Iain Mclean and Alistair McMillan
- Published in print:
- 2005
- Published Online:
- February 2006
- ISBN:
- 9780199258208
- eISBN:
- 9780191603334
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0199258201.003.0009
- Subject:
- Political Science, UK Politics
This chapter analyses what is now called the West Lothian Question (WLQ) after its persistent poser Tam Dalyell MP (formerly for West Lothian). The WLQ asks: Given partial devolution, why can an MP ...
More
This chapter analyses what is now called the West Lothian Question (WLQ) after its persistent poser Tam Dalyell MP (formerly for West Lothian). The WLQ asks: Given partial devolution, why can an MP for a devolved territory become involved in devolved matters in England, but not in his own constituency? It has been said that ‘the WLQ is not really a question: every time it is answered, Tam just waits for a bit and then asks it again’. But that merely shows what a persistently nagging question it has been since long before Tam Dalyell. In fact, it was sufficient (although not necessary) to bring down both of Gladstone’s Home Rule Bills (1886 and 1893). The chapter shows how problematic all the proposed solutions are, especially when dealing with divided government where one UK-wide party controls a territory and the other controls the UK government. However, if devolution is to be stable, the governments and parties will have to live with the WLQ. New conventions for cohabitation will arise, and the UK and devolved party systems may diverge, even if party labels do not. The UK electorate treats everything except UK General Elections as second-order.Less
This chapter analyses what is now called the West Lothian Question (WLQ) after its persistent poser Tam Dalyell MP (formerly for West Lothian). The WLQ asks: Given partial devolution, why can an MP for a devolved territory become involved in devolved matters in England, but not in his own constituency? It has been said that ‘the WLQ is not really a question: every time it is answered, Tam just waits for a bit and then asks it again’. But that merely shows what a persistently nagging question it has been since long before Tam Dalyell. In fact, it was sufficient (although not necessary) to bring down both of Gladstone’s Home Rule Bills (1886 and 1893). The chapter shows how problematic all the proposed solutions are, especially when dealing with divided government where one UK-wide party controls a territory and the other controls the UK government. However, if devolution is to be stable, the governments and parties will have to live with the WLQ. New conventions for cohabitation will arise, and the UK and devolved party systems may diverge, even if party labels do not. The UK electorate treats everything except UK General Elections as second-order.
Katrin Križ, Janese Free, and Grant Kuehl
- Published in print:
- 2016
- Published Online:
- October 2016
- ISBN:
- 9780190459567
- eISBN:
- 9780190459581
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190459567.003.0009
- Subject:
- Social Work, Children and Families
This chapter discusses how children at risk of maltreatment are removed from home in the United States. We discuss the legislative framework and the processes and agents involved in the ...
More
This chapter discusses how children at risk of maltreatment are removed from home in the United States. We discuss the legislative framework and the processes and agents involved in the decision-making process around removal, including child protection agencies and courts. The chapter presents evidence on several major blind spots in the system, including bias and delays in decision-making. Thus, it reveals the need for further research on how these blind spots impact children and their families, as well as on the impact of programs that aim at improving them. Further, this chapter also underscores the need for systemic change to ensure that bias can be eliminated and children and parents, especially those with the least amount of resources, also can be engaged and empowered users of the system.Less
This chapter discusses how children at risk of maltreatment are removed from home in the United States. We discuss the legislative framework and the processes and agents involved in the decision-making process around removal, including child protection agencies and courts. The chapter presents evidence on several major blind spots in the system, including bias and delays in decision-making. Thus, it reveals the need for further research on how these blind spots impact children and their families, as well as on the impact of programs that aim at improving them. Further, this chapter also underscores the need for systemic change to ensure that bias can be eliminated and children and parents, especially those with the least amount of resources, also can be engaged and empowered users of the system.
