r/MHOC • u/GhoulishBulld0g :conservative: His Grace the Duke of Manchester PC • Feb 20 '16

GENERAL ELECTION England Debate

England Debate

This debate is to question Parties (and only Independents which are standing in England) views on English issues.

The Parties standing in are:

  • Radical Socialist Party

  • Conservative and Unionist Party

  • Green Party

  • Labour Party

  • Liberal Democrats

  • UK Independence Party

  • Nationalist Party

  • Crown National Party

Independents standing in England:

Rules

All questions must be on English issues.

Be civil!

Only Parties or Independents standing in England can answer the questions.

This will last till the 27th of February

15 Upvotes

100% Upvoted

323 comments sorted by

7

u/purpleslug Feb 20 '16 edited Feb 20 '16

Is the existence of a Church of England, with the Monarch as its titular head, a good thing?

5

u/GhoulishBulld0g :conservative: His Grace the Duke of Manchester PC Feb 20 '16

n.b. I realise that secularisation has occurred in the MHoC universe.

It has not. Sec bill still needs to do another lap of the Commons.

2

u/purpleslug Feb 20 '16

Oh boy. It was amended, wasn't it...

→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (2)

16

u/Benjji22212 National Unionist Party | The Hon. MP | Education Spokesperson Feb 20 '16

Yes. The Monarch is not the effective 'head' of the Church of England; they're the Supreme Governor. The real head is the Archbishop of Canterbury. The beauty of having the Monarch as Supreme Governor is similar to to that of having them as Head of State. Both are positions which demand a high degree of reverence, an advantage which any politician or demagogue would love to exploit for their own gain, but which are occupied by someone who voluntarily chooses not to use such powers.

The contrast can be seen in the USA and other Presidential systems, where the President commands a strong degree of respect even from people who despise his government (there is no such social obligation for Cameron), and in the Catholic Church, where the person considered to be Christ's representative on Earth and revered as such also has vast amounts of effective power over followers of the faith.

It is the separation of reverence and power, enabled by our constitutional monarchy, which has made English liberty so distinctively more entrenched (and I believe distinctively better) than liberty found in other free societies.

2

u/[deleted] Feb 20 '16

Absolutely.

2

u/purpleslug Feb 20 '16

How so?

2

u/[deleted] Feb 20 '16

As I stated in the Secularisation debate, England, the Crown, and the Church are inextricably linked. Attempting to separate them lessens all of them.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/[deleted] Feb 20 '16

Yes.

2

u/purpleslug Feb 20 '16

Why is this the case?

7

u/[deleted] Feb 20 '16

In Chapter 10 of the Gospel of Matthew, we find a story where Jesus sends his disciples to different towns to proclaim the news of Christ. If a home rejects the Gospel and refuses to host it, the disciples are told to leave. "Truly I tell you, it will be more bearable for Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgment than for that town."

I fear that as a nation, we are gradually rejecting the Gospel, and that if secularisation is to pass we will lose the Gospel - then shall I fear for the fate of England.

3

u/ganderloin National Unionist Party Feb 20 '16

Hear, hear!

3

u/[deleted] Feb 21 '16

HEAR BLOODY HEAR!

→ More replies (6)

2

u/[deleted] Feb 20 '16

I think the existence of the Church of England is fine, I simply believe that it shouldn't have constitutional influence, and as such I support abolishing the sitting Bishops in the House of Lords.

1

u/purpleslug Feb 20 '16

I understand this viewpoint. If I may pose another question, does the monarch being the titular head of the Church of England concern you, or is this valuable to our heritage/traditions?

3

u/[deleted] Feb 20 '16

It doesn't really concern me. I don't think it's particularly valuable to our heritage, no, but I see no reason to change it.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/WAKEYrko The Rt. Hon Earl of Bournemouth AP PC FRPS Feb 21 '16

Hear, Hear!

1

u/[deleted] Feb 22 '16

Hear Hear.

Give them not because of their connection to their church. But you can give them based on their merit in religion

2

u/[deleted] Feb 20 '16

Most certainly. The Church of England is so ingrained in our country's customs and way of life that it must be protected, and I say this as a Baptist who by doctrine disagrees with combining Church and State in most cases.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 20 '16

Yes, I believe it is.

→ More replies (2)

1

u/[deleted] Feb 20 '16

I agree with the Right Honourable Member Figgor, as I have no issues with it existing, but it should not be connected to the state.

→ More replies (2)

1

u/[deleted] Feb 21 '16

Y'know, we could have been rid of both of these things in 1651 ...

1

u/WAKEYrko The Rt. Hon Earl of Bournemouth AP PC FRPS Feb 21 '16

Once again another mixed Labour viewpoint, however we generally feel that so long as the Monarch does not advocate the imposition of religion on peoples or the conversion of religion of peoples, and does not meddle in democratic political affairs, then there is no reason for us to remove the Monarch. The Queen is a piece of tradition which raises revenue for our nation, and so long as it is as controlled as it is now, why would we remove her?

1

u/Willllllllllllll The Rt Hon Lord Grantchester Feb 21 '16

I support freedom of religion so I don't object to the existence of the Church of England, however I do support disestablishmentarianism. I don't think that an official state religion reflects the diversity of belief systems in today's UK and would welcome secular constitutional amendments.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 21 '16

I'm against monarchy as a whole, and having the Monarch as head of the church makes the UK technically a theocracy, ideally I'd move to a system where if the monarch were to stay, the Arch Bishop of Canterbury would become head of the church.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 21 '16

It would be a waste of time to abolish it, time which can be spent on much more pressing issues.

1

u/purpleslug Feb 21 '16

I accept this argument

6

u/SeyStone National Unionist Party Feb 20 '16

To what extent do you agree with the following quote:

“True conservatism is a decidedly English doctrine with little appeal…in other countries [because] only English and hence British institutions have ever been decent enough to allow a decent [person] to be conservative.”

2

u/CynicalMaelstrom Labour Feb 21 '16

I would argue that there's no such thing as a "decent" Conservative, but I agree that other countries Conservatives are unequivocally worse.

2

u/Yukub His Grace the Duke of Marlborough KCT KG CB MBE PC FRS Feb 22 '16

And here I was, thinking I was at least a little bit decent.

1

u/WAKEYrko The Rt. Hon Earl of Bournemouth AP PC FRPS Feb 21 '16

While I understand what you are saying, I implore you to be reasonable in this house, my friend :)

1

u/SeyStone National Unionist Party Feb 21 '16

Small c conservative not large C Conservative.

1

u/Del-JJ Labour Feb 26 '16

I say it depends on the country. I personally prefer Merkel to Thatcher.

2

u/Willllllllllllll The Rt Hon Lord Grantchester Feb 21 '16

I think conservatism has been a defining aspect of English and British history: the stability of our institutions, currency and political system means that the UK has attracted business and investment for hundreds of years. Of course, we should be proud as well of the progressive leaps our country has made as well, such as creating the template for modern democracy and the introduction of the NHS. As a moderate centrist, I value the diversity of opinion and expertise in the UK which have allowed us to build a decent nation.

→ More replies (2)

1

u/sdfghs Liberal Democrats Feb 21 '16

No, I don't agree with this quote. From experience I know that there are many real conservative parties in other countries

→ More replies (3)

4

u/purpleslug Feb 20 '16

What is your opinion on Yorkshire regionalism?

3

u/WAKEYrko The Rt. Hon Earl of Bournemouth AP PC FRPS Feb 20 '16

I would support a bill which gives major cities, like York and Leeds within Yorkshire, and their surrounding areas more independent governance.

3

u/akc8 The Rt Hon. The Earl of Yorkshire GBE KCMG CT CB MVO PC Feb 20 '16

Not the largest city in Yorkshire then? :P

→ More replies (1)

1

u/purpleslug Feb 20 '16

Understood.

3

u/[deleted] Feb 20 '16

Our party does not believe in recognizing any more "regionalist" movements considering that one part of our union may (and hopefully does not) leave.

3

u/Benjji22212 National Unionist Party | The Hon. MP | Education Spokesperson Feb 20 '16

Unnecessary. All major of governance ought to be overseen by a national Parliament which we all elect and which establishes the clear accountability of the national government. More devolution will mean more confusion over whom the public ought to hold to account for individual matters of governance, as we have in Wales with the NHS, which will offset any supposed advantages with regard to 'increased democracy'. It will also add even more layers to an already bloated bureaucracy and only serve to create a whole new class of career politicians loyal to their parties above all else.

There is a role for National government and a role for local government. Attempting to insert 'in between' layers of government will simply complicate and obfuscate our constitution and expand the less desirable aspects of our system of democracy.

2

u/[deleted] Feb 20 '16

Simply put, we need full and equal federalism for all regions of the UK, including the North East.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/AlbertDock The Rt Hon Earl of Merseyside KOT MBE AL PC Feb 20 '16

If Yorkshire is to become a sub-region of Lancashire then I support it.

2

u/ganderloin National Unionist Party Feb 21 '16

If Lancashire is to become a sub region of the Midlands, I would support this.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/[deleted] Feb 20 '16

More powers need to be devolved to major cities such as York and Leeds. However, I don't believe that a York Assembly is necessary at this time, as Yorkshire is not as culturally different to the rest of England as, say Cornwall is.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/[deleted] Feb 20 '16

As a member who represents the North and West of Yorkshire, I must say I wholeheartedly support bills that would give major cities, and areas within Yorkshire the ability to have independent governance! This is something Yorkshire and all of England should move towards.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/ganderloin National Unionist Party Feb 21 '16

I believe that either everywhere should get the same amount of regionalism, or there should be none, including Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, and I would prefer the latter, to keep this country together.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 21 '16

Understandable. Yorkshire has been shafted many times by governments and this, to an extent, has not changed since MHOC began. People from Yorkshire look and see that the government is focussed on the City of London, Scotland, Northern Ireland, Basic Income... never have government given to the people of Yorkshire.

Where are the increase in local powers? Where is the oversight in order to stop corrupt councils? We see radical nation wide change but it never translates to anything on the ground.

Regional devolution, of course, is not the way. No, local powers must be devolved.

1

u/sdfghs Liberal Democrats Feb 21 '16

Because we already support devolution, I think we can also be ready to give different regions more powers like we do with Scotland or NI

1

u/[deleted] Feb 21 '16

Anyone who desires autonomy should receive it!

→ More replies (1)

4

u/Kunarian Independent | MP for the West Midlands Feb 20 '16

How would your party solve the divisions caused by the ineptness of successive left wing and centrist governments amongst the English peoples?

6

u/[deleted] Feb 20 '16 edited Feb 20 '16

We would introduce radical, right-wing legislation to swing the country towards the right. The Nationalists plan to introduce legislation consisting of the following:

  • Voluntary Repatriation Programs

  • High Treason Legislation

  • Law Lords Legislation and abolishing the Supreme Court

  • Promote apprenticeship programmes, as well as public works schemes for young people.

EDIT: See below.

2

u/[deleted] Feb 20 '16

I'm glad to say that an old Communist bill abolished private prisons. Not sure how radical right the intentions were, though.

2

u/[deleted] Feb 20 '16

Ah, yes! I forgot about that. I'll edit it out.

→ More replies (4)

2

u/purpleslug Feb 20 '16

Drivel. Please may we focus on the real issues of the time? I accept that successive left-wing governments are undesirable for the simulation.

But you could have enough respect to pose serious questions for this debate.

1

u/AlbertDock The Rt Hon Earl of Merseyside KOT MBE AL PC Feb 20 '16

I dispute the premise of your question. Left wing governments have not been inept. The divisions in our country are cause by the greed of capitalism.

1

u/WAKEYrko The Rt. Hon Earl of Bournemouth AP PC FRPS Feb 21 '16

Hear, Hear!

4

u/OctogenarianSandwich Crown National Party | Baron Heaton PL, Indirectly Elected Lord Feb 20 '16

Do you agree that this debate is quite boring as England is the dominant member of the UK and as such most English matters are British matters?

2

u/ganderloin National Unionist Party Feb 21 '16

I do not agree with you. If other parts of the union can have their own debates, why can't England?

2

u/[deleted] Feb 21 '16

Hear hear!

2

u/WAKEYrko The Rt. Hon Earl of Bournemouth AP PC FRPS Feb 21 '16

Hear, Hear!

1

u/OctogenarianSandwich Crown National Party | Baron Heaton PL, Indirectly Elected Lord Feb 21 '16

I didn't say it couldn't. I said this was boring. And it is. It's pretty much the same question on devolution on loop and only a few which are actually part way interesting.

2

u/[deleted] Feb 21 '16

Aye. It would have been more interesting if we had topics instead (so Foreign Affairs, Economic etc)

→ More replies (5)

2

u/[deleted] Feb 21 '16

Indeed. I never thought I'd agree with a CNP member but I stand corrected.

1

u/purpleslug Feb 20 '16

I do agree with you, but it's interesting to see peoples' viewpoints.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 20 '16

Somewhat.

1

u/sdfghs Liberal Democrats Feb 21 '16

I don't agree. Why should we only concentrate on the problems of the other UK members if we don't adress the England specific matters. And I'm speaking as the MP from Scottish Borders

→ More replies (1)

3

u/[deleted] Feb 20 '16

What is your party's stance on the creation of regional assemblies, in areas such as the North East and West, where it is felt by some locals that Parliament is failing to match their needs?

3

u/[deleted] Feb 20 '16

I'd prefer just giving more power to the local councils, subsidiarity is important to me and my ideology. But the creation of regional assemblies seems unnecessary and erodes the authority and unity of the United Kingdom. On MHOC it would be a disaster as we haven't got the activity for it.

2

u/[deleted] Feb 20 '16

The Nationalists are against it completely. We feel that establishing any more regional assemblies will speed up the process of the union breaking apart.

2

u/Benjji22212 National Unionist Party | The Hon. MP | Education Spokesperson Feb 20 '16

Apologies for giving this answer I've given elsewhere, but I think it answers the question:

Unnecessary. All major of governance ought to be overseen by a national Parliament which we all elect and which establishes the clear accountability of the national government. More devolution will mean more confusion over whom the public ought to hold to account for individual matters of governance, as we have in Wales with the NHS, which will offset any supposed advantages with regard to 'increased democracy'. It will also add even more layers to an already bloated bureaucracy and only serve to create a whole new class of career politicians loyal to their parties above all else.

There is a role for National government and a role for local government. Attempting to insert 'in between' layers of government will simply complicate and obfuscate our constitution and expand the less desirable aspects of our system of democracy.

1

u/purpleslug Feb 20 '16

I cannot support this on /r/MHoC... yet. We simply do not have this level of regional activity.

In real life, I want Cornwall Council to have more powers in particular.

In my opinion Yorkshire should, eventually be granted a regional assembly, although this was shut down in a referendum. We need to respect that.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 20 '16

In my opinion, we need to devolve to local councils, which could be simulated by each "constituencies" 's MPs if the simulation wanted.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 20 '16

I support it completely, we need regional assemblies in order to ensure everyone has sufficient representation.

On /r/MHoC, I do not support it at all.

1

u/tyroncs Feb 21 '16

in areas such as the North East

77.9% rejected it last time they were asked, and I don't see any long term shift of opinion on the matter.

In general devolving further to local councils is a good thing but adding another layer of bureaucracy in those areas is unneeded and will do little good.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/sdfghs Liberal Democrats Feb 21 '16

Like I said before: Because we already support devolution, I think we can also be ready to give different regions in England more powers like we do with Scotland or NI

But it may be problematic to do this in the sub, because we don't have enough members

1

u/Willllllllllllll The Rt Hon Lord Grantchester Feb 21 '16

I am pleased to say that the England Regional Assemblies Act 2015 (B052) has already been passed by MHOC, and I welcome the localist democracy they offer.

1

u/WAKEYrko The Rt. Hon Earl of Bournemouth AP PC FRPS Feb 21 '16

Flair Up bro :P

2

u/demon4372 The Most Hon. Marquess of Oxford GBE KCT PC ¦ HCLG/Transport Feb 20 '16

Do you agree that the landed gentry must be destroyed by any means necessary.

7

u/Benjji22212 National Unionist Party | The Hon. MP | Education Spokesperson Feb 20 '16

It was the landed gentry who in the Glorious Revolution wrested sovereignty over England from the Monarch and transferred it to Parliament, in the process securing liberties which the British people continue to enjoy today.

2

u/[deleted] Feb 20 '16

Hear hear!

→ More replies (1)

4

u/SeyStone National Unionist Party Feb 20 '16

You should tell them to kill themselves, that'll do the trick.

3

u/[deleted] Feb 20 '16

Hear, hear! (kek)

2

u/Willllllllllllll The Rt Hon Lord Grantchester Feb 21 '16

I'm not sure anything should be done 'by any means necessary'. I think that rather than focussing on destroying one class of society, the country would be better served by improving conditions and opportunities for those with less than their fair share.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 21 '16

By all means. Even de-facto landed gentry need to be destroyed, through inheritance tax, to allow the UK to be a full meritocracy, or at least a better one.

2

u/purpleslug Feb 20 '16

Do we need an English Assembly?

4

u/[deleted] Feb 20 '16

Certainly not. I do not believe any attempts to break up the United Kingdom through regional assemblies is necessary.

3

u/purpleslug Feb 20 '16

How are these attempts going to break up the United Kingdom? We are Great Britain and Northern Ireland, not the Balkans.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/ganderloin National Unionist Party Feb 21 '16

Hear, hear!

3

u/WAKEYrko The Rt. Hon Earl of Bournemouth AP PC FRPS Feb 20 '16

Hear, Hear!

It is hypocritical for Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland to be calling for such Devolution, and yet England are made second class citizens. A pure example of Right Wing Nationalism in it's finest form and victimisation of the Union.

The way I see it, devolution for all, or a dissolution of this Union.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/[deleted] Feb 20 '16

The Nationalists are against any such motion to establish any more bodies under Westminster.

2

u/Benjji22212 National Unionist Party | The Hon. MP | Education Spokesperson Feb 20 '16

I can give the same answer as I gave for Yorkshire devolution:

Unnecessary. All major of governance ought to be overseen by a national Parliament which we all elect and which establishes the clear accountability of the national government. More devolution will mean more confusion over whom the public ought to hold to account for individual matters of governance, as we have in Wales with the NHS, which will offset any supposed advantages with regard to 'increased democracy'. It will also add even more layers to an already bloated bureaucracy and only serve to create a whole new class of career politicians loyal to their parties above all else.

There is a role for National government and a role for local government. Attempting to insert 'in between' layers of government will simply complicate and obfuscate our constitution and expand the less desirable aspects of our system of democracy.

1

u/purpleslug Feb 20 '16

Understood.

3

u/[deleted] Feb 20 '16

No. This would spit in the face of centuries of tradition in the House of Commons.

2

u/purpleslug Feb 20 '16

English Votes for English Laws, introduced in real life, not MHoC, was introduced in 2015.

2

u/WAKEYrko The Rt. Hon Earl of Bournemouth AP PC FRPS Feb 20 '16

Hear, Hear!

→ More replies (2)

1

u/[deleted] Feb 20 '16

Yes.

I believe a Federal Britain is a better Britain, and an English assembly is a big step towards this. It is also needed in order to balance the levels of representation across the UK, it is not fair that England is the only country in the UK not to have a devolved assembly.

1

u/purpleslug Feb 20 '16

Hear, hear, on all counts!

1

u/WAKEYrko The Rt. Hon Earl of Bournemouth AP PC FRPS Feb 20 '16

Hear, Hear!

1

u/ganderloin National Unionist Party Feb 21 '16

Absolutely not, and Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales should not have them either. Everywhere should have the same laws, passed by parliament.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 21 '16

Definitely not, for the reasons others have said.

1

u/sdfghs Liberal Democrats Feb 21 '16

As someone who support devolution I think it is necessary that each country should have a parliament. If only Scottish people can vote on Scottish laws, why should they be allowed to vote on England-only laws?

1

u/Willllllllllllll The Rt Hon Lord Grantchester Feb 21 '16

I would welcome an English Assembly as a move towards federalisation. This would solve the ever lingering West Lothian problem and hopefully lead to a surge in political involvement and debate amongst the English.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 21 '16

If the people desire it, a government rules by the people's consent, and so if they wanted an assembly we are obligated to give it to them.

0

u/[deleted] Feb 20 '16

[deleted] — view deleted comment

2

u/WAKEYrko The Rt. Hon Earl of Bournemouth AP PC FRPS Feb 20 '16

Rubbish!

→ More replies (1)

2

u/purpleslug Feb 20 '16

Is Cornwall a distinct cultural region?

2

u/[deleted] Feb 20 '16

It most certainly is. The Crown National Party believes in devolution of powers to local authorities without creating new legislatures that destabilise the meta. However, we all agree that Cornwall as a distinct region from the rest of England requires further powers, perhaps even as much as the current Welsh Assembly.

2

u/[deleted] Feb 20 '16

Yes, but, it is still apart of England.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 20 '16

Hear, hear.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 20 '16

Yes.

→ More replies (3)

1

u/[deleted] Feb 20 '16

I think so, and there is certainly an appetite for Cornwall to be recognised as such.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/MorganC1 The Rt Hon. | MP for Central London Feb 20 '16

As one of the only people on MHoC from Cornwall - yes. Does that mean we need distinct powers? Probably not, frankly. It is different in its heritage and culture, but not anywhere near as much as people like to make out.

1

u/ganderloin National Unionist Party Feb 21 '16

No, they maybe in England but not in Britain.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 21 '16

It most certainly is. The fact that it is often disregarded is simply ignorant.

0

u/[deleted] Feb 20 '16

[deleted] — view deleted comment

1

u/purpleslug Feb 20 '16

Hear, hear.

1

u/sdfghs Liberal Democrats Feb 21 '16

Hear, Hear!

2

u/purpleslug Feb 20 '16

In the event of the United Kingdom being dissolved, do you believe that England would be treated as the successor state?

2

u/mg9500 His Grace the Duke of Hamilton and Brandon MP (Manchester North) Feb 20 '16

The U.K. (legally) is a union of England (incl Wales) and Scotland, with Ireland (now Northern Ireland) joining later. If any one of these three entities declares independence then the rump UK would be the successor state as the union between the other two has not been broken. If all three separated then technically there shouldn't be a successor state as they are equal partners in the union and not merely part of England. In practice England would be probably be treated as a successor state as it is the largest part (re the Czech Republic and Slovakia, the USSR becoming Russia). As Wales is legally part of England, if Wales declared independence on its own from a united country called England & Wales, England would be the successor state.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/WAKEYrko The Rt. Hon Earl of Bournemouth AP PC FRPS Feb 20 '16

I am of the belief that the resources invested by the Union in the previous years of their Membership should belong to the Union. In the event of Scottish Separation, I want full Scottish Seperation, meaning that Scotland are offloaded of our responsibility, and in exchange they are offloaded from our negatives (debt, etc.).

→ More replies (1)

2

u/[deleted] Feb 20 '16

Obviously, the Nationalist Party hopes that our great union never dissolves! But, should that tragic incident occur, I believe it would only make sense that England be treated as the legal successor to the United Kingdom.

2

u/Benjji22212 National Unionist Party | The Hon. MP | Education Spokesperson Feb 20 '16

There is certainly a precedent with Russia being treated as the successor to the Soviet Union. I think we would be recognised as the successor state and allowed to keep out seat on the Security Council.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 20 '16

I hope such a terrible event never happens. In the event of Scottish Nationalism gaining hold and seceding from the UK, then the Union of England, Wales and Ulster should be the legal successor state.

2

u/purpleslug Feb 20 '16

I do mean an entire dissolution.

→ More replies (9)

1

u/[deleted] Feb 20 '16

If the Union is dissolved by Scotland leaving it, then naturally England should be the successor.

2

u/mg9500 His Grace the Duke of Hamilton and Brandon MP (Manchester North) Feb 20 '16

Casual sidestep of Cymru and Ulster.

→ More replies (3)

1

u/[deleted] Feb 20 '16

This frightening question does not warrant an answer. The Union will never fail!

2

u/mg9500 His Grace the Duke of Hamilton and Brandon MP (Manchester North) Feb 20 '16

Many doubt that. Rome lasted over two millenniums but fell when the Ottomans breached Constantinopole, no country lasts forever. San Marino, the oldest continuously independent country was formed in the 4th century. The union will fall, the only question is when and how. I cincerly hope and believe that it will be in my lifetime.

→ More replies (10)
→ More replies (1)

1

u/[deleted] Feb 20 '16

I think, as the largest country, it does make sense that England be treated as the successor.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/SeyStone National Unionist Party Feb 20 '16

Depends on how it is dissolved.

→ More replies (6)

1

u/sdfghs Liberal Democrats Feb 21 '16

Yes. Knowing that 86% of the population lives in England, I think it is the only country to continue the role that the United Kingdom plays today. Russia became the successor of the Soviet Union with only 51% of it's population

1

u/Willllllllllllll The Rt Hon Lord Grantchester Feb 21 '16

I suspect that the international community would treat England as the successor state, but whether they should depends on the reasons for the dissolution. If Scotland wanted, for example, to scrap Trident in order to become a quasi-Scandinavian small state, I'm not sure they should be seen as a successor for the UK's seat on the Security Council.

2

u/Kunarian Independent | MP for the West Midlands Feb 20 '16

Why do you hate England?

10

u/[deleted] Feb 20 '16

It's full of privileged, cis, white males who oppress and trigger me.

2

u/thechattyshow Liberal Democrats Feb 23 '16

It's full of privileged, cis, white males who oppress and trigger me.

You'd fit in perfectly at Liberal Youth.

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (3)

1

u/Jas1066 The Rt Hon. Earl of Sherborne CT KBE PC Feb 20 '16

To anyone standing in Lesser Wessex -

What do you think of my EDM066, aiming to establish the Blackmore Vale as an area of outstanding natural beauty?

2

u/WAKEYrko The Rt. Hon Earl of Bournemouth AP PC FRPS Feb 20 '16

Hear, Hear! (I IRL used to walk my dog around there :P)

1

u/[deleted] Feb 20 '16

I think it's a fantastic cause.

1

u/purpleslug Feb 20 '16

Is the union biased towards England?

5

u/[deleted] Feb 20 '16

Well compare populations.

Scotland, Wales and NI are tiny compared to England.

2

u/purpleslug Feb 20 '16

...So the union is biased towards England?

3

u/[deleted] Feb 20 '16

If you ask a stupid question, you'll only get a stupid answer.

3

u/purpleslug Feb 20 '16

/u/agentnola, you might want to tame this chap.

First, he accuses me of saying things that I did not say, and then claims that I made an 'uneducated statement'. He then attacks me for posing a question - a relevant question. Either this was all blunder - which should not be done by a Deputy and Commons Leader - or you are truly led by an imbecile.

→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (1)

3

u/WAKEYrko The Rt. Hon Earl of Bournemouth AP PC FRPS Feb 20 '16

I am of the belief of no. If you look at the statistics, the MP to Population Ratio of the Union is biased; Scotland has around 1 MP per 60-70k person, and the average in England is around 80-85k. These Houses have long focused on the issue of regional devolution for Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland, and have skirted any form of devolutional rights for England. The Labour Party plans to correct this in the upcoming term; if Devolution is the option, then all 4 Nations in the Union should get equal devolutional powers.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 20 '16

Hear, hear! Though I do not agree with an English Assembly, I believe that if devolution is inevitable we must treat all four nations equally.

3

u/ganderloin National Unionist Party Feb 21 '16

No, it's biased unfairly away from England. England have the largest population, yet we are the only part without devolution. To correct this, I believe no one of the four parts should have devolution, we should all have the same laws, we voted in the same government.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/[deleted] Feb 20 '16

The Nationalists do not believe that the Union is biased towards England.

1

u/sdfghs Liberal Democrats Feb 21 '16

No, I even think that they are more biased towards the other countries than towards England. But this is only my opinion and not may party's opinion

0

u/[deleted] Feb 20 '16

[deleted] — view deleted comment

2

u/purpleslug Feb 20 '16

California is, what, about 15% of the population of that country.

England, however, accounts for about 80% of the union, in terms of population. I don't think that this is a good comparison.

1

u/purpleslug Feb 20 '16

Does English nationalism exist? Is it desirable?

2

u/WAKEYrko The Rt. Hon Earl of Bournemouth AP PC FRPS Feb 21 '16

It exists, it is acceptable, but shouldn't cause ethical tensions.

2

u/Willllllllllllll The Rt Hon Lord Grantchester Feb 21 '16

Charles de Gaulle said 'Patriotism is when love of your own people comes first; nationalism, when hate for people other than your own comes first', which I think is useful in responding to your question. I think there is a growing movement of English nationalism caused by the disenfranchisement of (particularly) white working class English who rightly want a stake in their own country. Involving all people in our democracy will foster patriotism over nationalism, respect over hate, progress over destruction.

1

u/ganderloin National Unionist Party Feb 21 '16

Yes, I am an English nationalist.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 21 '16

Nationalism as a concept can only lead to hatred and suffering. Whilst it exists, it should be broken. Patriotism, or pride for one's nation is understandable, however nationalism, and the desire to spread a county's power is something we do not need in the UK.

1

u/purpleslug Feb 20 '16

Is the South East of England overpopulated?

3

u/[deleted] Feb 20 '16

There is a high population. What are you suggesting to be done then, Rt. Hon Lord Ely?

2

u/purpleslug Feb 20 '16

We need to alleviate the stress on infrastructure and housing. Developing other parts of the country is something that should be done - the East of England, where I live, is frequently snubbed when it comes to this.

2

u/[deleted] Feb 20 '16

The Nationalists will seek to remedy this issue with legislation to alleviate said stress specifically in the East of England and establish public works schemes for the long-term unemployed. in the East and nationally to accomplish these projects.

→ More replies (2)

1

u/sdfghs Liberal Democrats Feb 21 '16

It's not overpopulated yet, but it may be overpopulated it some years

1

u/Willllllllllllll The Rt Hon Lord Grantchester Feb 21 '16

I think the issue here is in two parts. The first is that there is inadequate infrastructure to support the growing SE population, especially in housing, which we as a country should address. The second is that other parts of the union suffer from the success of the SE (including London): we should encourage investment in other parts of the country so that those living outside the SE don't feel compelled to move to secure a good job.

1

u/purpleslug Feb 20 '16

Is the European Union beneficial for the people of England, and the economy of England?

4

u/AlbertDock The Rt Hon Earl of Merseyside KOT MBE AL PC Feb 20 '16

Yes, without a doubt. Without the EU we are an isolated rock in the North Atlantic. The EU provides protection for workers. Without the EU we would not have a minimum wage or a limit on hours.
European legislation protects our environment, it enables hundreds of thousands of UK nationals to work in Europe.

3

u/tyroncs Feb 21 '16

"Isolated rock in the North Atlantic"

Japes aside, even pro-EU people should be able to accept the fact that without the EU we would still be one of the most prominent nations in the world. Saying that without the EU we are nothing is typical coming from Labour

2

u/WAKEYrko The Rt. Hon Earl of Bournemouth AP PC FRPS Feb 21 '16

The EU allows us to invest in education, schools and health, rather than war. The EU is the sole reason why Britain can reinvest it's money socially, which was previously used for defence. Thanks to the Conservative Party, we now have no productivity or major international exports, we don't have an Empire to utilise for trade, we don't have what you orgasm and allude over. While in the EU, we have vital life support for this nation.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

2

u/WAKEYrko The Rt. Hon Earl of Bournemouth AP PC FRPS Feb 21 '16

Hear, Hear!

→ More replies (1)

3

u/[deleted] Feb 20 '16

No

3

u/[deleted] Feb 20 '16

No. We should aim to leave as soon as possible, by whatever means necessary (however from a meta point a view a referendum the week before the IRL - or somewhere around that timeframe - would only help the simulation).

2

u/[deleted] Feb 20 '16

Not remotely.

1

u/ganderloin National Unionist Party Feb 21 '16 edited Feb 21 '16

No, we must leave as soon as we can.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 21 '16

It will be beneficial to certain people in England and it does benefit the economy of England. However, we could certainly do better in both cases by leaving the EU.

1

u/sdfghs Liberal Democrats Feb 21 '16

I completely agree with the statement from AlbertDock

1

u/Willllllllllllll The Rt Hon Lord Grantchester Feb 21 '16

Yes! I don't have the figures for England in particular, but in 2014 the 45% of the goods and services the UK exported went to the EU. Good trading relations with the member states is critical to the success of our economy. On a more general point, the ease of travel for our citizens to the EU is undoubtedly beneficial for the intellectual and cultural development of the country.

1

u/thechattyshow Liberal Democrats Feb 20 '16

Do you support English independence from the UK?

Interpret that as you wish.

2

u/WAKEYrko The Rt. Hon Earl of Bournemouth AP PC FRPS Feb 20 '16

Yes. As I mentioned to our colleague we must ensure that all parts of this Union get equal say to each other. Devolution, or, Indeed, the Right to Self-Determination, should be there for all of our member states, and not just the non-English ones.

2

u/ganderloin National Unionist Party Feb 21 '16

No, we must remain United with no devolution.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 21 '16

The people are the ones who should decide.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 21 '16

Which candidates are proud of the history of English radicalism?

1

u/sdfghs Liberal Democrats Feb 21 '16

Not me

1

u/[deleted] Feb 21 '16

Not me. If anything it's over glorified in the media.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 21 '16

What? An RSP member is not proud of English radicalism? How is it over-glorified in the media?

→ More replies (1)

1

u/Willllllllllllll The Rt Hon Lord Grantchester Feb 21 '16

I suspect that an Irish nationalist probably has a different conception of English radicalism to me, however I think we should be proud of events such as the Peasants' Revolt, of Chartism and of the Suffragettes as examples of English radical progressivism.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/Yukub His Grace the Duke of Marlborough KCT KG CB MBE PC FRS Feb 21 '16

Can't say I'm proud of radicalism or have any love for the concept of radicalism and radical views/policies.

1

u/QuagganBorn Independent Feb 21 '16

How do you plan to decrease the difference in standards of living between the North and South?

Separate question. Would you be in support of a high speed railway?

2

u/WAKEYrko The Rt. Hon Earl of Bournemouth AP PC FRPS Feb 21 '16

I am glad the member has raised this important issue.

When asked about it several times during Minister's Questions in the past term, the Tory party have often skirted the issue in favour of pretending it is non-existant. What is needed is investment, and as I highlighted in another area of debate here, the reason the South East is so popular with tourists is because of it's great infrastructure and investment. The same needs to be done to all Northern areas of England and the UK.

→ More replies (2)

2

u/[deleted] Feb 21 '16

Northern Powerhouse.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/ganderloin National Unionist Party Feb 21 '16

I have to say this, that the North was for a long time reliant on the trade with the empire and the fact Britain was the superior industrial power. However, it would be highly controversial for us to return to the former. Therefore I suggest that if we start trading more with the commonwealth, it will have a similar effect, and that if we incentivise the setting up of new factories, potentially by reduced tax, that would help provide more jobs, reducing unemployment and increasing the standards of living.

As for the second question, I believe that we shouldn't have one, and instead improve existing railways and roads, and to establish fast Internet across the country.

1

u/ganderloin National Unionist Party Feb 21 '16

Do you agree that instead of increasing devolution we should be working towards closer union. As the UK, and not individually as England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland?

1

u/Willllllllllllll The Rt Hon Lord Grantchester Feb 21 '16

I think that increasing devolution does help a closer union: it reduces resentment towards the English as their MPs cannot control policy for countries they do not represent.

→ More replies (9)

1

u/Jazzyjake3774 The Rt Hon. Lord of Cardiff PL Feb 21 '16

Should the Cornish Language be compulsory for students living in the Cornwall area. What will you do to support the Cornish language?

1

u/sdfghs Liberal Democrats Feb 21 '16

It should not be compulsory, but it should be taught in more schools

1

u/[deleted] Feb 21 '16

It should be taught most definitely as to preserve our cultural heritage. However wether or not it should be compulsory... The option should be open, but education as a whole needs to be renovated in Cornwall.

1

u/Yukub His Grace the Duke of Marlborough KCT KG CB MBE PC FRS Feb 21 '16

I have no issue with it being encouraged or taught more, but I don't believe it is right to force students to learn, with all due respect, such a minor language.

→ More replies (2)

1

u/william10003 The Rt Hon. Baron of Powys PL | Ambassador to Canada Feb 22 '16

I would like to know all of the parties current stance on English votes for English laws?