I've already said i have no objection to more powers locally, but under an English parliament.
Thanks for confirming my thoughts. Two points:An English assembly would do nothing to help address the north south divide and would mean the north east has a continues Tory government yet voting overwhelmingly for labour and the lib dens. The region would be being governed from london. Who knows better about our ommunity?
1. How does a British parliament address the north-south divide? Why do we need it?
2. How can a government in Edinburgh address the needs of all the people in Scotland? Particularly the highlands and islands? Should they have devolution while abolishing the Scottish Parliament. Doesn't sound very fair, but you're suggesting that for England.
May I ask you people of NE England is that metropolitan county of Tyne and Wear a completely artificial concoction and Northumbria is the real thing?
I know that until 1974 the county division of England had remained almost intact for 1000 years but in that year they changed it and after that it has been changed again on a very frequent basis.
The people in the North East are closer, politically and culturally to Scotland and Wales as celtic nations than say Hamphire. A British parliament better represents politically the people in the North East (If England was independent we would have had a conservative government at every election since WWII bar Tony Blair) You can't argue that people in Northumbria are far more Labour, and in social attitudes survey generally less liberal.1. How does a British parliament address the north-south divide? Why do we need it?
We need it because the UK is stronger as a whole, Without it we would have seperate entities governing the border, possibly diverging currencies, immigration rules, patterns and military policy. We can better defend ourselves as the UK, we can control our borders as the UK isles, far harder if different immigration systems are adopted.
England is far larger than Scotland, and there is a serious bid to get greater devolution in the highlands and islands. England, independent, centrally controlled would be the largest centrally governed nation in Europe. Germany has devolved government, America, Canada, France I would argue England is too large, and devolution to an entity as 'England' when we already have a British parliament would be very ineffective.2. How can a government in Edinburgh address the needs of all the people in Scotland? Particularly the highlands and islands? Should they have devolution while abolishing the Scottish Parliament. Doesn't sound very fair, but you're suggesting that for England.
What happens to the London Assembly? They govern their own transport, policing, and housing policies. Londoners would be able to vote on transport laws effecting Northumbria, with our MPs not being able to vote on theirs?
I would also argue a UK parliament - English parliament - North east assembly - council structure is too big. I personally cut out the English parliament, I don't think it is needed, cost effective or useful. You would cut out the UK parliament. However, I would presume we would both agree the need for a Northumbrian Assembly?
A strong regional council is needed for our region. I personally believe Northumberland getting greater power wouldn't help, we would compete between ourselves in the North East, have to deal with different authorities and rules when commuting across the region.
A Northumbrian government, for the entirity of Northumbria. Which we would currently define as the North East of England, however, it should be established in North of the Tyne and Northumberland with referendums in other areas to decide if they believe a Northumbrian assembly would be wished.
Bookmarks