Keith McBurney

Postcript to Postcript.

The first go at English the ersatz decentralisation which is regional devolution was disjointedy designed to fail by the civil ministries whose unelected ever present power behind the rotating throne would have been threatened otherwise, and by those who had no wish to set a precedent the EU commissars in their politburo of a totalitarian Commission would have been quick to exploit. Prescott was the expendable useful fool.   

The RDAs finesse is the resulting bypass of democratic norms in another version of cash for votes through a political and corporate cashback scheme via rent a job.  

The English public are now much more aware of the meaning of regional assemblies than they were in 2004 when the North East of England voted NO to this form of government.
We know it means the abolition of England and the wiping out of English Identity and culture.
Let this government hold a referendum on regional assemblies in England on the same day throughout England with the added option for an English Parliament.
Tony Blair admitted that the English would vote yes to an English parliament.For some reason the onus seems to have fallen on the English to maintain the uk at all costs.
I'm not one of them, I would like to see a full parliament for Wales and independence if they want it. What can be fairer than that?

"Not quite; Labour are proposing to beef up the Regional Development
Agencies in a way that could conceivably foreshadow a second go at
English regional devolution"

We can but hope but in reality there is not enough time available for Labour to pursue this policy to fruition because they will be out on their ear (unless something very dramatic and unseen occurs in the meantime) in May 2010. Let's recall that the bungled Prescott led strategy only emerged 5 years after Labour's installation in 1997 before its ultimate demise in 2004.

My general advice to Labour strategists if they are indeed indulging
in a massive rethink on this policy would be; This time round do not
under any circumstances let timidity rule your thought processes.

First of all Labour might want to consider ripping up the current
official English Regional map as a template for power dispersal because
this document has a profoundly negative impact on public reaction
towards the concept of English Regional Devolution - witness the (too)
large and nebulous South East and South West Regions for starters.

Secondly any English Regional institutions of accountable governance
must boast both primary legislative and revenue gathering powers
commensurate with their proposed competencies, so they would be English
Regional Parliaments in the truest sense of the word.

Finally Labour should be very bold in ensuring that those policy
fields slated for transfer to English devolved institutions are
both relevant to ordinary people and meaningful so I am thinking; Healthcare, Education, Law & Order (policing), Housing, Intra-Regional Transport, Culture & Tourism as a bare minimum.

Peter Davidson, Alderley Edge, NW.England

After 12 years, England is still an after-thought. We will not tolerate the dismantling of England into unwelcome and unwanted Regions, headed by the equally unwanted Regional Assemblies.
It is clear that democracy will not work for us in England and the whole system is in fact, designed to work against us and prevent us from achieving parity in Britain.
"They" are refusing to listen, but when we stop asking, "they" had better be very worried indeed.

Isn't the so-called "Celtic fringe" you mention multi-ethnic/multi-cultural these days - like England? If not, why not? Celtic purity is an old racist myth - as is the idea that the Scots, Welsh and Northern Irish are some kind of unsullied ancient tribe.

"With vocal and powerful national legislatures, Britain's peripheries are accused of to looming too large in the life of the UK."

Taking a look at the numbers of MPs and the Barnett Formula squeeze and the recent report on the reality of BBC coverage - its very difficult to take any of this seriously.

Mike

Normal Mouth,

I actually believe the UK will fracture in the next ten years or so.

But I do think that a seperate English Parliament for English issues would go a long way to forestalling that analysis.

England is a nation, much as Scotland and Wales are. It would be an unbalanced federalism, but it would be federalism for all that. Which, in some senses, it has always been.

So, you are completely correct in arguing that the Tory idea is a diversion from the West Lothian question. That, however, ought to be answered directly by an English Parliament - not some sort of regionalism.

That putative English Parliament should have exactly the same subservient powers and roles that Hollyrood, The Welsh Assembly and Stormont already have when compared to Parliament.

Which obviously requires an equalisation of said devolved powers. What one gets, they all get. Otherwise it is just another game of divide and conquer.

I have zero faith that this will be delivered by any politician.

Of course, the whole game will be up if the Scots vote for independence in 2010, 2011 or whenever. This will be all the more likely if the Tories win outright in the next general election: a victory that will be entirely due to voting in England and will set the resultant Conservative government at odds with SNP-controlled Holyrood. Ironically, this most likely of all UK break-up scenarios is precisely one which the Tories' answer to the West Lothian Question is designed to engineer; as they want to preserve the possibility of a single party (i.e. themselves at the next election) winning outright UK majorities, dependent on the First Past the Post electoral system.

If the Tories were really interested in trying to make the current asymmetrical devolution settlement work, they'd have recommended PR. Then there'd be no conflict between the UK and English parliamentary majorities, as they'd be based on the same cross-party alliances. Clearly, the Tories are putting narrow perceived party self-interest before the survival of any sort of United Kingdom.

Under the present post-devolution system, MPs elected in devolved areas are allowed to participate in determining policies concerning matters which, in their constituencies, have been devolved. Their decisions on such matters do not apply to their constituents so these MPs do not represent their constituents and do not have to answer to them for their actions. However unacceptable their decisions are to the people to whom they apply, their constituents are given no reason on which to base their decision at subsequent elections. This is a travesty of a democratic constitution.

I don't normally agree with Britology but on this occasion I concur wholeheartedly. The CONServative Party is being even more selfish and self-centered than it normally is. PR would lessen the dangerous imbalance between major party support which has built-up in the last twenty years (since the 1983 general election and in Scotland particularly since the 1987 election) which results in Scots thinking the Tory Party is the 'English party' and English people in the South of England thinking Labour is the party of Scotland (apart from the SNP of course).

A Tory victory at the next election would shatter the Union as Scots have a visceral hatred of the Tories due to the collapse of heavy industry in Scotland during the 1980's which rightly or wrongly they blame on the Conservative Party.

This scenario of a Tory victory with the Tories winning few or no seats in Scotland is what Alex Salmond dreams about. It is his 'perfect storm'.

Can everyone please sign their comments at the bottom until we have fixed it. Thanks (and many apols)

I support the English in their choice of settlement. Personally I think they would be best served by devolved government to the natural and historic English regions but that should be their choice. I believe there should be a constitutional convention that involves the English public and puts all the options on the table to be discussed.

However most Eng nats do not support the Cornish assembly campaign not for the reason you give Toque but rather for older more celtophobic reasons namely ignorance and aggressive right wing English nationalism.

Many Eng nats, being cut from the same respective cloths as UKIP, the Tories and the BNP, hold the same dislike of the 'uppity' Cornish.

Oll an gwella

The Cornish Democrat

Most Engish Nationalists would not object to a Cornish Assembly if that's what the majority of the people of Cornwall want.
What they do object to is devolving from the UK Assembly (Westminster) straight to regional assemblies in England without setting up an intermediary English Assembly (ie English Parliament) first.
English regional devolution should be the responsibilty of English political representitives not British.

@Anonymous Wed, 2008-07-02 12:45 - "Let this government hold a referendum on regional assemblies in England on the same day throughout England with the added option of an English Parliament."

For me, this practical proposal offers an equitable solution to the ongoing constitutional conundrum presented by England.

However, before contemplating a plebiscite in this form, many things have to change:

1. Current political élites will have to take a quantum leap of faith and trust the electorate to deliberate upon this matter in a rational and informed manner.

2. That means some method of meaningful engagement with the public. That's why I advocate a Citizens' Convention for this purpose.

3. It also means a radical departure from the default strategy of keeping the public as ill-informed as possible about potential constitutional options. A Citizens' Convention should therefore include a comprehensive programme of objective information and the potential to discard current orthodoxy and start afresh, i.e. The Queen must be the British Head of State, the default voting method for elected bodies must be FPTP, the current official English Regional map must be retained - Why, Why & Why?

If (and I know it's a big ask) we can arrive at that circumstance, a simultaneous referendum (for the entire English electorate) offering mutually exclusive choices for dispersal of power in England would be legitimate and binding.

Peter Davidson, Alderley Edge, NW.England