Parliament (Participation of Members of the House of Commons) Bill [HL]

My Lords, I am becoming increasingly worried by the growing anti-Scottish feeling in England, most evident in the Conservative home counties. Some recent articles in the so-called quality press have been so aggressively anti-Scottish and anti-Scotsmen that they border on incitement to racial hatred. Their bile is not only directed at the understandable concerns at what is seen as an excessive Scottish influence on the political affairs of England—the issue at the heart of the Bill—but a growing resentment of Scottish involvement in all walks of English life. Scotsmen, as we all know, run English banks; they are captains of English industries; they manage English football teams; they head powerful trade unions; they command armies, navies and Royal Marines; they are ever-evident as presenters on English televisions. One particular Scotsman’s antics have even succeeded in doubling the viewing figures of that ghastly, demeaning ““reality”” programme, ““Big Brother””. And that is not to mention that nearly half the British Cabinet are Scotsmen. Of course, English-Scottish rivalry has always existed. But in the past two centuries anyway, it has always seemed a healthy rivalry. We Scots have had to suffer the patronisation of the English and their mocking insensitivity to our culture. For instance, I have hardly met an Englishman who knows anything about Robert Burns, our national poet, who is revered by the French, the Russians and most European countries as well as the Americans, yet is deliberately ignored by the English. ““Auld Lang Syne””—““What does that mean, for heaven’s sake?””, they say. We have to pretend that we do not mind jokes about sporrans, bagpipes and haggis. Spike Milligan, in the 1950s’““Good Show””, invented a Scottish character—““Hairy McLegs””. We are also supposed to be mean. They must be referring to those living on the east coast. We west coast Scots are famous for our friendliness and generosity. Anyway, Scots have never been mean—we are canny. That, by the way, is a Presbyterian virtue, not a fault. Part of this English resentment is based on an annoying suspicion that the Scots are relatively more intelligent than they are—more canny, anyway. Incidentally, I am an exception to that rule, but that is only because I was educated in England. It is not my imagination when I now fear that the rivalry between our two countries, which has always been tempered with good humour, is now becoming resentful and acrimonious. That sizable Scottish minority who pride themselves in hating the English, and have always done so, now seem to have their counterparts in England. This is a very worrying development. To some extent, among Conservative voters especially, that new animosity has been caused by the creation of the Scottish Parliament and what has come to be known as the West Lothian question—the ability of Scottish MPs to speak and vote on purely English matters when English MPs have no comparable right to participate in Scottish affairs. That is so self-evidently unfair and illogical, yet there seems to be no simple solution to it, despite what has already been said. That, however, is what the Bill is attempting to do. But, regrettably, its proposed solution does not seem to make practical sense. Is the noble Lord, Lord Baker of Dorking, seriously suggesting that a Cabinet Minister—no, let us go further: a future Prime Minister—will be unable to speak or vote on important English matters because his constituency happens to be in Scotland?