham. The Chancellor has been accused of doom and gloom in her first 11 months in office, focusing on what she claims has been a horrible inheritance from the Conservatives. With this Spending Review she tried to change gear and set out a more positive plan for the years ahead. The North East will hope to play a big part.
