Labour MP backs calls for devolved English parliament

He’s not the first, but I get the feeling Derek Wyatt won’t be the last – especially with the growing anger at the “perverse” method of dividing public finances between the nations in the UK. Also, it’s an easy issue for New Labour MPs with English constituencies to make a stand on.

Demand ‘growing’ for English parliament
Wednesday 18th June 2008 at 12:12 AM

The United Kingdom is in a “constitutional muddle” and demand is growing for an English parliament, a Labour MP has said.

Speaking ahead of a Westminster Hall debate on parliamentary representation in England, Derek Wyatt told that four lower houses of equal powers should be established in England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales.

A new upper house of representatives should be set up with responsibility for issues such as the environment and foreign policy, the Sittingbourne and Sheppey MP said.

He said: “We’ve devolved to Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland, but we’ve not devolved the same powers to the one assembly and two parliaments. And by default, we have not given anything to England.

“We tried to do elected regional assemblies and they failed; now we’ve got unelected regional development agencies and we’ve still got some form of regional assembly – unelected. So the largest economic unit in Britain has no democratic representation.”

Wyatt, who is the parliamentary aide to culture minister Margaret Hodge, said that England was becoming increasingly disillusioned with the Barnett formula which allocates funding across the United Kingdom.

“English people are tired really of a Barnett formula that spends more money in the [other] three countries and doesn’t give them the same rights and the same responsibilities and the same treatment,” he said.

“I think it’s time we stopped and thought about what we’re doing.”

He added that demand for an English parliament will grow within the next five years to 10 years.

“People are tired of hearing that Scotland’s got better facilities when the Barnett formula gives them more per head for education, for instance, than in Kent where I live,” he said.

And since I was so amazed at this news, I checked Derek Wyatt’s own website:

Labour MP calls for five UK parliaments: “the United Kingdom is a half-built house,” says Derek Wyatt.

In a Westminster Hall debate tomorrow morning (Wednesday June 18) Derek Wyatt MP (Labour, Sittingbourne & Sheppey) will compare the United Kingdom to a half-built house where no one lives the way they want to and everyone argues about the household bills.

Setting out proposals for wide-ranging long-term constitutional and financial reform, he will call for a replacement of the “Barnett formula” which determines public spending in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland: “arrangements set up in the 1970s for reasons no one can now remember with results no one can now understand.”

Mr Wyatt will propose a constitutional convention, representing all the parties and peoples of the United Kingdom, to agree a ten-year plan for major reform of Parliament. At the end of the period the convention would present proposals for five separate Parliamentary chambers, one for each of the nations of the United Kingdom and one for the United Kingdom as a whole. Each nation would choose the issues it wanted to handle in its own chamber – and finance its policies from its own tax revenue. Other issues would remain with the UK chamber and financed from UK-wide taxation. The final package of proposals would be put to all voters in a referendum.

He will say: “I believe that all the peoples of the United Kingdom should have the same power to shape the laws and services which shape their lives, but they should also have the same responsibility for paying for them. We cannot carry on as we are. The present constitutional and financial relationships cannot endure. They are arbitrary and opaque and they allow everyone in the United Kingdom to believe that the system is unfair to them. The resulting mutual resentments could well lead to the break-up of our country in confusion and acrimony.”

Channel 4’s Faisal Islam reports on the Barnett Formula


Dig this from yesterday’s Channel Four News – their lovely business bod Faisal Islam delves into the murky waters of the Barnett Formula, and discovers the truth about the ties that bind the British state. Sorry, I am lapsing into blurb-speak. Anyhow, kudos to Faisal for getting the ball rolling…

Scotland: the ‘land of the free’?

There’s a new force in UK politics: the power of place, and the fear that your region isn’t getting its dues from central government.

From some English perspectives it’s about the new ‘land of the free’ to the north – Scotland, the land of the free prescription, free tuition fee and free personal care for the elderly.

In Scotland almost the opposite argument is being made and debated in the Scottish press: the UK has been subsidised over thirty years by £200bn of oil that belongs to Scotland.

Meanwhile, speaking to Channel 4 News, London Mayor Ken Livingstone said that £10 to £20bn of London taxes are being lost by the capital city.

“Some small part of that goes to Scotland, but the bulk of it goes to the North and the English regions – they are the major beneficiaries.

“It’s broadly a redistribution that goes from London and the South East to the Midlands and the North – that’s the bulk,” he tells us.

Fascinatingly, that’s a shift in position for Red Ken from when, last year, the Robin Hoods robbing the Sheriff of London were definitely wearing kilts.

The English regions

And talking of Robin Hood, what about the East Midlands, in fact all the English regions?

When you ask the council leaders, as we did when we popped along to Nottingham for last week’s Core Cities conference, there’s a shrug of the shoulders.

Prod them a bit, as we did, and the concern about how the UK kitty is carved up between London and Scotland starts to pour out.

So there are three different positions, not especially reconcilable with one another. But who is telling the truth?

A cursory glance at the Treasury PESA tables and breakdowns from last month’s Comprehensive Spending Review shows that it’s the English regions that are the losers in terms of per capita spending.

Northern Ireland does well. Scotland and London are both very high. Wales is just above average. England’s regions, coincidentally those parts of the UK with no voice versus London or Scotland, do the worst.

The Barnett Formula

Read Neil Macdonald’s piece on the history behind the Barnett Formula and why the Scots get more money than the English

What’s the role of the Barnett formula in all of this? Well although Bristol and Birmingham may feel the Barnett blues, that Treasury convention only allocates money between England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. The growing English resentment at Barnett may be mistargeted.

The Barnett formula merely codifies that increases in most forms of public spending in England should be matched in other regions.

So when London gets £5bn for Crossrail, Scotland will get a £500 million Barnett bonus (formally a Barnett consequential) for its budget. That led Newcastle Labour MP Jim Cousins to pounce on his own Chancellor of the Exchequer at a recent Select committee hearing

“The Crossrail bonus that goes to Scotland reappears in free prescriptions, free home care and free everything else – extra grants for heating, the abolition of graduate endowment. When is there going to be a north of England bonus?”

So what do Professor McLean’s numbers show?

London is the top recipient, in per capita terms, of public spending. Nonetheless London taxes exceed substantially the investment that comes its way. Scotland is a slight subsidy junky, but not if you include oil.

Actually including oil at current prices sees a healthy Scottish surplus. However, if money were to be allocated to those parts of the country that ‘needed’ it, ie the parts with lower average living standards, London is hugely over-provided for. Scotland does pretty well too. And the English regions are hard done by. East Midlands, the land of Robin Hood, is robbed blind.

Now, these numbers are raw. Clearly there are other ways of measuring ‘need’. The entire notion of geographically allocating tax revenues is fraught. Is Tesco’s multi-billion profit really made ‘by London’ on account of their HQ being in Cheshunt?

However, we at Channel 4 News wanted to get the ball rolling in a growing debate about how the national kitty is carved up.