I AM regularly puzzled when I read of Henry VIII powers still being available to the current Westminster Parliament.
These powers were introduced about a couple of centuries before the Treaty of Union and applied to the English parliament of that time. As the treaty of Union, an internationally recognised treaty, enshrined the disbandment of the existing English parliament and the creation of a new, joint English/Scottish one, I fail to understand how powers held by the previous one can possibly still be legally held by the new one. Is this not a blatant breach of the Treaty of Union, open to legal challenge?
READ MORE: All Scottish political parties should fight the Union’s injustice
If, however, powers previously legal in the erstwhile English parliament are still legal today, does this mean that any or all powers previously legal in the defunct Scottish parliament are still equally legal at Westminster? If so, surely one of these continuing powers must be the sovereignty of the people of Scotland, who must therefore retain the right in law to alter or abolish parliament, which exists only by their consent, and institute new government of their choice?
If Henry VIII powers are still legal, then the people of Scotland legally need no-one’s permission to decide to change their government.
L McGregor
Falkirk
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