DOCSLIB.ORG

Options for an English Parliament

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Options for an English Parliament DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL SCIENCE OPTIONS FOR AN ENGLISH PARLIAMENT MEG RUSSELL AND JACK SHELDON OPTIONS FOR AN ENGLISH PARLIAMENT Meg Russell and Jack Sheldon The Constitution Unit University College London March 2018 ISBN: 978-1-903903-80-3 Published by: The Constitution Unit School of Public Policy University College London 29-31 Tavistock Square London WC1H 9QU United Kingdom Tel: 020 7679 4977 Email: [email protected] Web: www.ucl.ac.uk/constitution-unit © The Constitution Unit, UCL, 2018 This report is sold subject to the condition that it shall not, by way of trade or otherwise, be lent, hired out or otherwise circulated without the publisher’s prior consent in any form of binding or cover other than that in which it is published and without a similar condition including this condition being imposed on the subsequent purchaser. First published March 2018 Front cover image: © Gareth Young, 2010. Contents List of Tables and Figures ...................................................................................................................... viii Acknowledgements .................................................................................................................................... ix Executive summary .................................................................................................................................... x 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 1 Part 1: Context ............................................................................................................................................ 4 2. The history of the English Parliament idea .................................................................................... 5 Pre-1997 .............................................................................................................................................. 5 1997–2014 ........................................................................................................................................... 6 Post-2014 ............................................................................................................................................ 8 Conclusion .......................................................................................................................................... 9 3. Arguments for and against an English Parliament ...................................................................... 10 Key arguments for an English Parliament ................................................................................... 10 Key arguments against an English Parliament ............................................................................ 12 Public attitudes to proposals for an English Parliament ............................................................ 13 Conclusion ........................................................................................................................................ 17 4. Alternative models for an English Parliament ............................................................................. 19 The separately elected model ......................................................................................................... 19 The dual mandate model ................................................................................................................ 20 Other models .................................................................................................................................... 22 Conclusion ........................................................................................................................................ 22 5. UK and overseas experience .......................................................................................................... 24 UK experience .................................................................................................................................. 24 Overseas experience ........................................................................................................................ 26 Conclusion ........................................................................................................................................ 29 Part 2: Powers and functions .................................................................................................................. 30 6. The policy powers of an English Parliament ............................................................................... 31 Existing UK experience .................................................................................................................. 31 Overseas experience ........................................................................................................................ 33 What English Parliament supporters have said ........................................................................... 36 How and where would the policy powers of an English Parliament be defined? .................. 36 v What specific policy powers might be devolved to the English Parliament? ......................... 38 Conclusion ........................................................................................................................................ 41 7. Financial arrangements for an English Parliament ..................................................................... 44 Existing UK experience .................................................................................................................. 44 Overseas experience ........................................................................................................................ 46 What English Parliament supporters have said ........................................................................... 49 Fiscal devolution .............................................................................................................................. 50 Grant funding ................................................................................................................................... 50 Conclusion ........................................................................................................................................ 52 8. An English government? ................................................................................................................ 53 Existing UK experience .................................................................................................................. 53 Overseas experience ........................................................................................................................ 55 What English Parliament supporters have said ........................................................................... 56 Government formation and confidence ....................................................................................... 57 Government structure and ministerial portfolios ....................................................................... 59 Conclusion ........................................................................................................................................ 62 9. How business in an English Parliament would be organised .................................................... 64 Existing UK experience .................................................................................................................. 64 Overseas experience ........................................................................................................................ 66 What English Parliament supporters have said ........................................................................... 67 Procedural options and questions ................................................................................................. 67 Conclusion ........................................................................................................................................ 72 10. The implications of an English Parliament for the UK’s central institutions ....................... 73 Existing UK experience .................................................................................................................. 73 Overseas experience ........................................................................................................................ 74 What English Parliament supporters have said ........................................................................... 76 Powers and financial arrangements ............................................................................................... 78 The structure of the UK government ........................................................................................... 79 The structure of the UK parliament ............................................................................................. 80 Intergovernmental relations, and a federal UK? ......................................................................... 83 Conclusion ........................................................................................................................................ 84 Part 3: Structure and composition .......................................................................................................... 86 vi 11. The structure and size of an English Parliament ......................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The National Audit Office, the Public Accounts Committee and the Risk Landscape in UK Public Policy Discussion Paper [Or Working Paper, Etc.]
    Patrick Dunleavy, Christopher Gilson, Simon Bastow and Jane Tinkler The National Audit Office, the Public Accounts Committee and the risk landscape in UK Public Policy Discussion paper [or working paper, etc.] Original citation: Dunleavy, Patrick, Christopher Gilson, Simon Bastow and Jane Tinkler (2009): The National Audit Office, the Public Accounts Committee and the risk landscape in UK public policy. URN 09/1423. The Risk and Regulation Advisory Council, London, UK. This version available at: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/25785/ Originally available from LSE Public Policy Group Available in LSE Research Online: November 2009 © 2009 the authors LSE has developed LSE Research Online so that users may access research output of the School. Copyright © and Moral Rights for the papers on this site are retained by the individual authors and/or other copyright owners. Users may download and/or print one copy of any article(s) in LSE Research Online to facilitate their private study or for non-commercial research. You may not engage in further distribution of the material or use it for any profit-making activities or any commercial gain. You may freely distribute the URL (http://eprints.lse.ac.uk) of the LSE Research Online website. The National Audit Office, the Public Accounts Committee and the Risk Landscape in UK Public Policy Patrick Dunleavy, Christopher Gilson, Simon Bastow and Jane Tinkler October 2009 The Risk and Regulation Advisory Council This report was produced in July 2009 for the Risk and Regulation Advisory Council. The Risk and Regulation Advisory Council is an independent advisory group which aims to improve the understanding of public risk and how to respond to it.
    [Show full text]
  • Future Access Pricing in the Water Sector a Discussion Paper
    Water today, water tomorrow Future access pricing in the water sector A discussion paper www.ofwat.gov.uk Future access pricing in the water sector 2 Water today, water tomorrow About this document This document introduces some of the terminology, concepts and issues we will need to consider in developing a new charging rules framework for access pricing for the water sector in England and Wales. It describes: • what access pricing is and why it matters; • some of the key issues we will need to consider around access pricing; • which costs could be considered in setting access prices; and • the lessons that we can learn from other sectors. The UK Government’s Water Bill, published in June 2013, will extend the role of competition in the sector in England. This will mean new companies will have access to the systems and services provided by monopoly water and sewerage and water only companies. The Water Bill also requires us to prepare rules that monopoly companies will need to follow in setting the prices they will charge for providing access. Contents 1. Why does access pricing matter? 4 2. What are the main issues? 8 3. Which costs should we consider? 12 4. What lessons can we learn from other sectors? 15 5. Next steps 26 6. Further information 27 3 Future access pricing in the water sector 1. Why does access pricing matter? Most people in England and And in June 2013, the UK Together these reforms will Wales receive their water Government published draft encourage: services from one of 19 licensed legislation (the Water Bill) to regional monopoly companies achieve this vision.
    [Show full text]
  • References.Pdf
    References Audit Commission (2006). Higher Standards, Better Schools for All: More Choice for Parents and Pupils [Department for Education and Skills Consultation Response January 2006) [online]. Available: http://www.audit-commission.gov.uk/Products/ NATIONAL-REPORT/FC8B4B31-C278-4987-8EFA-DA0F2C20A6DB/ ACResponseHigherStandardsBetterSchoolsforAll.pdf [29 March, 2007]. Brettingham, M. (2006). ‘Hare Krishna school angers Hindus’, Times Educational Supplement, 4714, 8 December, 3. Communities and Local Government (2004). Community Cohesion Education Stan- dards for Schools [online]. Available: http://www.communities.gov.uk/pub/613/ CommunityCohesionEducationStandardsforSchools_id1502613.pdf [5 April, 2007]. Curtis, P. (2005). ‘MPs to publish alternative white paper’, Guardian Unlimited, 14 December [online]. Available: http://education.guardian.co.uk/admissions/story/ 0,,1667203,00.html [29 March, 2007]. Department for Education and Employment (2004). The Protection of School Playing Fields and Land for Academies [online]. Available: http://publications.teachernet. gov.uk/eOrderingDownload/1017-2004DOC-EN-01.doc [3 April, 2007]. Department for Education and Skills (2001). Special Educational Needs Code of Practice [online]. Available: http://www.teachernet.gov.uk/_doc/3724/SENCodeOf- Practice.pdf [5 April, 2007]. Department for Education and Skills (2005a). A Single Inspectorate for Children and Learners: the Government’s Response to Consultation [online]. Available: http://www.dfes.gov.uk/consultations/downloadableDocs/SingleInspect4Children.p df [29 March, 2007]. Department for Education and Skills (2005b). Youth Matters (Cm 6629). London: The Stationery Office. Department for Education and Skills (2006a). Johnson Announces Multi-Million Pound Package to Improve School Food and Fight Childhood Obesity (DfES Press Notice 2006/0121) [online]. Available: http://www.dfes.gov.uk/pns/DisplayPN.cgi? pn_id=2006_0121 [5 April, 2007].
    [Show full text]
  • Home to School Travel and Transport Guidance Statutory Guidance for Local Authorities
    Home to school travel and transport guidance Statutory guidance for local authorities July 2014 Contents Summary 5 Review date 5 What legislation (including statutory instruments) does this guidance refer to? 5 Who is this guidance for? 5 Main points 6 Local authorities’ statutory duties 6 Part 1 - Statutory duties 7 1.1 Sustainable school travel 7 Assessing the travel and transport needs of children and young people 7 Audit of infrastructure to support sustainable school travel 8 Strategy to develop infrastructure to support travel needs of pupils 8 Promoting sustainable travel and transport to and from school 9 Publication of Sustainable Modes of Travel Strategy 9 1.2 Provision of travel arrangements 9 1.3 Provision of travel arrangements: Eligible children 10 Statutory walking distances eligibility 10 Special educational needs, a disability or mobility problems eligibility 10 Unsafe route eligibility 11 Extended rights eligibility 11 Accompaniment 11 Assessing route safety 12 Measurement of routes 12 Timing of assessment of eligibility 12 Qualifying school 13 Travel arrangements made by the local authority or other bodies/persons 13 Suitability of arrangements 14 Part 2 - Discretionary Arrangements 16 Travel arrangements for other children 16 Religion or belief 16 Part 3 - Transport Considerations 18 2 Safeguarding requirements 18 Training and Equalities 18 Bus safety considerations 18 Poor behaviour on school buses/other modes of transport 19 Partnership 19 Part 4 – Policy Changes 20 Publication of general arrangements and policies
    [Show full text]
  • The European Parliament Should Return to a 'Dual Mandate' System
    The European Parliament should return to a ‘dual mandate’ system which uses national politicians as representatives instead of directly elected MEPs blogs.lse.ac.uk/europpblog/2014/06/16/the-european-parliament-should-return-to-a-dual-mandate-system- which-uses-national-politicians-as-representatives-instead-of-directly-elected-meps/ 16/06/2014 One of the key criticisms of European Parliament elections is that low turnout prevents the Parliament from genuinely being able to confer legitimacy on the EU’s legislative process. Herman Lelieveldt writes that while there was a small increase in turnout in the 2014 European elections, the overall trend of declining turnout necessitates a radical reform to improve the EU’s democratic legitimacy. He suggests returning to a ‘dual mandate’ system through which national parliaments appoint a proportion of their members to split time between the European Parliament and the national level. With a turnout that was only slightly higher than five years ago and a general consensus that many of the dissatisfied voters stayed home, the new European Parliament continues the paradoxical trend of declining legitimacy despite a systematic increase in its powers over the last decades. If it comes to mobilising more voters it is safe to conclude that the experiment with the Spitzenkandidat has been an utter failure. Apart from maybe in Germany, the contest did not generate much excitement in the member states nor did it bring more voters to the polls. Hence we are left with another election in which a majority of the member states (17 out of the 28) saw turn-out again decline, as shown in the Chart below.
    [Show full text]
  • 301-United Kingdom: the Conservative Party *Note: All Code Justifications Which Appear in ALL CAPS Were Part of the Original ICPP Project (Janda, 1980)
    #301-United Kingdom: The Conservative Party *Note: All code justifications which appear in ALL CAPS were part of the original ICPP project (Janda, 1980). All other code justifications were subsequently provided by those credited after said justification. Variable 9.01: Nationalization of Structure 1950-1990: 5 CONSERVATIVE PARTY WAS ORGANIZED INTO TWELVE AREA COUNCILS IN ENGLAND AND WALES AND TWO DIVISIONS IN SCOTLAND. AREA COUNCILS MET FROM TWO TO FOUR TIMES YEARLY, WHILE AREA EXECUTIVE COMMITTEES FUNCTIONED IN THE INTERIM. AN AGENT OF THE CENTRAL OFFICE REPRESENTED THE INTERESTS OF THE NATIONAL PARTY, ACTING AS HONORARY SECRETARY FOR THE AREA COUNCIL. THESE REGIONAL ORGANIZATIONS IN THE CONSERVATIVE PARTY, WHICH HAD NO RESTRICTIONS ON THE TOPICS THEY COULD DISCUSS, EXERCISED SOMEWHAT MORE INDEPENDENCE OF ACTION THAN THEIR COUNTERPARTS IN THE LABOUR PARTY. (JANDA, 1980: 209) Norton notes that, "In terms of its internal organization, the party is hierarchical." (Norton, 1991:136) The hierarchy runs from the national organs through eleven regional offices in England, one in Wales and two in Scotland. Concerning the hierarchy and flow of authority, Kelly notes that even at the Conservative Local Government Conference and Exhibition, matters were arranged and managed at the national level. (Kelly,1989:58-9) [By Paul Sum] The Conservative Party in its 1974 Manifesto (Craig, 1975: 446), agreed the following: "In Scotland, we will: set up a Scottish Assembly; give the Secretary of State for Scotland, acting with the Scottish assembly, the power to decide how to spend Scotland's share of the U.K. budget; establish a Scottish development fund to provide substantial help with both the new problems created by oil, and with Scotland's old deprived areas; transfer the Oil Division of the Department of Energy to Scotland." [By Renata Chopra] As described in the Conservative Party publication The Right Approach (1976), Scotland feels that the Parliament and the government are out of touch with its needs.
    [Show full text]
  • Join Us to Celebrate England's Birthday in Malmesbury This July
    Newsletter ISSUE No. 20 June 2019 Inside this Issue Surprise as Judge Refuses to Hear Tilbrook -Surprise as Judge Refuses to Brexit Exit Case hear Brexit Exit Case p1 -Celebrate England’s Birthday A single Judge has said that the that Mr Tilbrook was probably right in his this July with ED p1 Tilbrook case does not merit being assessment. -Write for EV p1 heard. He considered the papers and Not unusual -Brown Bullies England Again p2 refused permission. It is important to remember that at nearly Deadline to appeal every stage of the Gina Miller legal case -Two things the Gov’t don’t want English Democrat Chairman Robin they had to appeal against the initial you to know about Barnett p2 Tilbrook stated:’ Our Application to findings which were usually negative. -NSS Reserach Reveals Appeal the Refusal of Permission was This case has a right to be heard and the Unstunned Meat Widespread in safely issued in time despite the Order Judge not allowing a full court case marks UK Supermarkets p3 being made on almost the only day another nail in the coffin of the idea that we -Editorial p3 which, had I not had my post checked have an impartial and unbiased justice -Join Us to write the Draft daily, could have made me miss the system in the UK. Constitution for England p4 deadline because I was away on holiday Important Point - English Democrats FightsTwo for two weeks’. (There is an extremely What this case does highlight very well is Further Cases: Electoral tight time period following decisions the problems caused by not having a Commission; Facebook made at this level (no merit)for written Constitution; the abolition (under applicants to appeal The time starts Blair of the important role of Lord p4 when the decision is made and not when Chancellor; and the dire state of the -future events p4 the decision is received.editor) Judicial system in England where Setbacks expected competence is sacrificed on the altar of Do You Want to Write For Respected Emeritus Profssor Alan Sked political correctness.
    [Show full text]
  • Sentencing and Immediate Custody in Wales: a Factfile
    Sentencing and Immediate Custody in Wales: A Factfile Dr Robert Jones Wales Governance Centre at Cardiff University January 2019 Acknowledgements ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The author would especially like to thank Lucy Morgan for all of her help in producing this report. I would also like to thank staff working at the Ministry of Justice who have responded to the many requests for information made during the course of this research. Finally, I am extremely grateful to Alan Cogbill, Emyr Lewis, Ed Poole, Huw Pritchard and Richard Wyn Jones for their insightful comments on an earlier draft of this report. ABOUT US The Wales Governance Centre is a research centre that forms part of Cardiff University’s School of Law and Politics undertaking innovative research into all aspects of the law, politics, government and political economy of Wales, as well the wider UK and European contexts of territorial governance. A key objective of the Centre is to facilitate and encourage informed public debate of key developments in Welsh governance not only through its research, but also through events and postgraduate teaching. In July 2018, the Wales Governance Centre launched a new project into Justice and Jurisdiction in Wales. The research will be an interdisciplinary project bringing together political scientists, constitutional law experts and criminologists in order to investigate: the operation of the justice system in Wales; the relationship between non-devolved and devolved policies; and the impact of a single ‘England and Wales’ legal system. CONTACT DETAILS Wales Governance Centre at Cardiff University, 21 Park Place, Cardiff, CF10 3DQ. Web: http://sites.cardiff.ac.uk/wgc/ ABOUT THE AUTHOR Robert Jones is a Research Associate at the Wales Governance Centre at Cardiff University.
    [Show full text]
  • The European Election Results 2009
    EUROPEAN PARLIAMENTARY ELECTION FOR THE EASTERN REGION 4TH JUNE 2009 STATEMENT UNDER RULE 56(1)(b) OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS RULES 2004 I, David Monks, hereby give notice that at the European Parliamentary Election in the Eastern Region held on 4th June 2009 — 1. The number of votes cast for each Party and individual Candidate was — Party or Individual Candidate No. of Votes 1. Animals Count 13,201 2. British National Party – National Party – Protecting British Jobs 97,013 3. Christian Party ―Proclaiming Christ’s Lordship‖ The Christian Party – CPA 24,646 4. Conservative Party 500,331 5. English Democrats Party – English Democrats – ―Putting England First!‖ 32,211 6. Jury Team 6,354 7. Liberal Democrats 221,235 8. NO2EU:Yes to Democracy 13,939 9 Pro Democracy: Libertas.EU 9,940 10. Social Labour Party (Leader Arthur Scargill) 13,599 11. The Green Party 141,016 12. The Labour Party 167,833 13. United Kingdom First 38,185 14. United Kingdom Independence Party – UKIP 313,921 15. Independent (Peter E Rigby) 9,916 2. The number of votes rejected was: 13,164 3. The number of votes which each Party or Candidate had after the application of subsections (4) to (9) of Section 2 of the European Parliamentary Elections Act 2002, was — Stage Party or Individual Candidate Votes Allocation 1. Conservative 500331 First Seat 2. UKIP 313921 Second Seat 3. Conservative 250165 Third Seat 4. Liberal Democrat 221235 Fourth Seat 5. Labour Party 167833 Fifth Seat 6. Conservative 166777 Sixth Seat 7. UKIP 156960 Seventh Seat 4. The seven Candidates elected for the Eastern Region are — Name Address Party 1.
    [Show full text]
  • THE 422 Mps WHO BACKED the MOTION Conservative 1. Bim
    THE 422 MPs WHO BACKED THE MOTION Conservative 1. Bim Afolami 2. Peter Aldous 3. Edward Argar 4. Victoria Atkins 5. Harriett Baldwin 6. Steve Barclay 7. Henry Bellingham 8. Guto Bebb 9. Richard Benyon 10. Paul Beresford 11. Peter Bottomley 12. Andrew Bowie 13. Karen Bradley 14. Steve Brine 15. James Brokenshire 16. Robert Buckland 17. Alex Burghart 18. Alistair Burt 19. Alun Cairns 20. James Cartlidge 21. Alex Chalk 22. Jo Churchill 23. Greg Clark 24. Colin Clark 25. Ken Clarke 26. James Cleverly 27. Thérèse Coffey 28. Alberto Costa 29. Glyn Davies 30. Jonathan Djanogly 31. Leo Docherty 32. Oliver Dowden 33. David Duguid 34. Alan Duncan 35. Philip Dunne 36. Michael Ellis 37. Tobias Ellwood 38. Mark Field 39. Vicky Ford 40. Kevin Foster 41. Lucy Frazer 42. George Freeman 43. Mike Freer 44. Mark Garnier 45. David Gauke 46. Nick Gibb 47. John Glen 48. Robert Goodwill 49. Michael Gove 50. Luke Graham 51. Richard Graham 52. Bill Grant 53. Helen Grant 54. Damian Green 55. Justine Greening 56. Dominic Grieve 57. Sam Gyimah 58. Kirstene Hair 59. Luke Hall 60. Philip Hammond 61. Stephen Hammond 62. Matt Hancock 63. Richard Harrington 64. Simon Hart 65. Oliver Heald 66. Peter Heaton-Jones 67. Damian Hinds 68. Simon Hoare 69. George Hollingbery 70. Kevin Hollinrake 71. Nigel Huddleston 72. Jeremy Hunt 73. Nick Hurd 74. Alister Jack (Teller) 75. Margot James 76. Sajid Javid 77. Robert Jenrick 78. Jo Johnson 79. Andrew Jones 80. Gillian Keegan 81. Seema Kennedy 82. Stephen Kerr 83. Mark Lancaster 84.
    [Show full text]
  • Women Mps in Westminster Photographs Taken May 21St, June 3Rd, June 4Th, 2008
    “The House of Commons Works of Art Collection documents significant moments in Parliamentary history. We are delighted to have added this unique photographic record of women MPs of today, to mark the 90th anniversary of women first being able to take their seats in this House” – Hugo Swire, Chairman, The Speaker's Advisory Committee on Works of Art. “The day the Carlton Club accepted women” – 90 years after women first got the vote aim to ensure that a more enduring image of On May 21st 2008 over half of all women women's participation in the political process Members of Parliament in Westminster survives. gathered party by party to have group photographs taken to mark the anniversary of Each party gave its permission for the 90 years since women first got the vote (in photographs to be taken. For the Labour February 1918 women over 30 were first Party, Barbara Follett MP, the then Deputy granted the vote). Minister for Women and Equality, and Barbara Keeley MP, who was Chair of the Labour Party Women’s Committee and The four new composite Caroline Adams, who works for the photographs taken party by Parliamentary Labour Party helped ensure that all but 12 of the Labour women party aim to ensure that a attended. more enduring image of For the Conservative women's participation in the Party, The Shadow Leader of the House of political process survives Commons and Shadow Minister for Until now the most often used photographic Women, Theresa May image of women MPs had been the so called MP and the Chairman “Blair Babes” picture taken on 7th May 1997 of the Conservative shortly after 101 Labour women were elected Party, Caroline to Westminster as a result of positive action by Spelman MP, enlisted the Labour Party.
    [Show full text]
  • Mrs. Thatcher's Return to Victorian Values
    proceedings of the British Academy, 78, 9-29 Mrs. Thatcher’s Return to Victorian Values RAPHAEL SAMUEL University of Oxford I ‘VICTORIAN’was still being used as a routine term of opprobrium when, in the run-up to the 1983 election, Mrs. Thatcher annexed ‘Victorian values’ to her Party’s platform and turned them into a talisman for lost stabilities. It is still commonly used today as a byword for the repressive just as (a strange neologism of the 1940s) ‘Dickensian’ is used as a short-hand expression to describe conditions of squalor and want. In Mrs. Thatcher’s lexicon, ‘Victorian’ seems to have been an interchangeable term for the traditional and the old-fashioned, though when the occasion demanded she was not averse to using it in a perjorative sense. Marxism, she liked to say, was a Victorian, (or mid-Victorian) ideo1ogy;l and she criticised ninetenth-century paternalism as propounded by Disraeli as anachronistic.2 Read 12 December 1990. 0 The British Academy 1992. Thanks are due to Jonathan Clark and Christopher Smout for a critical reading of the first draft of this piece; to Fran Bennett of Child Poverty Action for advice on the ‘Scroungermania’ scare of 1975-6; and to the historians taking part in the ‘History Workshop’ symposium on ‘Victorian Values’ in 1983: Gareth Stedman Jones; Michael Ignatieff; Leonore Davidoff and Catherine Hall. Margaret Thatcher, Address to the Bow Group, 6 May 1978, reprinted in Bow Group, The Right Angle, London, 1979. ‘The Healthy State’, address to a Social Services Conference at Liverpool, 3 December 1976, in Margaret Thatcher, Let Our Children Grow Tall, London, 1977, p.
    [Show full text]