THE Tories are set to bring forward a motion on the controversial English Votes for English Laws (Evel) on July 13.
In a severe shift from the Tory line only a few short years ago, Cabinet Office Minister Michael Gove today said the law had “not served our Parliament well” and called for it to be removed.
The mechanism was suspended in April last year to simplify Commons proceedings during the pandemic but this move would see it made permanent.
What is English Votes for English Laws?
"We have heard the voice of Scotland and now the millions of voices of England must be heard," then prime minister David Cameron said following the 2014 independence referendum.
READ MORE: EVEL: UK Government to scrap 'appalling' English Votes for English Laws system
The legislation aimed to answer the so-called “West Lothian Question” in which English MPs could not vote on devolved matters while Scottish, Welsh and Northern Ireland MPs were able to vote on England-only matters.
Evel was then featured in the 2015 Tory manifesto in which the party gained a majority of seats at Westminster.
The law was passed in the same year by 312 to 270 votes which saw English, or English and Welsh, MPs allowed to accept or veto legislation that affects only their constituents before it passed to a third reading, its final commons stage.
Scottish MPs could still vote on laws applying only in England, though such bills would require a double majority – consisting of all MPs and of those representing English constituencies.
In essence, it prevented the possibility that laws on England-only matters could be passed without the support of a majority of English MPs.
At the time Labour accused the UK Government of using "procedural tricky" to artificially manufacture a larger majority and argued the law would “reduces Scotland's voice at Westminster and strengthens Tories' grip on power”.
There was concern over the complicated and technical nature of the law by even some Tories at the time.
One of the trickier tasks was what constituted an English law. The SNPs argued that while many pieces of legislation appear to impact England only had huge knock-on effects for Scotland.
The legislation followed campaigns and attack ads by Tories portraying a deal between Labour and the SNP likely – with the SNP being seen as a kingmaker on laws seen only to impact England.
READ MORE: Michael Gove plans to scrap Evel in bid to stop Scottish independence
Labour had historically performed better in Scotland and there was fear from Tories that Labour would rely on votes from Scottish MPs in any future government to pass English-related legislation.
In 2014, Nicola Sturgeon suggested Evel put Scotland a step closer to independence but the Tories believed it was only fair that as English MPs couldn’t vote on Scottish education or health, neither should Scottish MPs be allowed to sway a vote on English education or health.
Pete Wishart agreed, saying: “Scotland is watching this, and the mood is darkening.”
It now appears Boris Johnson’s government agrees with this stance as the vote coindices with the Tories’ plans to unite the Union.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel