Parliament for the England - Yes or no

Discussion in 'Off-Topic Chat' started by BigHorn, Dec 31, 2003.


How do you want to be governed

  1. Parliament for England

  2. Regional Assemblies

  3. Full Independence for all Home Nations

  4. Go Back to one for all parliament

  1. BigHorn

    BigHorn Active Member

    Related to the thread on race bias against the majority is the question of a Parliament for England. Scotland have theirs, The Welsh have their assembly but all we English are offered are glorified county councils at a regional level
    Is it required? Is it a waste of money?
    Do you agree with the break up of England into regions?
    Should the Scots/Welsh have full independence?
    Please discuss.
  2. PeterBale

    PeterBale Moderator Staff Member

    I don't think that the current proposals for Regional assemblies would be very successful, not least because some of the "regions" being talked about seem as artificial as the countries in the Balkans, often putting traditional rivals together. Another problem is that, without any real powers to govern, rather than administer and carry out decisions actually made in Westminster, it could be difficult to drum up much enthusiasm, as we find at the moment with local councils.

    I do feel that something needs to change, though, especially regarding the influence that Scottish MPs can currently have over Westminster legislation that has no effect on their own country. At the very least the existing MPs should be barred from voting on such issues. The idea of indepence for each nation within the EC umbrella has many attractions, although it would be a nightmare trying to disentangle such issues as defence commitments, oil revenue etc.
  3. Accidental

    Accidental Supporting Member

    FWIW I voted for 1 parliament for all - it seems ludicrous to compartmentalise areas/cultures/regions when the world is "shrinking" and national economies are more and more interconnected. I think eventually we'll end up with a US-style government, with tiers of local/regional representation and 1 European parliament - but it may take another 100 years or so!

    oooooh - controversial! :wink:
  4. twigglet

    twigglet Member

    I think that devolution for the Scottish, Irish and Welsh assemblies was entirely just as it served to represent national minorities that were not being represented in the first past the post system of the national government.


    I do not believe that England has a problem with this as the English identity is very strong and traditional political stances are represented well in the national parliament.

    Regional devolution I believe makes more sense therefore for England

    Rant over, politics hat off...
  5. wewizrobbed

    wewizrobbed Member

    to be fair the Scottish Parliament is a waste of time though...all they've managed to do is spend billions on a stupid building that still isn't finished and decide on which shade of blue is most appropriate for the national flag :?
  6. Pythagoras

    Pythagoras Active Member

    Not sure about an English parliament. Can see the reasons for it but don't feel its really necessary at the moment. Think Accidentals prediction is probably quite likely.
  7. geordiecolin

    geordiecolin Active Member

    I'm all for Regional Assemblies. I don't think the North East and Cumbria is represented at all well in Parliament today. Policies that are appropiate in the busy South just aren't applicable in Northumberland/Cumbria/Wearside/Smogside.

    For instance, Schools are allocated money per pupil. In Northumberland and Cumbria there are lots of tiny little schools. This is due to the remoteness of these counties (Northumberland is England's Least Densely Populated County). Kielder School has about 7 pupils who otherwise have to travel 20+ miles to school. The school only gets the same money for those 7 pupils as a school of 500 would get. Its running costs are immeasurably higher though (per pupil)!!

    These aren't the only issues however. There are issues regarding Economy, Employment and other things.

    I personally am sick and tired of being dismissed as "part of Scotland". The weathermen do it with their vague gesturing, it happened to Berwick with its own little war against Russia. In the 30's this ignoring led to the Jarrow March!

    Up here it is cold, it is often miserable and it is full of fat geordies who speak funny. There is a strong Geordie/Mackem/Smoggy Nation spirit. But we are English and we deserve either fair representation in Parliament or our own Assembly.

    Howay Le Revolution!!
  8. BigHorn

    BigHorn Active Member

    Look what happened last time you lot in the NorthEast were given a vote - you ended up with a man in a monkey suit. :roll:
    Hope your kids are enjoying the free bananas. :p

    I am suspicious of regional assemblies. They sound good if you are one of the first regions to be offered one cos you are beguiled by promises of extra local funding and it brings out the parochial nature in us all. But the logical consequence is that the whole country will end up with a regional assembly all clamouring for a slice of the cash for their own pet schemes and you can be sure the biggest slice will still end up in the SouthEast. There won't be enough cash to go around so everyone's taxes will go up.

    They will also be completely toothless. The government won't want to give up power over important matters and will ultimately still hold the purse strings. So there will be a huge buearacracy discussing the colour of lollipop ladies' uniforms and introducing more PC claptrap. Meanwhile the Scotts MPs will still be drafted in to force through unpopular English legislation on things such as student fees, foundation hospitals etc.
  9. James McFadyen

    James McFadyen New Member

    Wouldn't that just add to the already big fuss about goverment spending in their own parliments?

    If people want their own parliment, then they shouldn't complain about the cost it takes to set one up, there is a lot of fuss about the cost of the one in Edinburgh being built just now, and yes, while they are being slightly OTT, just slightly, I think they are just being reasonable.

    Have ur own parliment if u wish, but please don't cause all the fuss about building costs when and if u get one.

    That is m y humble opinion anyway, politics aren't my thing, but it's just commonsence if u ask me! :wink:
  10. geordiecolin

    geordiecolin Active Member

    Central/Local Government Conflicts have been ongoing since the beginning of time. Essentially Central Governement will never want to totally lose control of LG. Look at Thatcher and her conflict with Rebel Labour Councils. Even now, the power in LG isn't with the councillors, more like local business leaders and badly disguised Quangos. I feel that Regional Assemblies would possibly provide a platform from which LG can begin to become more independent from CG and it's Capital Spending constraints. If the RAs were allowed to distribute funding to RG bodies then I believe it would be done in a much fairer manner. By adding the extra step between CG and LG, you will be perhaps loosening the vice-like hold CG has on LG spending.

    I also don't believe that they would be reduced to discussing petty and minor policy. A RA would be a great aid when considering such things as large scale planning policy. Regional Policy Guidance and Structure Plans would be a lot more coherent and integrated, something that regeneration areas in North East/Yorkshire would benefit from.