According to the fifth annual Audit of Political Engagement by pollster Ipsos MORI:
The public […] are most likely to be dissatisfied with Scottish MPs being able to vote on English issues (46% are dissatisfied with this)
Bear in mind that this is a survey “based on 1,073 adults aged 18+ in Great Britain” – I’m guessing that the percentage of people dissatisfied is higher in England and that it isn’t thought satisfactory for MPs with constituencies in Wales or Northern Ireland to be voting on England-only affairs, either.
But what chance an English parliament? It’s is the only solution to the problem.
As Tony Benn said many years ago:
“England is also entitled to its own cultural and political identity. The cultural identity of the English has been submerged by a history of dominating the United Kingdom and the world, such that the common people of England have been persuaded that in return for status as subjects of a King or Queen-Emperor, they somehow shared the glory of that Empire. In fact England, like Scotland and Wales is the colony that never secured its own liberation from that monarchical power.”
The bigger issues for constitutional reformers include the electoral system, a bill of rights, a written constitution, abolition of the monarchy – anything but devolution in England, in fact. Which is odd, because an English parliament would be more likely than the British parliament to act on electoral reform, a bill of rights, a written constitution, abolition of the monarchy – because the establishment of an English parliament would speed-up the death of Britain, leaving England alone.
No longer part of a multinational state, but a state on its own, the governance of England would have to be formally reconsidered. Here, progressive social forces could act to ensure that the radical tradition of the English working class is continued – Empire over, a new England could be built, a land of peace and social justice where the people are the sovereign power.