Archive for January 26th, 2005

The "English Constitutional Convention"



ECC Logo

On Wednesday morning I attended a business meeting of the ECC in a House of Commons meeting room, sponsored by Lord Hylton.

This was an ongoing business meeting of the “English Constitutional Convention” which was launched on the 20th October, last year, with the aims of having:

  • “Parity” as a distinct nation within the UK
  • “Recognition” of England’s Nation Statehood
  • “Equality” of respect as being culturally and historically distinct
  • “Fair Funding” to remove discrimination against England

Just over twenty delagates met in Committee Room 4b at “The House” to discuss devolution for England, along similar lines as the Scottish Parliament. There were at least two MPs (and a prospective MP) present, and amongst the lawers was at least one Queen’s Councillor.

Various discussions took place including the terms of reference and scope for such a constitution, operating procedures, funding and the idea of approaching other organisations for help both with money and giving us their views on what they feel about the subject.

One interesting point cropped up. In a recent survey where Scots were asked whether they felt their MPs in Parliament should have their voting rights curbed when discussing matters only affecting the English people, as many as 47% agreed that they should be curbed.

And, an article by David Stenhouse in the Mail on Sunday, June 19th 2004, states:

When Gordon Brown this week became the longest serving Chancellor in British history, it was not merely a moment of personal achievement, it was another remarkable landmark in the tartan takeover of Britain.

Throughout the past few years, men and women from Scotland have come to dominate British politics in a way that is unprecedented in both its scale and success. As a proud Scot, a broadcaster and journalist who has chosen to work mainly in his native land, I have spent much of the past two years in England researching this Caledonian coup. And what I discovered gives profound cause for concern.

The full article can be read from here.

Contact details for the ECC may be found by following the link below my sign-out below.

Andrew

Advertisements

Leave a comment

Immigration v. NHS

I was listening on the news about Howard adopting Kilroy-Silk’s idea of basing our immigration policy on the Australian model of a points system.

All in all, I think it is a good idea and fairer than back home where a white person cannot enter our country at all unless they can afford to support themselves by not working and paying for their medical costs as they go along.

In fact it is so difficult for the indigenous white people to get a job there now, because of the law on positive discrimination, that a huge percentage of them have already settled in England. A year or so ago I attended an Afrikaans weekend festival in Wembley and 10,000 attended that weekend. Think of all those who didn’t bother to come!

But there is another factor. If we keep on admitting immigrants to this small country, we are going to have to change our entire approach to a free National Health Service or be willing to pay an extra 10% to 15% income tax. The reason for this is we can’t afford to maintain it, even at present levels.

As far as I can see, we have to decide, and as soon as possible, whether we want a free NHS or whether we are willing to see a severe curb on immigration.

I would like to see a 5% increase in income tax and allow a smaller percentage of immigrants. This country has an aging population and we need more younger people.

Mind you, if we weren’t paying all those billions to the EU, we wouldn’t have to worry about any of this. We’d have enough money for education, the NHS and for extra police.

Over to you!

Andrew

Leave a comment

%d bloggers like this: