The United Kingdom’s constitution is known to be uncodified, meaning that it is made up of a combination of statutes, conventions, judicial decisions, and practices that took a long time to develop. One of the debates that underscores the challenges with this understanding of constitutionalism is the West Lothian Question. The West Lothian Question has been the subject of debate and discussion by politicians and academics for several decades, and it has raised issues of fairness, representation, and the respective balance of power of different jurisdictions of the UK.
Understanding the core issue
At its most basic level, the West Lothian Question is about the question of parliamentary fairness and equality. It is asking whether MPs from Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland should be able to help create laws for England, especially in the (health and education) areas, because in many (policy) areas their devolved legislature will decide.
For example:
- The major aspects of health and education have been devolved to Scotland; the Scottish authorities exercise their nationalist aspirations in these domains of policy. In Westminster, Scottish MPs are allowed to vote on issues of health and education in England.
- The English MPs cannot vote on matters of health and education, which are expressly looked after by the powers of the Scottish Parliament.
This situation creates an asymmetry in the system, which raises a question about whether England, in this aspect, experiences a democratic deficiency in the UK system.
Evolution of Devolution and Its Ramifications
Devolution reform from 1997 to 1999 by Tony Blair’s Labour government added greater fuel to the flame burning around the West Lothian Question, especially after granting Parliament to Scotland, the Assembly to Wales, and the Assembly to Northern Ireland under the Good Friday Agreement.
All devolved governments could take their own decisions on local and domestic affairs, while Westminster would retain jurisdiction on matters that are rendered for a wider extent of the UK, foreign policy, defense, and monetary policies. This imbalance has become increasingly apparent, especially as political parties gain different levels of support in England in comparison to Scotland or Wales.
Examples of the West Lothian Question in Action
The debate regarding the West Lothian Question has moved from theory and real politics in the following significant instances:
- Tuition Fees Vote (2004): The Labour government introduced and ultimately passed an increase in university tuition fees for England with the support of Scottish Labour MPs, even though tuition fees did not apply to Scotland.
- Health Reforms in England: There have been instances in the past where health reforms in England have been voted against by Members of Parliament who have represented non-English constituencies, even though health care is a devolved issue in Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland.
- Different political realities: For example, the Labour Party has historically enjoyed strong support from Scotland, which means that Scottish members of Parliament could influence votes based on English issues in Westminster.
These are two examples that underpin the arguments of why many feel this is an unfair situation and necessitates reform.
Possible Solutions to the West Lothian Question
There are a few alternative approaches that have been considered over the years to try and solve this constitutional puzzle:
1. English Votes for English Laws (EVEL).
In 2015, the Conservative government introduced a process referred to as English Votes for English Laws (EVEL). This implies that only English (or English and Welsh) MPs are given the final say over laws that affect only their area, and it was at least partly viewed as a remedy to the situation.
EVEL was described as complicated because it required considering what was meant by English law and how the parliamentary processes would work. EVEL was also critiqued as potentially divisive, and that, in effect, would undermine the integrity of the UK Parliament. EVEL was suspended in the autumn of 2020 and then subsequently removed from all formal proceedings in March 2021.
2. Creation of an English Parliament
Some argue that England should have its own parliament similar to Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland. This would create a federal-type system with each nation responsible for domestic policies and Westminster dealing with UK-specific issues.
England has a much larger population; it is argued that such a system would inevitably create an unequal federal system with non-English local parliaments dominated by England.
3. Restrictions on non-English MPs’ influence
Another alternative proposal is to stop MPs from Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland from voting on any decisions relating to any purely English matters. This could also lead to the problem of creating two classes of MPs in Westminster (an English parliament and a non-English parliament) and undermining the principles that all MPs are equal in a parliamentary setting.
4. Maintaining the Status Quo
Some people claim that the issue is theoretically problematic; it is not bad enough to merit reforms or actions. Furthermore, they argue that the current situation is strong due to the flexibility and adaptability of its unwritten constitution.
The Debate: Arguments for and against Reform
Arguments for reform
- Fairness: English MPs should not be at a disadvantage.
- Democratic legitimacy: Policies that apply only to England should only be made by English representatives.
- Clarity: Reforms would also remove public confusion about the responsibilities of different representatives.
Arguments Against Reform
- Unity of Parliament: Establishing an exclusive voting system for the English runs the risk of disaffecting MPs and diminishing Westminster’s role as the Parliament of the UK.
- Practical Issues: The intricacies behind defining “English only” legislative proposals often prove to be difficult. Many policies have effects for the entire UK indirectly.
- Political Turbulence: Creating different classes of MPs or an entirely new parliament for England introduces a dimension of instability to an already uneasy union.
Why the West Lothian Question Is Still Relevant
The West Lothian Question continues to be relevant today for four reasons:
- Devolution Is Constantly Changing: The projects for further devolution from Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland continue to grow, and there are significant questions of what the place of England is in this changing system.
- Brexit: The withdrawal of the UK from the EU has breathed new life into the debates surrounding sovereignty, sharing power, and the oversight of Westminster over the devolved governments.
- National Identity: The debates surrounding Scottish independence and the need for Welsh autonomy have different identities and raised questions about the fair representation of each nation’s political concerns.
- English Governance: England remains the only territory of the UK with no devolved parliament; this feeds a national discourse surrounding governance.
How the Question Reflects Unequal Power Distribution
The United Kingdom has always aligned with the description of a unitary state that recognizes Westminster as the speaker of ultimate sovereignty, yet with a recent history of devolution, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland received their own powers, leaving England subject to Westminster only. This difference in power has created what many would describe as a structural imbalance. This is evident through the West Lothian Question, in which Scottish MPs can vote on laws that affect England, whereas English MPs cannot vote on their own constitution’s devolution issues involving Scotland or Wales. This lack of balance has fostered resentment and calls for reform among many MPs and political commentators.
Symbol of the Phrase “West Lothian Question”
West Lothian is just a Scottish constituency; the phrase itself stands for a much bigger constitutional issue for the UK. West Lothian does not have any specific legislative powers, but the phrase “West Lothian Questions” has become a commonly accepted shorthand means of describing the injustice of the system. Tam Dalyell’s decision to name the issue after a constituency said a lot; while each country’s name is localized by having original awkward phrasing, the whole country should see it as one issue. It contrasts how parliamentary questions, over time, can become national issues concerning justice.
The Question of Parliamentary Sovereignty and Equality
One of the fundamental issues with the West Lothian Question is whether MPs should remain equal in Westminster. Traditionalists defending the current system argue that Westminster is the Parliament of the whole of the UK, which means every MP has the same right of voting per issue, irrespective of where elected. Reformists counter that equality amongst MPs is meaningless if there is sa ystematic disadvantage to English voters. It is here that the tension lies between parliamentary sovereignty (that all MPs are equal) and democratic fairness (that votes reflect the regions that will be impacted by policies).
The Political Implications of Failing to Address the Question
By failing to consider the West Lothian Question, there can be very real political implications. For example, English nationalism is growing stronger. Some advocate that England needs its own devolved parliament, which could further the stipulation of the “United Kingdom.” It can also create political tension whenever a government depends on independent MPs from either Scotland, Wales, or Northern Ireland. Anytime the government seeks to push through English legislation. In extreme circumstances, without addressing the question, it may very well lead to the disintegration of the U.K. (or at the very least aggravate divides within the nation). This question is not just a question of constitution; it is one of political stability over the terms of the union.
How the Question Contextualizes Electoral Campaigns
Oftentimes, when elections are being held, the question of West Lothian resurfaces. When a political party is able to rally the support in Scotland or Wales, when the support in England may be weak, critics habitually claim that they (the elected representatives) will now have the ability to influence the English agenda.
Therefore, it can be more meaningful if these MPs are representing a party (such as Labour, which tends to be stronger in Scotland) that can dominate the agenda with Scottish MPs while building political momentum with a strong English party (such as the Conservatives, who generally gained ground in England). This disparity informs political strategies, political promises, and confidence in results after elections occur. The question in part is related to constitutional arguments, but it is also related to issues of party politics and the bias of power distribution after elections.
The Question and the Future of the Union
The United Kingdom is under constant threat of disunity due to movements for Scottish independence and arguments for greater self-determination for Wales. The West Lothian Question is well connected to these issues as it embodies the continuing struggle of how to govern a state that is partly devolved and not fully federal. If it remains unresolved, the question could support arguments for independence—that this union cannot operate fairly under the current status. If it is resolved, it could be a way to enhance trust and confidence in the UK’s constitutional arrangements, performing services to the future of the union.
