Letter: Shropshire Star
There are 645 MP's, not 605. Not sure if that's my mistake or theirs.
Consider campaign for English parliament
I would like to offer a reply to Jim Thornicroft’s letter, “Parliament for English a bad idea”. His concern that an English Parliament would create an extra layer of bureaucracy and tax burden on the English is a very common argument against an English Parliament. It is, however, a misconception.
The Government has 605 MPs and spends 80 per cent of its time dealing with matters that affect England.
To create an English Parliament and leave 605 MPs in Westminster would, I agree, be unacceptable and an unnecessary burden on the English taxpayer. But Jim is looking at this problem the wrong way around.
Scotland and Wales have had their own government now for almost eight years and are already reaping huge benefits at the expense of the English taxpayer.
The British government is already over-sized since devolution came to the rest of the UK and the day-to-day running of Scotland and Wales moved away from Westminster.
An English Parliament could take away as much as three-quarters of the British government’s workload so why would we need 605 MPs? The simple answer is that we wouldn’t.
An English Parliament need not be an extra level of government but rather a different layer of government.
There really is only one feasible solution to the discrimination against England and that is to establish an English Parliament.
I would urge Jim to write to his MP but I doubt that he will get the response he wants. British MPs are well aware that an English Parliament will force them to hand back their first class tickets on the gravy train.
If you really want to make a difference Jim, join the Campaign for an English Parliament and start pressing for a real solution.
Stuart Parr Telford