An OurKingdom symposium: see also articles by Gerry Hassan, James Mitchell and David Torrance

It seemed unlikely that Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling would be hounded out of office by the English mob, like Brown's predecessor Lord Bute, but for a moment in 2006 Alan Duncan looked like he might be a modern day John Wilkes. He was quickly slapped down. Since that time there has been a grumbling English discontent - articulated most forcefully by the likes of Simon Heffer, David Starkey and Kelvin MacKenzie - but the Tories themselves have resisted the temptation to play the English card and have not made an issue of Gordon Brown's Scottishness, or more specifically his lack of mandate on English domestic issues.

Soon though, baring divine intervention, the boot will be on the other foot; soon it will be Scotland that is ruled by a man they have not elected, who is not one of theirs, and who to them has no mandate. Step forward David Cameron to deliver the acid test of devolution. It was the democratic deficit of the Thatcher and Major years that provided the unionist rationale for Scottish devolution: Why should Scotland put up with a right-wing Tory government, and an English one at that, when Scotland consistently voted left-of-centre? If the devolution theorists are correct then the devolved Scottish Parliament should buffer Scotland from the worst excesses of English Conservatism and mollify the nationalist impulse. But there's a fly in the ointment, some Scots, most Scots in fact, are saying that devolution doesn't go far enough. They want a referendum and more powers, especially enhanced fiscal powers, and David Cameron doesn't want that. Respect, yes; powers to tax and spend, no! At least not yet, not now.

David Cameron is English, he's posh, he only has one Scottish MP, and he's a Tory. On paper he's an easier quarry for Alex Salmond than Gordon Brown is. But Salmond is a wily character, and he doesn't want the SNP to be the nasty party, so just as the Tories refrained from attacking Brown on grounds of his Scottishness, the SNP will most likely refrain from attacking Cameron's Englishness and class. This leaves Cameron's 'Tory-ness' and his lack of a Scottish mandate as the best grounds for attack, but then an attack on Cameron's Tory-ness may sound too much like the class-warfare and anti-Englishness of old, and may well alienate the Scottish voters that the SNP most wants to attract - those looking to cast their vote tactically against Labour. So Salmond's best tactic will be to point to Cameron's lack of Scottish support. Taking the best possible Conservative case-scenario that has presented itself so far (YouGov, 8th - 9th October 2009; Lab 34%, SNP 28%, Con 22%, Lib Dem 10%) the Conservatives could capitalise on the collapse of the Labour vote by picking up 7 Scottish MPs in 2010. However, this really is a best-case-scenario, for all their superior resources the Tories will find it tough campaigning in Scotland where they have failed to sanitise the Conservative brand to the extent they have in England and Wales.

George Osborne's proposed cuts in public spending will hit Scotland disproportionately hard, and hard hit too will be Scotland's representation at Westminster, delivered a double whammy of cuts through boundary changes and then enfeebled by English Votes on English Laws. "Vote Tory at the General Election and I won't be able to vote at Westminster" is not necessarily a good election slogan for doorstepping Tory candidates. On English Votes on English Laws the Tories may find that they have an ally in Alex Salmond, a man keen to see Scots side-lined at Westminster, though they may also find that it is Salmond who is the unlikely champion of England's cause. Worst of all, the Tories in Scotland have to explain their position on the Calman Commission, and they're not too sure what that position is. And the Tories in England don't particularly want the English to read in their papers about more Scottish devolution, lest they begin asking their own 'English Question'.

"I'll consider anything that makes the political elite accountable to citizens" wrote Gordon Brown. Stopping unnaccountable Scottish MPs from voting and speaking on English matters, and from participating in the government of England, would seem like a good start in achieving that. Like Meatloaf Gordon Brown might consider anything, but he won't do that. But what will the Liberal Democrats consider?

Dear Liberal Democrats,

Given the sudden interest in constitutional reform is there any chance of getting the ‘English Question' on the political radar? An English parliament offers the opportunity of ushering in many of the constitutional reforms that are suddenly being discussed, and probably represents the best chance of a more deliberative democracy. Until people begin to think the unthinkable and talk seriously about an English parliament - even if only to advocate asking the people how they wish to be governed instead of imposing top-down solutions - I tend to think that serious constitutional reform is off the agenda. Not because an English parliament is necessary for reform, but because opposition to an English parliament is so often predicated on a desire to prevent serious constitutional reform and a rethink of what it actually means to be a multi-national United Kingdom. Talk of an English parliament raises all the difficult questions that the political establishment wants to - and will - avoid at all cost. All the more reason to raise them then.

Political authority has been hived off to Scotland, Wales and NI which makes this current crisis of legitimacy as much of an English constitutional crisis as a British one, especially because the dreadful prospect of English self-government has prevented Labour from ever asking the dreadful English (the rump of Britian) how they would like to be governed (a mistake that Cameron appears destined and willing to repeat). However, in calling for the English - as a nation - to be consulted on how they wish to be governed the Liberal Democrats could quite legitimately tap into a popular national mood that increases the likelihood of a citizens' convention for the whole of the UK (because England cannot be considered apart as Scotland was).

You may have read in the Guardian that Gorgeous George has blamed Speaker Martin's fall from grace on English snobs:

English snobbery can do a morris dance of delight at the political demise of the Speaker, Michael Martin. The bigots have put the taigs back in their place.

Amongst those who signed Douglas Carswell's petition for the Speaker to resign were Norman Baker, Jo Swinson and Gordon Prentice, and they are all Scots. In fact a disproportionately high number of Scots contributed to Martin's downfall.

Is it possible that Michael Martin was forced out not because of English snobbery but because he was hopelessly partisan and useless at his job. We are in the grip of a very British constitutional crisis, and at a time when the House needed leadership there was none on offer.

Amid the Westminster panic circulates rumours of a coup against Gordon Brown and the possibility of a constitutional convention

Gareth Young, campaigner for an English Parliament, examines the English Democrats' alliance with the white nationalist England First Party.

On Monday morning Nick Griffin, BNP leader, was interviewed on the BBC's FiveLive Breakfast Show. "Isn't your party full of neo-nazis?" asked Nicky Campbell. "No", said Griffin, "Britain's neo-nazis hate me, they say that I've sold out...They call me a liberal".

One such group that hates the superficially more moderate and 'liberal' Nick Griffin is the England First Party (EFP) who describe the BNP leader as 'fundamentally flawed and psychologically disfigured' and object to Griffin's 'watering down of nationalist principles

Yesterday's press release from ippr contains some sobering statistics for those of us who love our pubs. Across England, in the four years between 2005-2009, a total of 2,707 were lost. Scotland lost 562. And Wales a further 236.

Hardest hit is the West Midlands, losing a staggering 9.6% of its public houses.

It's no secret that I am a huge fan of pubs, I see pubs as vitally important to both the historic and modern cultural fabric of England, and it breaks my heart to see pubs local to me closing (Just outside Lewes The Abergavenny Arms and The Pumphouse have become dead pubs, both of them the only pub for the respective villages of Rodmell and Cooksbridge). The loss of a village pub is a loss just as great as the loss of the post office, the village shop or the church. Frenchman turned English poet Hilaire Belloc wrote, "When you have lost your inns drown your empty selves, for you will have lost the last of England". It is a quote that that adorns a thousand beams, usually in gold italics, in pubs the length and breadth of England, and its marketing appeal lies in its simple truth. To sit in a traditional English pub is to connect with generations that have gone before. The English pub is redolent of Englishness: from its architecture; to its furnishings; to the peculiar etiquette of the inhabitants, the games they play, the way they interact and the language they speak.

On Thursday I went to London, to the Foreign Press Association, situated in the former residence of William Gladstone, to record a video for The Convention on Modern Liberty (who were holding a press conference there).

I should have known it was going to be one of those days when I asked the ticket officer at Lewes Station for a return ticket to “piccalilli” instead of Piccadilly. Anyway, the little speech that I had intended to deliver to camera didn’t come out quite as I had intended, and in order to illicit a more conversational style I was prompted with questions and asked to improvise a response. It was excruciating, even more so for the film crew than myself I imagine.

Having thanked the crew for their patience I went to meet Anthony for a cuppa, and he suggested that I posted the speech that I had intended to make to Our Kingdom. So without further ado, this is what I had written down and had intended to say.