A SENIOR English Conservative MP has called for a watered-down version of English Votes for English Laws - or Evel - in a report published today for the free-market think-tank, the Centre for Policy Studies.
Andrew Tyrie, MP for the West Sussex seat of Chichester, says the best way to resolve the West Lothian Question, the anomaly of Scots MPs voting on issues which do not affect Scotland, is to put legislation affecting only England into the hands of English MPs.
He says the UK Government should not be able to alter its recommendations but should have a final veto over the legislation.
Prime Minister David Cameron pledged to introduce English Votes for English Laws.
The move is opposed by Labour, who fear they would lose control over wide areas of policy in England if they came to power relying Scots MPs for their Commons majority.
Mr Tyrie says his plan amounts to a "double veto" and would force compromises if one party had a majority across the UK but not in England.
He rules out the idea of an English Parliament, in a federal UK, saying it would become more powerful than the UK parliament given the control it would have over health, transport, justice and other areas devolved to Scotland.
Mr Tyrie also warns against "full-strength" Evel, in which a UK Government had no control over policies in England, saying it would be "dangerous" because it effectively created an English parliament by the back door.
But he said: "Action must be taken now.
"The call for English Votes for English Laws is not a narrow sectional demand, still less a slogan.
"It is a statement of the minimum necessary to stabilise the Union in the long term."
Mr Tyrie says a similar approach was a central recommendation of the 2008 report by the Conservative Party's Democracy Task Force, led by former Chancellor of the Exchequer Kenneth Clarke MP.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article