Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Foulkes urges Britain to become federal nation

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 20 January 2008
BRITAIN should be turned into a federal nation in order to end the country's constitutional war, one of Scottish Labour's most senior figures has declared.
Lord Foulkes of Cumnock said it was time to consider a separate English chamber in London so all four nations of the UK have their own forum under a sovereign UK Parliament.

He said this would lead to a "sensible, stable and proper" solution to th
e "constitutional conundrum" thrown up by Scottish and Welsh devolution.

Lord Foulkes's call is at odds with the Labour party's official opposition to any more constitutional change in the UK.

UK ministers have expressed their opposition to the creation of a federal system. Justice Secretary Jack Straw declared last year that it would "break the Union altogether".

However, Foulkes says such a move would create a "just" answer to those English people who believe they should have their own parliament. He argues an English forum would finally answer the West Lothian Question, which asked why Scots MPs should be able to vote on English-only affairs at Westminster, but not the other way around.

Writing in Scotland on Sunday today, he states: "The four countries of the UK have more in common with each other – culturally, historically, geographically and in many other ways – than many federations around the world."

His Labour colleagues have dismissed federalism because they believe England makes up too big a part of the UK to make it a stable prospect.

A spokesman for the Liberal Democrats, which backs federalism, said: "A Federal solution it the most coherent and sensible long-term way of sustaining the UK."

A Conservative party spokesman said: "If George Foulkes wants to get involved in the discussion about how to answer the West Lothian Question, then we welcome him to the club."



Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 19 January 2008 7:28 PM
  • Source: Scotland On Sunday
  • Location: Scotland
  • Related Topics: Scottish Labour Party
 
1

democrate,

central Scotland 20/01/2008 01:28:21
so this is an elder statesman talking, is it? God, give us strength! A couple of months ago there was no need for constitutional change and those of us who argued for it were extremists seeking to rip the very heart out of the Union which had served Scotland so well - hahaha!
2

Highland Mighty,

UK 20/01/2008 01:32:39
I'm not wholly convinced about the case to go down the federal route but devolution is obviously far from complete.

Create an English Parliament and devolve equal powers and responsibilities to Holyrood, Cardiff, Belfast and (I assume) London, including the power to adapt other principal taxes to local needs.

Whitehall only needs to be involved in a few domestic matters, such as managing the overall economy, foreign affairs, defence & security, national/international crime, trade & employment law, national transport etc.

Similar responsibilities to the US federal government perhaps?

Recent polls show that the independence campaign is clearly not making any progress (despite countless bizarre attempts by the nationalist mob to trash the 'union' - Norwegian chess-sets, curry chefs etc!), the overwhelming majority of us still prefer further devolution within the UK.

If the SNP can just get to grips with this concept, then maybe they will have the maturity to join the 'national conversation' that mirrors the views of the majority of Scotland!
3

Conan the Librarian™,

20/01/2008 01:45:44
2
Federalism eh?
Maybe before the quarterway house of devolution as defined by the sh*tscared Blair administration.
But not now.
4

Petro,

20/01/2008 01:50:25
Federalism is the future. More and more Scots are rejecting narrow nationalism and recognising that we need to be able to express Scotland's desire for control over our own domestic affairs alongside a recognition of the value and shared history of being part of Britain with our Welsh, NOrthern Irish and English fellow islanders.
5

,

20/01/2008 02:01:06
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
6

Gregor Addison,

Glasgow 20/01/2008 02:05:20
Eddie Barnes is busy today. You'd think no-one else wanted to write for the Scotsman. As for the question of federalism, well...maybe it'll work...but it's not up to the electorate in Scotland to make it work - English voters have to decide what the want - and we could well ask why we should wait until they've figured out their solution?
7

subrosa,

20/01/2008 02:23:40
# 2

Didn't the SNP start the National Conversation? Also didn't they ask for contributions from ALL political persuasions?
8

Royster,

20/01/2008 02:43:28
An English Parliament will take one look at the books and secede from the rest of the UK in about 2 minutes flat. Labour tried to split England into regions with separate councils but the English smelled a rat and voted it down. The best way forward is to admit that devolution is a pig's ear and close Holyrood and the Welsh Senate. NI should remain devolved.
9

Scotindy,

Los Angeles 20/01/2008 06:47:39
Independence for SCOTLAND is the only sensible way forward.England can make her own way albeit into bankrupcy when we stop subsidising them.
10

Nikostratos,

20/01/2008 07:42:43
"A house divided against itself cannot stand."

I believe this government cannot endure, permanently half slave and half free.

I do not expect the Union to be dissolved -- I do not expect the house to fall -- but I do expect it will cease to be divided.

It will become all one thing or all the other.

Abraham Lincoln
11

Nikostratos,

20/01/2008 07:42:43
"A house divided against itself cannot stand."

I believe this government cannot endure, permanently half slave and half free.

I do not expect the Union to be dissolved -- I do not expect the house to fall -- but I do expect it will cease to be divided.

It will become all one thing or all the other.

Abraham Lincoln
12

donald,

glasgow 20/01/2008 08:55:01
With London still in control, as urged by the Libs for a Federal Empire at end of 19thC
13

Erse,

Middle East 20/01/2008 09:14:48
#2. Would that be the National Conversation that SNP called for or the National Disgrace when the unionist alliance snuck off down to London at their masters beck and call?
14

BIG EYE,

Paisley 20/01/2008 10:25:44
Simple question Federalists. In this Federal system would the "North sea Account" be handed over to Scotland?

Thought not!
15

Mr. Lachie Todd,

Edinburgh 20/01/2008 10:47:56
After the major government changes in Northern Ireland, Scotland, and Wales, the United Kingdom is already a federal state in everything but constitutional name!
16

Richard M,

Scottish Raj 20/01/2008 10:53:46
What about a Confederation? A UK goverment would be responsible for Defence and Foreign Affairs and maintenance of a single currency [if we don't adopt the Euro], but with national governments in the four parts of the UK being responsible for everything else up to and including tax [including oil revenue], social security and all other aspects of social and economic policy
17

Petro,

20/01/2008 10:59:20
To answer Wardog's question, I believe that the single biggest flaw with the Scottish Parliament is that it does not raise its own revenue. It should raise its own revenue for two reasons. Firstly, it is through changes to the tax system that economic growth can be improved and secondly because it is wrong for any parliament or council to rely on one big cheque each year. Having to raise the money you spend increases the accountability of politicians to us the electorate. So when Liberal Democrats talk about more powers for the parliament it is fiscal powers which they talk about.

As an aside, I think the same argument above is why the SNP government are fundamentally wrong about their approach to local councils. A nationally impossed council tax freeze might feel good for us but it does remove an essential level of local accountability. But then I am pretty scornfull of the SNPs democratic credentials.
18

Jimmy the Pie,

20/01/2008 11:09:20
Is it not a bit rich being lectured to by the Labour Party's regal buffoon?? A bit like Royster and our other buffoon, AM2 telling us all what is good for us!!
19

Saul Tyre,

Germany 20/01/2008 11:41:43
Amazing the number of posters here who find it acceptable that foreign policy and defence shoud be decided down south. I would recommend a good book on the First World War for starters. Then try reading the unpleasant bits in the newspapers (Iraq & co.).

British foreign policy is the main reason people like myself will only accept full independence.
20

,

20/01/2008 11:48:39
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
21

connaughtboy,

stonehaven 20/01/2008 11:55:22
I defy Foulkes to explain the "common culture" shared by Scotland and England!
22

connaughtboy,

stonehaven 20/01/2008 11:56:50
#23 Rob. I believe that around 750,000 "English" people live in Scotland. Do you hate them too?
23

Rob7,

England 20/01/2008 12:03:20
#25 - No, But hopefully when England is free my two next door neighbours wil be expelled and I will then be able to buy their houses very cheeply. Don't worry I will not sell any of the houses to a Scot!!!
24

Jimmy the Pie,

20/01/2008 12:05:11
#23 Rob7
You sound quite irrational! What about a career in politics. There will soon be a vacancy for Labour leader in Scotland. You sound ideal for the job. You will have a platform to spout a load of drivel at every opportunity! The fact no one will listen to you is irrelevant. Fatty Foulkes didn't get where he is today by talking sense!!
25

mr angry,

ayrshire 20/01/2008 12:19:31
#26 Rob7 what a loser.
26

Generalissimo Hernandez,

20/01/2008 12:33:11
"Federalism is the future. More and more Scots are rejecting narrow nationalism... "

I assume Petro that is in favour of a federal Europe, or is he a parochial British Nationalist?
27

 Ayrshire Scot™,

20/01/2008 12:50:31
4. As evidenced by the SNP victory in in the Scottish election, its status as the largest party in local government and its continuing surge in the polls?

More and more Scots are rejecting the narrow Brit Nationalism that seeks to limit the decision making and power exercised in Scotland for the best interests of our nation.
28

 Ayrshire Scot™,

20/01/2008 12:52:21
23 A charming sentiment "absolutely hate the Scots"? Sadly a view which seems to be echoed by Labour's most senior special adviser in Scotland....
29

Enigma,

20/01/2008 14:16:52
17

`The united Kingdom is already a federal state in everything but constitutional name`.

That`s hyperbole pure and simple. Never mind `constitutional in name`, without a devolved English legislature, the UK is not federal in fact.
30

P Rayner.,

London. 20/01/2008 14:18:20
ROB, like you I´m English , but unlike you I certainly don´t hate the Scots . In fact I´m rather fond of them .I think you might have need to reappraise your thinking , if not your life . Maybe you hate yourself .The truth is there is , from Lands End to John o Groats , not a fig of difference between any of us , despite yours and others bile .
31

eric,

Lothian 20/01/2008 14:36:19
Cant rewind we have gone too far to be federal.The backlash in England is growing.
32

Rob7,

England 20/01/2008 14:49:12
#36 - bring it on
33

padav,

NW.England 20/01/2008 15:22:19
Whilst concurring wholeheartedly with the author's assertion of federalism as a principled solution to the UK's recurrent constitutional dilemma, I must strongly reject the seemingly robotic assumptions concerning the homogeneity of England as a single indivisible socio-political entity.

Just because other federal structures exist elsewhere around the globe with apparently divergent populations, this does not necessarily mean that it will function effectively here for the UK.

The most recent population projections for the UK are :

Northern Ireland - 1.7 million
Wales - 3.0 million
Scotland - 5.1 million
England - 50.4 million

England as a single entity would clearly unbalance any proposed federal equation and dominate, politically, socially and economically, the other partners.

To assume that England is a single entity is in the first place highly debatable. The only durable solution is to my mind, a partnership between roughly equal constituent elements.

In this respect the best route to an inclusive settlement lies in a comprehensive and meaningful dialogue with the UK's entire population about the form of governance best suited to its future needs. This "conversation" would ultimately lead to a written British Constitution in which no subject is "out of bounds".

Such a debate might include:

What powers should be transferred to each element of a future UK federation - transfer of tax raising powers?
Potential reshaping of the English Regional Map (I believe that the current artificial nature of the official English Regional Map is a major contributory factor to English antipathy)
The role and status of the head of state, is the Queen a relevant figurehead for a modern federal state?
The voting system used to elect our representatives - because it profoundly shapes the nature of the democratic and political landscape in which discourse takes place

All of these matters should be up for discussion but to try and pre-empt the outcome
34

yoric,

England 20/01/2008 15:52:27
This isn't about anybody "hating" anyone, its about giving England and the English the same rights of self determination as awarded the rest of the UK.
If the Scottish People wish to withdraw from the UK Parliament then this should be so, same for the Welsh or the English.
The Conservatives still believe they can win Westminster seats in Scotland, and Scottish Labour MPs at Westminster fear for their futures if England gets its own Parliament.
Labour fear they would never win Government in an English Parliament, Brown and his cronies would be out of a job.
Labour in England will NEVER support the idea of an English Parliament for those reasons.
We English have to fight for an English Parliament, but we fight our own Westminster MPs, not the Scots or anyone else.
35

Enigma,

20/01/2008 16:38:22
41

`England as a single entity would clearly unbabalnace any proposed federal solution`. I`m tempted to say, so what! Clearly the status quo, `assymetric devolution` is no answer. Even if England did neatly divide into `regions`, and in historic and cultural terms this is questionable, there would still be a need for some form of England wide legislature. Unless of course you are suggesting that there should be a `north eastern` educational system, south western NHS or east midlands planning system, surely a recipe for chaos. The very fact of devolved national institutions elsewhere in the UK dictates a reciprocal establishment in England.

England may not be completely homegenous, on the same basis one could argue for assemblies for north and south Wales or Lowland and Highland Scotland. Equally France, Italy, Germany, no country is but they still have a national parliament so what makes England any different? The preservation of the Union is certainly no argument against a fully federal solution.
36

P Rayner.,

London. 20/01/2008 16:43:53
YORK, I´m not in favour of an English Parliament , as I´m not in favour of Scots or Welsh Parliaments , simply because I favour a British Parliament . An English Parliament would inevitably lead to ludicrous tensions within these islands . I´m quite amazed that a sensible and pragmatic people as the Scots should have voted for another tranch of politician when we , the nation as a whole , have far too many . North and south , be they Welsh , Scots , English or Irish ,the first thing most politicians concentrate on is how best they can exploit the gravy train . A British Parliament and local councils sufficient .
37

Enigma,

20/01/2008 17:03:37
44
But the Scots Parliament and Welsh Assembly/Parliament are not going away. We have to deal with the situation as it is, not as we would like it.
38

Guga II,

Rockall 20/01/2008 17:07:51
For foulkesake, more hack journalism from Eddie Barnes. Like I said Eddie, who's paying your wages? Is it the Hootsmon or the New Labour Sleaze and Corruption Party (North British Branch)?

In any event, describing Foulkes as a one of Labour's senior figures doesn't say much for the Labour Party, does it? The man is a drunk and a criminal.
39

padav,

NW.England 20/01/2008 17:20:13
Unfortunately there seems to be a word limit on this forum, which has truncated my original post, thus rendering its latter section somewhat confusing.

Enigma says "So what?" to a more balanced federal equation but this smacks of a dogma driven agenda overriding any logical approach to this complex issue.

We should stop trying to deliberately muddy the waters of rational discussion by throwing in clearly disingenuous comments about the validity of extant geo-political entities.

Some people believe that the devolution genie can be put back in the bottle - this is obviously unrealistic but it doesn't seem to stop them floating the idea.

The boundaries of Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and Greater London complete with constitutionally enshrined accountable institutions of governance are already decided. We may not agree with those boundaries but they are there and the UK must proceed on that basis. For the rest of England only officially dictated Regions exist and the shape of those should be up for grabs because they do contribute to public confusion and controversy.

@Engima: "a `north eastern` educational system, south western NHS or east midlands planning system, surely a recipe for chaos."

Engima - such a system already exists! Why do you think there is so much controversy surrounding the Scottish Parliament Prescription Charges policy?

A big factor contributing to NHS inefficiency and waste is its vast size; it is a lumbering inflexible behemoth. Downsizing into a number of smaller more flexible and responsive Regional Health Services maybe just what it needs?
40

Enigma,

20/01/2008 17:33:35
47

No, I say `so what` to the Union, not a federal solution. You seem worried that the rest of the UK will not accept this,`so what`?

I don`t think the `devolution genie can be put back into the bottle`. Which is why a federal solution is the only sustainable course.

You have taken the words out of my mouth,`Why do you think thre is so much contoversy surrounding Scottish Parliament prescription charges policy`? Since we cannot make such decisions in England without recourse to the UK Parliament, you make my point for me. Are you really suggesting seperate NHS, education, planning systems throughout the English `regions`?

`For the rest of England only officially dictated regions`. I agree, but the problem is England does not easily divide into historically and culturally homogenous regions.

41

 Ayrshire Scot™,

20/01/2008 17:51:02
What disgusting displays of the lowest racism from Brit Nats and UK unionists on this thread.

And Scottish Unionists want us to stay in a union with these slethering, dribbling, knuckle trailing racists when we are outnumbered and have little political say ?

42

Enigma,

20/01/2008 18:02:02
49

You have more say than the us. What makes you think we are all Unionists?
43

Enigma,

20/01/2008 18:05:45
49

`Racist`??
44

padav,

NW.England 20/01/2008 18:09:06
@Enigma: "For the rest of England only officially dictated regions`. I agree, but the problem is England does not easily divide into historically and culturally homogenous regions."

That depends on the emphasis you place on individual aspects of said Regional divides.

In the 21st Century are historical and cultural factors always more important than economic considerations?

Let's take the three northern Regions as examples.

Yorkshire in its entirety is a traditional historical Region - why bother bolting on some parts of Lincolnshire?

The original county of Lancashire also includes the cities of Manchester and Liverpool. Cheshire now includes huge commuter belts servicing these modern conurbations so there are clear economic links between the two counties. Together they equate to a political unit just slightly larger than Scotland.

That leaves Northumbria consisting of the traditional counties of Northumberland, Durham and Cumbria, which is how many people have always claimed the Regional demarcation line should have drawn in the first place.

To pretend that absolutely no sense of historical or cultural affinity exists at a sub-national level within England is to deliberately ignore the obvious - Yorkshire and Lancashire are the same? Pull the other one!
45

Enigma,

20/01/2008 18:19:42
`Yorkshire and Lancashire are the same?` No! You pull the other one:) And what of `Eastern region`, `East Midlands` `South west`?

Do I take it you are content to see England wide decisions taken by the UK Parliament? You did not comment on these points. Do you really want a post code lottery for health, education etc?

Why are supporters of RAs so scared of offering a choice, particularly when as you demonstrate, they areconvinced of overwhelming support? prove it.

Possibly RAs may hold a partial solution to devolution of power within England, though existing counties represent a far more localised tier, they do not however address the `English question`. Perhaps that is the attraction for some.
46

 Ayrshire Scot™,

20/01/2008 18:22:21
51.

"I hate Scots" Rob 7 at post 23, now deleted etc Or have a peek at 26.

You don't find that "racist"?
47

Enigma,

20/01/2008 18:24:57
54

Fair enough, these debates bring racists out on both sides.
48

Charles1234,

20/01/2008 18:28:00
P Rayner @ 44. If you therefore lived in Canada would you want to abolish the Provinces and just have Ottawa and the Municipalities?
49

 Ayrshire Scot™,

20/01/2008 18:37:38
55. Pathetic. Rather than just condemn the racism you equate it to some other post and seek to justify it or use it in some tit for tat exchange. Raise your game.
50

 Ayrshire Scot™,

20/01/2008 18:40:46
58

what about this, from Labours most senior adviser in Scotland:

""It's the country Scotland would be if it was not narrow, Presbyterian, racist, etc"

Bit racist?
51

 Ayrshire Scot™,

20/01/2008 18:46:01
58 Now you define the flavour of the racism rather than just condemn it. Pathetic.
52

Charles1234,

20/01/2008 18:47:41
""It's the country Scotland would be if it was not narrow, Presbyterian, racist, etc"

What I can't fathom is why he is in the Labour party then since they were the main party for 50 years runing the UK Government for certain periods and large regional councils as well as having many people in other high office.

It strike's me as a bit masochistic being part of the party that helped create that narrow, Presbyterian, racist etc" country he disliked so much?
53

 Ayrshire Scot™,

20/01/2008 19:03:32
63 One racist comment? I think there were more than that.

And how about Mr McTernan "Scotland narrown, Presbetyrian and racist" - is he not a unionist?
54

P Rayner.,

London . 20/01/2008 19:14:48
CHARLES 1234 , I´m simply not especially au fait with the situation in Canada except to say that I can´t imagine its practise of government can be compared to that of Britain . That wondeful country is after all , I think it true to say , the second or third largest on the planet . That alone differs it from Britain . Inj a tiny country such as Britain several layers of government are in my view wasteful.
55

P Rayner.,

London. 20/01/2008 19:18:58
ENIGMA 45 , Who is to say that the Welsh and Scots Parliaments , or whatever they are called , are not going to go away ? You ? They went away before . It is precisely peoples liking that creates institutions in the first place .
56

P Rayner.,

London. 20/01/2008 19:36:14
And another reason why I´m so surprised sensible Scots voted for an assembly . In this paper its announced pensions of about 700 quid a week ! Not bad eh ? Wonder what the old girl in Dundee is getting ? What about the old soldier from Inverness ? 700 quid ? Doubt it . As I´ve said we need fewer for the gravy train . Those that remain get the same as the old girl in Dundee or the squadie in Inverness .
57

padav,

NW. England 20/01/2008 20:01:46
@Enigma: "Do I take it you are content to see England wide decisions taken by the UK Parliament? You did not comment on these points. Do you really want a post code lottery for health, education etc?"

A post code lottery will always exist to some degree. For example, the performance of your local public services; hospital, schools, state of law&order, will vary according to where you live. Some are better than others at any point in time and remain in dynamic flux, ever changing. If you believe you can apply uniform top down diktat from a London based English Parliament and suddenly all the contentious issues will melt away, you are deluding yourself and misleading readers here - they won't!

So Yep! I am proposing that Healthcare, Education, Law & Order, Housing, Intra-Regional Transport, Intra-Regional Economic Regeneration, Culture & Tourism to name the most obvious candidates should be devolved to smaller more flexible tiers of accountable governance - that process is already in train in the UK, see the Scottish example.

England is simply too big to apply these more flexible governance solutions but there is a critical mass requiring such entities to be a certain size so they can realistically achieve a degree of financial, cultural and political sustainability.

The United Kingdom remains an exemplar of unitary centralised governance; even the current devolution of competency to Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and Greater London remains severely limited, particularly in terms of tax raising powers.

@Enigma: Why are supporters of RAs so scared of offering a choice, particularly when as you demonstrate, they are convinced of overwhelming support? prove it.

I'm not scared of offering the English electorate REAL choice but it must be precisely that, an informed choice between effective alternatives:

1. An English Parliament (based in London - where else?) that would (in my opinion) replicate the same fundamental centralising flaws inherent
58

Enigma,

20/01/2008 20:30:18
Perhaps you have missed the point, yes there are local differences, but not a different legislature for each `region` of England. By definition with devolved institutions elsewhere, there must be an England wide policy.

`England is too big`. Bigger than France or Germany, where I believe they have national parliaments?

Why do supporters of `regional` government for England always imply that any other solution is by definition `centralist`? What is wrong with returning powers to existing tiers of local government?

`I`m not scared of offering the English electorate REAL choice but it must be an informed choice`.

Exactly, regionalism is being forced down our throats without informed debate. Having spectacularly failed in the one `region` they thought they would succeed in, despite a lavishly funded campaign, it is now being introduced by stealth. Where is your `informed choice`, when the obviously effective alternative` an English Parliament is the policy that dare not mention it`s name? To date there has been no alternative offered. Put simply,there is no mandate for regionalism.

As to the choice of location for any future Parliament, that is a matter for the people of England to decide, whatever your assumption.
59

Enigma,

20/01/2008 20:38:24
70

In Scotland I believe there are nationwide bus passes for the elderly, in Wales free prescriptions. Do we perpetuate these policies piecemeal across the English `regions`? In the west Midlands free bus passes, north-west student tuition fees, south east free nursing care for the elderly or free prescriprions?

Exactly what is your problem with a nationwide solution to nationwide problems?
60

padav,

NW. England 20/01/2008 21:24:42
Again my last post was truncated by the character limit - here is the rest of message #70

within the current UK model

2. Semi-Autonomous, Self-Sustaining Regions boasting closer geographic immediacy

Given such an open and informed choice I am confident which option the English Electorate would go for. Are you?

@Enigma: "By definition with devolved institutions elsewhere, there must be an England wide policy."

Why - what does England in the 21st century represent?

There is no coherent response to that question - you might think there is but you are looking at it from a narrow English Nationalist perspective. Modern England is a very diverse society; what Greater London needs is not the same as Yorkshire, which is not the same as the North West and so on. Applying the straitjacket approach inherent within an English Parliament solution simply will not deliver equitable governance across the whole of England and that is what will happen, please don't try to mislead readers with stories about empowered counties - we already have that kind of nonsense - it doesn't work!

In the 21st Century England more readily represents a convenient geographical tag for those parts of the UK that are not Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland than any notion of a homogeneous socio-political entity.

@Enigma; "`England is too big`. Bigger than France or Germany, where I believe they have national parliaments?"

Enigma - can I suggest you get yourself a modern atlas; more recent than 1945?

Try looking for Saarland, Bayern, Sachsen-Anhalt, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, Baden-Wurttemberg, Poitou-Charentes, Ile de France, Languedoc-Roussillon, Franche-Comté or perhaps even Catalunya, Galicia, Andalusia, Lombardia, Emilia-Romagna, et al - I could go on.

All of these provide the kind of sub-national models I am advocating.
61

Enigma,

20/01/2008 22:29:37
Since regionalists have held all the aces ( cash and political influence)with regard to the current debate on England, yet have signally failed to win the argument, it would be very interesting to see what result a genuine debate would throw up. I think we both know why regionalists do not want the debate opened beyond their own narrow aims, which is why they are scared to ask the question.

An `open informed choice` we have not had!

`What does England represent in the 21at century?` Touchingly 1960s.Much the same as Scotland do to the Scots , France to the France or japan to the japanese I would imagine. Now who did you accuse of resorting to dogma?

Strangely regionalists want to wed us to the straightjacket of UK governance. Your regions offer no solution to decisions being imposed by unaccountable outsiders. Yet strangely it is the regionalists who of late have been `devolving` powers away from local communities and their elected representatives(countries, boroughs, districts) and up to remote artificially imposed regions. Once again it is YOU who are misleading readers with myths of regions empowering local communities.

I will ignore your patronising comment re a post 1945 atlas. The average primary school child can see that France and Germany are far bigger than England geographically and in terms of population. They may have regions, they also have a national government for all their diversity. To pretend otherwise is both disingenuous and insulting.

It may be that some form of regional government is a partial answer, lets have a proper debate first. With Scotland and Wales pursuing their own interests, we still need a national forum. The UK, which regionalists have a quaint attachement to, clearly does not fit the bill.

`All of these fit the kind of sub-national models I am advocating`. Exactly, `sub-national`. Which begs the question, what do you envisage as `national`.

62

Enigma,

20/01/2008 22:40:53
Padav

Hypothesising about how government should work is one thing, yet there is not one shred of evidence for your contention of popular support for regional government in England, outside two of the three main political parties that is.

I put it to you that until the English electorate have been offered what you call `an informed choice`, which they have not yet, then your side ( the political establishment) are guilty of misleading the public and trying to close down debate.

63

P Rayner.,

London. 20/01/2008 22:56:24
WARDOG 44 . I shall answer in due course . Suffice to say , for now , I regard the establishment of regional parliaments as wasteful and devisive . A UK parliament is quite capable of representing all the peoples of our tiny island satisfactorily , particularly since the populations of Scotland and Wales remain so tiny . If there was a genuine desire for independence from the UK it might be different . However if my many sojourns to our northern tribes is any guide I´ve seen NO evidence of any appetite for independence , irrespective of what the SNP , the BBC , newspapers etc might say or wish for . Incidentally you are so luckie to be in Buckie ! A lovely part of the world I know well , Aberdeenshire anyway . From south America I´m envious !
64

Conan the Librarian™,

20/01/2008 23:25:07
77
"However if my many sojourns to our northern tribes is any guide I´ve seen NO evidence of any appetite for independence".
I'll give you the Northern tribes even if it is a wee bit patronising.
But in your sojourning, did you actually speak to many people?
65

padav,

NW. England 20/01/2008 23:32:20
Enigma

You seem confused because you are conflating the viewpoint espoused by me with some kind of official Regionalist Strategy.

What can I say except that you are utterly mistaken.

First of all there is no longer any officially sponsored campaign vehicle - CFER broke up a few years ago although I understand it is now trying to reform.

Secondly I am probably just as unsympathetic as you towards the shape of the current English Regional Map, but for entirely different reasons.

Thirdly I am also deeply critical of the form devolution has taken to date, not just for the English Regions but also for Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and Greater London, because the progress made so far is nowhere near enough.

Finally I don't belong to any political party. I am concerned with adherence to democratic principles, dispersal of power, transparent and open governance, accountability of elected representatives and an inherently fair voting system to elect them. In furtherance of those goals I belong to some democratic renewal campaign groups.

Why are you trying to spread blatantly misleading ideas about the concept of Regionalism? You complain about Regionalism as a centralising tendency but this is because of the way the process has been implemented by the current government, not Regionalists (whatever that tag represents).

@Engima: "yet there is not one shred of evidence for your contention of popular support for regional government in England, outside two of the three main political parties that is"

Perhaps you should do some research before making bold statements like that. If you investigate this topic in more detail you will discover that every single public opinion poll taken prior to 2003 demonstrated a healthy public appetite for English Regional governance.

The reason for the stark contrast between these polls and the outcome of the NE England referendum is very obvious. It is because the public believed that devolution meant precisel
66

padav,

NW. England 20/01/2008 23:36:05
[precisel]y that, transfer of power from a fundamentally centralised state apparatus.

When the English Regional Assemblies (Preparations) Bill was published in Nov 2002, it became very clear that the original idea had been watered down to such an extent that it simply no longer represented devolution; that's the primary reason why NE England said "Thanks but no thanks!"
67

Aqwes,

Edinburgh 21/01/2008 00:30:55
I hear a lot about federalism, and at the same time very little. Lot's of people talk aobut fedarlism, but how many have thought it through? Where is the federalist's white paper on a federal UK? Are there any concrete plans from any federation-advocates?
68

Toque,

Brighton 21/01/2008 00:37:45
Padav: "You seem confused because you are conflating the viewpoint espoused by me with some kind of official Regionalist Strategy."

That'll be because you campaigned like a rabid monkey for Prescott's Euro regions and you host this abominable website. http://www.padav.demon.co.uk/

You're not interested in England, you're an anglophobe who only wants what is best for Europe at the expense of nation states.

Prescott's monkey boy.
69

padav,

NW. England 21/01/2008 09:26:38
Gareth (Toque)

It would seem that petty name calling is now masquerading as rational debate but that's no more than I expected.

P.S. Thanks for the website plug - it's a bit out of date now but every little helps!
70

Amparo de Glasgow,

10/02/2008 00:47:52
The Honorable Member for getting p*shed and falling doon wae the Scum-suckers ...

Weel ...

Whit can we say??
71

Amparo de Glasgow,

10/02/2008 01:10:53
Oy oy oy...
Don't us girlies jist love it ehh??

Pero es una pena ...!!
72

Joe M.,

Edinburgh 14/02/2008 15:22:04
Why doesn't Lord Foulkes have a word with his boss, Gordon Brown?

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 

Featured Advertising



Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.