[Wednesday]
Comrade Price has some words on the English Question:
Of the 23 bills announced in the Queen’s Speech yesterday 4 apply to England and Wales, 13 are UK-wide and six are England-only. So for a quarter of this session, Westminster will be an English Parliament to all intents and purposes – but for the presence of a phalanx of Celtic MPs.
Should we as Plaid MPs vote on these England-only bills? The SNP do not vote on England-only legislation as a matter of principle.
Which is cool, especially when SNP parliamentarians can rattle the Prime Minister over his own West Lothian question. (Gordon Brown did not answer a question on the issue during the Queen’s Speech Debate yesterday, merely rambling on about the “separatist” Scottish nationalists.)
But, Adam asks,
Should we abstain on English legislation – or use our votes to defeat ideas like ‘foundation hospitals’ that we oppose?
I’d say in the case of NHS privatisation, extra opposition would be welcomed by the popular masses of England – it should be viewed as an act of solidarity.
The “phalanx of Celtic MPs” that Adam refers to are not all as principled as he is – for the most part they are New Liebour scumbags who have no concern for national self-determination or the class struggle.
Like Gordon Brown.
Rebellion Sucks! = a blog for socialism & self-determination 
Thursday, November 8, 2007 at 12:08 am
it’s an interesting dilemma, but i think the snp & plaid could do well to publicise it. if they published a joint statement to the effect that they felt unable to legitmately challenge privatisation etc within england it might kickstart a lot of much needed debate on the new national movements and the absence of the left – and i think it would also help gather support for the causes of welsh and scots nationalism here in england. everyone’s a winner.
Thursday, November 8, 2007 at 1:20 am
I don’t think that Scottish nationalism needs much help in England – it’s stated goal (independence) is said to me more popular here than in Scotland! What Adam’s getting at is that there should really be “home rule for all”. Sounds pretty reasonable to me.
As to privatisation – it’s a bit complicated with the snp, isn’t it? Funded by big business like New Labour, yet implementing social democratic reforms of the kind associated with the traditional Labour party. It remains to be seen how far opposition to privatisation will go (so far: hospitals and prisons, but what of the rest of the public sector?) and there’s no sign that a total rejection of neoliberalism is in the offing…
Thursday, November 8, 2007 at 10:57 am
Indeed, institutionally and ideologically they’re very much a part of the political class – I think of them as the Scottish Lib Dems, Plaid as Welsh Old Labour – and post-independence they would need to be – and probably would be – vigourously and frequently challenged from the left. However, in practise there’s no denying that the drive for independence has been tied up with anti-imperialist and even anti-capitalist reforms. Nothing radical, certainly, but something to be recognised.
No disagreements with Home Rule for all!
Thursday, November 8, 2007 at 5:01 pm
[…] his blog yesterday, he addressed what we might call the English Question (h/t Charlie Marks): Of the 23 bills announced in the Queen’s Speech yesterday 4 apply to England and Wales, 13 are […]