Clarke rejects ‘East Lothian Answer’

Ken Clarke, the former Conservative Chancellor, last night came out firmly against Sir Malcolm Rifkind's proposal for an English Grand Committee as a solution to the West Lothian Question.

The significance of his opposition to the ex-Scottish Secretary's so-called "East Lothian Answer" is that Mr Clarke is heading a policy taskforce into the subject for David Cameron and is expected shortly to publish the findings.

Giving evidence to the House of Commons Justice Committee, which is looking at devolution 10 years on, the former Chancellor was keen to point out that he did not speak for the Tory leadership. However, he was asked if he agreed with Sir Malcolm's particular solution regarding the issue of English votes for English laws.

He replied: "No. I don't. Malcolm and I broadly agree that the question should be answered. He has come up with one answer. I don't think our taskforce will come up with the same. We are, in principle, heading in the same direction."

Last autumn, the Conservative leader described Sir Malcolm's plan as an "elegant" solution to the West Lothian Question, a situation in which Scottish MPs can vote on English-only matters but English MPs cannot vote on parallel Scottish ones because of devolution.

While the Tory back bencher appeared a little coy about giving away details of the proposals contained in the taskforce's forthcoming report, he nonetheless appeared to point towards the designation of legislation as "English only" as the way to get round what he described as a parliamentary "niggle". He told the committee: "I don't believe it is not possible to identify a small amount of legislation which is totally English."

Mr Clarke pointed to the Queen's Speech which identified countries of the UK to which certain legislation applied. He also denied one argument, put forward by another witness, Lord Tyler, the Liberal Democrat peer, that designating bills in this way would "get the Speaker into invidious arguments".

Lord Tyler was more forceful in his opposition to an English Grand Committee, branding Sir Malcolm's idea "a minefield" which would increase the opportunities for political conflict. He pointed out what would happen if, when considering a bill, it was discovered some amendments did affect Scotland. "What do you do, create another committee?" he asked.

"It would draw the Speaker into some invidious decision-making and make him intensely more political," insisted the LibDem peer, who said he was "amazed" such a distinguished politician as the former Foreign Secretary could have proposed such an idea.

Professor Vernon Bogdanor, the constitutional expert, who was another witness, noted how the party which was most in favour of English votes for English laws was the SNP because it wanted to split Scotland from England.

Mr Bogdanor added that it would be wrong to have a "complete upheaval in the British constitution" to tackle that particular political problem. "I profoundly hope that the Conservatives, who are a Unionist party, do not go down that road."

However, he did point out that if Holyrood had fiscal autonomy, then the issue of the West Lothian Question would be greatly diminished as the "arguments against English votes for English laws would be weaker".

Mr Clarke, who earlier said there was growing "irritation" among some people in England over the West Lothian Question, also called for the Barnett formula to be reviewed.

Mr Bogdanor said there was a central misunderstanding over the formula.

"Many people do believe Scotland has gained extra money because of devolution which of course it hasn't. Any social benefits they give people such as free tuition fees or free residential care for the elderly have to be paid for from within the Scottish Budget," he added.