I voted for the English parliament to be located at the Palace of Westminster and the UK one to be elsewhere as one of the first actions of an English parliament should be to hold a referendum on our continued membership of the UK. They may as well build it outside England as there would be little point in re-locating all over again after our secession!

I voted the same but for different reasons. Westminster is the historic seat of English governance. The same might be said of British governance but it would make more sense to have the UK Parliament somewhere other than London, Edinburgh, Cardiff or Belfast, probably somewhere that is equidistant between the four national capitals.

Billy Bragg has written about the Power 2010 and mentions an English Parliament

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/oct/14/power-2010-change-po...

Would you gut the building or keep the decor? It's difficult to imagine a change of political culture (if desired) without changing the debating chambers of the Houses of Parliament. The House of Lords has more room but is rather gaudy.

Some people prefer a horseshoe-shaped chamber because it is less adversarial. Frankly I think the adversarial nature can be overcome simply by not having all blues on one side and all the reds on the other, or if the Speaker stops allowing such stupid partisan and sycophantic questions (thinking of PMQs here). Presumably there would also be greater use of committees in an English parliament, and they tend to be far less partisan.

When the Welsh Assembly started up members were not seated in party blocks during plenary sessions (I think it might have been one of Ron Davies’s ideas) but they just couldn’t stick to it and insisted on being allowed to sit in blocks. Cue more Westminster-style ‘yah boo’ behaviour from the Members. Stopping them herding together might be tricky, though as you say, it depends of the tone set by the Speaker or Presiding Officer. Back in those early days Dafydd Elis Thomas tried outlawing the use of unofficial descriptions of parties such as 'Tories'. As you can imagine, he lost that battle.

I've voted for the UK Parliament to be based elsewhere in the UK. Then the so-called "Celtic" (relatively recently invented myth) fringe can all get together and England can declare independence.

Easiest way around it is for all seats to be allocated alphabetically.

I voted to have both in England, as I beleive the best situtation would be for dual mandate MPs for all four countries of the UK.

We need to get the EP away from Westminster and to the centre of England. England needs to reconnect with herself.

The House of Common should become the English Parliament. It would retain ancient privileges. The House of Lords should be replaced by the British Parliament (the Salisbury solution). If both remain at Westminster, initially at least, the cost is minimal. It solves the problem of reforming the House of Lords. It opens the way for the British Parliament to become a legislature only with the excutive separate and led by a directly elected PM, since that position is becoming more presidential anyway. It goes with the grain of existing institutions and trends. It introduces a federal system by default. No new buildings are required. It reduces the number of elected representatives. It allows the smaller nations extra representation at the British level.

"It would retain ancient privileges."

That reminds me of Nye Bevan's impressions on entering Parliament as a newly-elected MP (recently quoted by Plaid's Adam Price):

“The House of Commons is like a church. The vaulted roofs and stained glass windows, the rows of statues of great statesmen of the past, the echoing halls, the soft-footed attendants and the whispered conversations, contrast depressingly with the crowded meetings and the clang and clash of hot opinions he has just left behind in the election campaign. Here he is, a tribune of the people, coming to make his voice heard in the seats of power. Instead, it seems he is expected to worship; and the most conservative of all religions - ancestor worship.”

I alluded to this point earlier. I wonder whether a new political culture can be built within such an environment, be it a federal UK parliament or an English parliament.

Excellent comment Hendre, and considering how desperately we need a new political culture it's a good question to ask.

Sadly, I don't (yet) have an answer.

It should be built on the Olympic site in East London

Westminster is universally recognised as the seat of UK government and has been for centuries. I would leave it where it is. I would also signal a new start for England by ensuring that an EP was based not only outside London but outside the southeast.

London is a black hole that sucks in all around it, and it bears little relation to much of the rest of England in just about every way (not a new observation: just ask Cobbett.) The country is way too London-centric already. I vote for an EP in the north - Manchester, Leeds or perhaps York, the old Viking capital.