Originally Posted by benjamin:
The trouble - as with much of the debate about the future of the UK/British Isles is that UNLIKE the Nordic Council's members, the elements of the British Isles are clearly not equivalent. It might make sense for five Nordic countries to treat each other as equals when 3 have populations of roughly 5 million and one 9 million (albeit Iceland is much smaller on 300k) but when England has 49 million people it is hard to see how it can enter into an equal partnership with countries of 1, 3, 5 and 7 million people without some form of subdivision - which seems to be unacceptable to those of an English Nationalist persuasion.

As you've conceded, you lack the requisite insight! This population disparity is invariably used to disadvantage England and the English!

One solution - unrelated to population size - is to deal in issues and the resources needed to deal with them. If countries are important enough to have a say, they are important enough to divvy up their share of the resources needed for co-operative projects. In fact, the arrangements could be very similar to those of a federation.

____________________
[Rep]

The model suggested implied equal voting rights - a plainly absurd suggestion in the British case. The alternative - weighted voting results in one member (England) constantly outvoting all other partners - equally unsustainable.

Moreover, it is the ignorance of the population disparity that threatens to disadvantage the English. By basing demands for English Home Rule on political units i.e. England, Scotland etc rather than actually trying to devolve power closer to citizens, the CfEP, EDP et al are deliberately setting out to give English people a less represesentative and more remote government than has been granted to the Scots and Welsh.

What kind of patriot cares more for the lines on a map that delimit his country than the millions of people who actually make it up?
[Rep]

Originally Posted by benjamin:
The model suggested implied equal voting rights - a plainly absurd suggestion in the British case.

Really? Equal votes [ie equal authority] should mean equal responsibility! The logic of that is the resourcing of particular joint initiatives should also be on the basis of equality! Each £100 could be divided by the number of member nations! The failure of the UN to apply such an approach has led to all kinds of dubious states saying what should or should not be done, but leaving the USA and UK to pick up the tab!

Originally Posted by benjamin:
The alternative - weighted voting results in one member (England) constantly outvoting all other partners - equally unsustainable.

If it is unsustainable, it is largely by reason of resentment of England and all things English.

Originally Posted by benjamin:
Moreover, it is the ignorance of the population disparity that threatens to disadvantage the English.

What igorance? Where?

Originally Posted by benjamin:
By basing demands for English Home Rule on political units i.e. England, Scotland etc rather than actually trying to devolve power closer to citizens, the CfEP, EDP et al are deliberately setting out to give English people a less representative and more remote government than has been granted to the Scots and Welsh.

What is your authority for citing this fiction?

Originally Posted by benjamin:
What kind of patriot cares more for the lines on a map that delimit his country than the millions of people who actually make it up?

Dunno! Haven't met any! I can't imagine why you should ask this question.

:-)


-
[Rep]

But why should Northern Ireland (pop. somewhat under 2 million) get an equal vote - or bear an equal burden - with England (pop. 49million)?

Equally, why should any of the other nations mentioned enter into any union/federation where the sheer comparative size of England would leave their votes worthless?

The entire basis of the demand for an English Parliament is founded on wanting representation for England. But what about representation for the English? What about what is best for the people, rather than the geographical unit?

A single body governing England on a par with the devolved Scottish and Welsh bodies would provide significantly less devolution and decentralisation for the people of England than for those of Scotland or Wales. The weighting of decision-making towards London and the South East would be even more keenly felt in England's neglected extremities and in regional centres of the North and Midlands than now. An English Parliament would fail in devolution's most basic task of moving government closer to the people. It would have no function other than as a sop to English nationalism. Government in the UK is already bad enough without creating new layers of it purely out of symbolism.

If you want the English to get a fair deal, start thinking about how to represent PEOPLE rather than the block of land we know as England.
[Rep]

Originally Posted by benjamin:
But why should Northern Ireland (pop. somewhat under 2 million) get an equal vote - or bear an equal burden - with England (pop. 49million)?

Equally, why should any of the other nations mentioned enter into any union/federation where the sheer comparative size of England would leave their votes worthless?

The entire basis of the demand for an English Parliament is founded on wanting representation for England. But what about representation for the English? What about what is best for the people, rather than the geographical unit?

A single body governing England on a par with the devolved Scottish and Welsh bodies would provide significantly less devolution and decentralisation for the people of England than for those of Scotland or Wales. The weighting of decision-making towards London and the South East would be even more keenly felt in England's neglected extremities and in regional centres of the North and Midlands than now. An English Parliament would fail in devolution's most basic task of moving government closer to the people. It would have no function other than as a sop to English nationalism. Government in the UK is already bad enough without creating new layers of it purely out of symbolism.

If you want the English to get a fair deal, start thinking about how to represent PEOPLE rather than the block of land we know as England.

Make up your mind! What are you on about? THIS is about a 'Council of the Isles' [an 'association'], NOT the governance of England!


________________________
[Rep]

The discussion somehwat diverged into two parallel tracks a few posts back, I know, but I thought perhaps if I continued discussing two related topics in tandem you might engage in resonded debate on at least ONE of them. Apparently not!
[Rep]

Two points Benjamin -

England only occupies 41% of the area of the British Isles. There is more territory to govern which isn't English, so we're not that dominant.

It's a council - what's population got to do with it? Do you object to the fact that Scotland and Wales have the same number of votes as us in organisations like FIFA/UEFA etc.?
[Rep]

Because government is about people - individual citizens - not territory. In a democracy it doesn't matter how much land you own, it matters how many of you there are.
[Rep]

I think you're missing the point somewhere. It's about maintaining good relations with our neighbours in the event of the end of the UK.

Bit like how the the EU should have been. Close co-operation between nation states without a centralised organisation dictating to us.
[Rep]

Originally Posted by benjamin:
Because government is about people - individual citizens - not territory. In a democracy it doesn't matter how much land you own, it matters how many of you there are.

Nationality is based on territory. England is a nation. The English and Englishness are connected with England.

Contrary to your notions, the EDP seek a separate parliament & executive for England regardless of whether it remains part of the UK.

The FEP want England to separate from the UK which, perforce, means a parliament for England . . . or anarchy or dictatorship!

Government is about people occupying particular territory, in this case England and the UK!


____________________________
[Rep]