Blair: Regional identity simply does not exist

The out-going UK Prime Minister, Tony Blair, met with the Commons Liaison Committee yesterday. This committee is quite literally the “mother” of all committees, being made up of the Chairmen of Parliament’s 30 Select Committees.

There was a good spell on devolution, with Sir George Young MP very much on song- asking the Prime Minister about the state of the Union, the West Lothian Question, the Barnett Formula, the Scottish Parliament, tuition fees and English Votes on English Matters. Remarkable, really. The Prime Minister gave rather unremarkable answers to these questions, but when it came to regional assemblies Mr. Blair did say something worth writing down.

When asked by Dr. Phylis Starkey MP whether he wished he had been more bold and imposed elected regional assemblies on England, the Prime Minister said:

“The problem we found in the North East, because we tried to do a regional assembly there, if it was going to work anywhere it was going to work in the North East because of the coherence of the North East, but truthfully we found when we got into the campaign and the referendum that Teesside did not feel the necessary link with Tyneside, that County Durham did not necessarily want to be in the same place in terms of government as Newcastle and even Newcastle and Gateshead did not”.

There you have it. According to the Prime Minister himself, “regional identity” simply does not exist. Even in somewhere like the north-east of England, where the Government thought, of all places, their scheme was most likely to work, they found that people did not identify with their “region”, but with more local identities; with Teesside, Tyneside, County Durham, Newcastle, Sunderland, Gateshead.

This is surely the finishing touch to the argument that regionalism, no matter how you dress it up, is dead and should not be revived. And yet the BBC still promotes regional identity, the media still refers to “north east MPs” when talking about politicians from Newcastle or Sunderland, and parties like the Liberal Democrats, the Green Party and to a lesser extent Labour still cling to the idea. They should listen to the very people they are trying to force regionalism onto, and take this advice:

Regionalism is dead. Stop trying to dance with the corpse.

Letter published in the Oxford Mail, 13 June 2007

NATIONAL HOLIDAY ON SAINTS' DAYS

Dear Sir,

So the Labour Government suggests that we have a "British Day" to celebrate our British identity.

Such an idea would sound acceptable if it came from anyone else but this Government, which has done more than any other in living memory to undermine what it means to be British.
Other people have highlighted how this Government's policies on ID Cards, detention without trial, uncontrolled immigration, political correctness, limits on free speech and banning protest outside Parliament are examples of their attacks on British culture, values and way of life.

To this, I would add the growing resentment among English people about the way they are being treated compared with their British countrymen in Scotland and Wales. More and more people deliberately choose to identify themselves as English, not British - a direct result of having Britishness rammed down our throats while being starved of our equally important English identity.

So to the idea of a British Day - which Gordon Brown says must not be a Bank Holiday but just a celebration - I say let's have a national Bank Holiday for St George's Day in England, and one in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland for St Andrew, St David and St Patrick.

Better that than some contrived day of Britishness cooked up by the people that have done so much to destroy our culture, values and way of life.

Tom Waterhouse
Campaign for an English Parliament
Oxfordshire branch

Labour Deputy Leadership candidates: don't mention the "E" word!

The Labour Deputy Leadership candidates were recently asked on OurKingdom, “What should be done, if anything, to give England more representation or ‘voice’?”.

The answers were, predictably, abysmal.

The CEP's view of their repsonses has been put up on the OurKingdom website. Have a read of it at OurKingdom or read it below, but don't forget to add your own views.


It is interesting that the candidates, when asked what should be done to give England fair representation within the Union, immediately start talking about Scotland, Wales, the Union or even the “Regions”. They would rather talk about anything other than the “E” word.

Their response is, sadly, not surprising. This Labour Government has done more than any other to undermine England and the English way of life. The plans to balkanise England into regions failed when it encountered that annoying little thing called “democracy”: in the only referendum to be held on a regional assembly in the north east of England, the idea was emphatically rejected by 78% to 22%. Despite this, regionalisation in England has continued. It’s undemocratic, it’s unwanted, it’s unfair. That the candidates said nothing of this does not bode well for England in the near future. It certainly shows that talk of “re-engaging” with voters and the public is just as false as it was in 1997.

What the Labour Deputy Leadership candidates must realise - indeed what all Labour, Conservative and Liberal Democrat politicians must realise - is that the public want an English Parliament. Successive opinion polls have shown this: 68%, 61%, 67% in favour. Therefore their arguments about regions or the Union are irrelevant. As Labour MP Frank Field said recently, an English Parliament “is what voters want and what justice demands”. It cannot be said more simply or more powerfully than that. The fact that England’s voice is ignored by our political masters is evidence enough of why we must have an English Parliament.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

UPDATE 15 JUNE: Tom Griffon of The Green Ribbon covers this, adding an importnat point about the sheer uselessness of regional assemblies. Worth a read.

Our Kingdom.net: England's turn for its own Parliament

I'm absolutely delighted that OurKingdom, part of openDemocracy, has opened up a debate about an English Parliament.

This website is read by many academics, MPs and journalists, as well as political campaigners.

Add your voice to the debate by going here.

What a bunch of sour little regionalists

The Constitution Unit (CU) has just published its latest newsletter, Monitor, which comments on, among other things, devolution. Many thanks to Gareth Young via the CEP network for the heads-up on this one.


The CU, being an “independent” group of well-educated academics, has always supported regional assemblies and strongly opposed an English Parliament (?). Their arguments have been shot down one by one over the last few years, but nothing shot them down harder than the people of the north-east of England. In a referendum on a regional assembly in 2004, a whopping 78% of people voted “No” to a regional assembly. Might I just add here that the referendum was a simple “Yes or No” question.

Despite this, the CU continued ploughing what we had always told them was a fallow field. Their retort was always that the grass was hardly greener on our side of the fence, seeing as (according to their favourite surveys), support for an English Parliament was below 20%. In the words of CU stalwart, Prof. John Curtice, in July last year, “yeah, well let us know when you’ve got some public support.”

Then some different people started doing some opinion polling. November 2006- a Sunday Telegraph Ipsos Mori Poll found that 68% of people support an English Parliament. January 2007, a BBC Poll (yes, the BBC!) shows that 61% support an English Parliament. More recently, in April this year, an ICM Poll commissioned by the CEP found that support for an English Parliament was at 67%.

So, what do the esteemed CU say now that their last argument against an English Parliament has been shot down? Yep, you guessed it- “Ok, we can see the blindingly obvious. The CEP were right”.


Erm, no. Try again. How about this sour little whimper: “But all three polls asked a somewhat loaded question with a simple yes/no choice rather than offering policy alternatives.”

That’s right. They didn’t like the way the questions were framed. In particular, they said the questions were “loaded” (I bet Ipsos Mori and ICM have something to say about that!), and that the questions didn’t offer any policy alternatives. Well, neither did the north-east referendum.

A referendum on an English Parliament would ask the public something similar to a “Yes or No” question. It’s simple. There’s no confusion. And if we had one tomorrow, we’d have an English Parliament overnight.

The Constitution Unit remains completely blinkered to the reality. It is such a shame that such narrow-minded and subjective opinions can be portrayed as "independent". You've got a chance to have your say.

All aboard the 20:07!

Things couldn’t have worked out better. Or worse. Around the same as Scottish National Party leader, Alex Salmond, is sworn in as Scotland’s First Minister, fellow Scotsman Gordon Brown has become Prime Minister-elect of the UK Parliament. A Scotsman running Scotland, and a Scotsman running England.

Not that these two Scottish brethren will treat each other as buddies. This presents its own problems, though. Alex Salmond and the SNP, after their election success, feel closer than ever to their goal taking Scotland out of the Union. Gordon Brown, however, is tantalisingly close to his goal of becoming UK Prime Minister. He will formally cross the finishing line when Tony Blair steps down on 27th June, but until then Gordon Brown will continue on his victory-lap. It’s a strange way of doings things, granted, but what the heck. What would be his worst nightmare, however, is for his Premiership to be cut tragically short by Scotland leaving the Union, and therefore taking him and his political career with him. There is a lot at stake.

The SNP have said they will not call a referendum on independence until the end of the current Parliament, probably in 2010. They want to prove they can govern Scotland effectively. What this means in practice is four years of Alex Salmond bullying Westminster into giving Scotland more and more of England’s wealth. If Gordon Brown dares to stand in the way of the 20:07 Express Gravy Train to Edinburgh, they’ll be sticky bits of Gordon all over the place. Political suicide. The SNP will shout from the platform, “You see! Even when we have a Scotsman as PM, we still can’t have what we want! Independence is the only option!” And yet while that Gravy Train continues to roll in, the SNP can claim to be securing the best for Scotland in a way that no Labour administration at Holyrood could possibly have done so.

So, my concern now is that the next 3 or 4 years will be spent with Scotland’s First Minister, Alex Salmond, and UK Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, effectively bartering with England’s wealth and resources in order to convince Scotland to leave/stay in the UK. This is effectively a new chapter in the history of Britain. How badly do we need an English Parliament and English First Minister to speak up for England?



This concern about Salmond and Brown is not new. I remember worrying about it before.

67% support English Parliament

The most recent opinion poll, conducted by ICM towards the end of April, found that support for an English Parliament is at 67%. Another fantastic result.

People were asked the following question:

You may have seen or heard that a separate Scottish parliament, a Welsh assembly and a Northern Ireland Assembly have been established.

Do you think that England should or should not have its own parliament or assembly?

The results were excellent: 67% of people believe England should have its own Parliament. Just 25% said England should not have its own Parliament. The result is consistent with other recent opinion polls, and so proves that the public supports an English Parliament. We can now add the result to the previous excellent results:

Nov 2006. Sunday Telegraph Ipsos Mori Poll: 68% support for an English Parliament.
Jan 2007. BBC Poll: 61% support an English Parliament.
April 2007. CEP ICM Poll: 67% support for an English Parliament.

Of interest was the differing levels of support across the UK:

All England 67%
South-East 65%
Midlands 68%
North England 70%
Wales & SW England 62%
Scotland 72%

Perhaps most surprising is the fact that, across the whole of the UK, the area where support for an English Parliament is at its strongest is Scotland. For me, this reinforces what I (and a number of other CEP members) have been saying for some time: that we must be even more careful about being perceived as “anti-Scottish”. The CEP was formed out the unfairness of the devolution settlement, and many of our grievances have come from what Scotland has been given at England’s expense. This has led to some accusations of anti-Scottishness, which is of course unfair, but we must nonetheless be aware that people may perceive our views in this way.