XPost: soc.culture.scottish, soc.culture.irish, uk.media.tv.misc   
   From: allan@EASYNET.CO.UK   
      
   "R.Peffers."  wrote in message   
   news:JbadnYh0--dAae3ZRVnyiA@bt.com...   
   >   
   > "JNugent"  wrote in message   
   > news:TtmdnVFGW_rR5O3ZnZ2dnUVZ8tOdnZ2d@pipex.net...   
   > > R.Peffers. wrote:   
   > >   
   > >> "JNugent"  wrote:   
   > >>>allan connochie wrote:   
   > >> So what? What about the majority of the time when the cabinet was all   
   > >> English?   
   > >   
   > > OK, what about it? And when did it happen?   
   > If you think I'm about to troll through Hansard to find out then you had   
   > better think again but it most certainly has happened, (with the obvious   
   > exception of such as the Scottish Secretary).   
   > >   
   > > If it ever DID happen, surely even you have to accept that "domination"   
   by   
   > > a majority needs less justification (if any), whereas "domination" (I   
   put   
   > > that into quote marks because I'm not convinced that it is happening) by   
   a   
   > > minority is always cause for concern.   
   >   
   > You are getting my view on this all wrong. My claim is that EVERY MP in   
   > Westminster is a UK MP and not an English/Welsh/Scots/Irish MP. There are   
   > many examples of English born MPs being elected to Scottish   
   constituencies.   
   > As point of fact Winston S. Churchill held a Scottish seat on more than   
   one   
   > occasion was he in Westminster as a Scots MP, an English MP or a UK MP?   
      
      
   I tihnk if you get off the hostility bus a wee bit you'll see that the   
   poster has already pointed out the difference between a Scot as an MP and   
   someone representing a Scottish constituency.   
      
      
   > >> The point about the Westminster Parliament is that it is the UK   
   > >> parliament and NOT the English, Welsh, Scottiosh or Irish Parliament.   
   > >   
   > > Quite. That's why:   
   > >   
   > > (a) Scotland doesn't need a Parliament (it already had one), and/or   
   > > (b) England needs a Parliament so that its citizens have the same amount   
   > > of democracy and self-determination as the Scots do.   
   > >   
   > > Whatever argument there is for preventing English votes affecting purely   
   > > Scottish affairs must apply to the question of Scottish votes affecting   
   > > purely English affairs.   
   >   
   > The obvious anomoly is that the English do not have a parliament and the   
   > only sane course is for them to be placed in the same position as the rest   
   > of the UK and get treated in like manner   
      
   Which is all that the guy has been saying he wants!   
      
      
   Allan   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)