Divide and Conquer?
Lacking an English Parliament to give them a collective voice, English city-regions and traditional shire counties competing with each other for funds allocated by central government provide the ideal background for a British Establishment determined to retain political control over England and the English.
Moreover, there exists the potential for conflict within a city-region as Prof. Robert Hazell states (The English Question, 2006): "There is a risk of urban dominance with the cities and their leaders being perceived as neglecting the separate identities and interests of rural areas." He also writes: "Finally, some of the arguments advanced against city regions are similar to those advanced against regional assemblies: that they are essentially technocratic, of interests to elites not ordinary people, and at best a patchwork solution."
Still relevant today, this letter published in the Bristol Evening Post on October 10th, 2014 and in the Western Daily Press on November 6th 2014, was in favour of re-uniting and re-empowering England's traditional counties and argues against devolution in the form of city-regions.
City regions unwelcome and unwanted.
It appears that Bristol mayor George Ferguson is among those who are promoting the plan for city-regions. Would he like to have control over a swathe of England stretching all the way from Bath to the Bristol Channel?
Who knows what else a Bristol city-region might encompass – perhaps Somerset, Gloucestershire and Wiltshire, possibly even Devonshire and Cornwall too?
Be that as it may, city-regions would be a Trojan horse for regional government, the eventual balkanisation of England and the perfect tactic for a British political establishment determined to prevent the creation of an English Parliament.
Rural areas and the green belt would fall under the control of dominant cities and eventually disappear under a shroud of concrete and tarmac as urbanisation of the countryside inevitably followed.
To buttress England against this unhappy future our shire counties, weakened and dismembered by the Conservatives’ Local Government Act of 1972, must be reformed and re-empowered to act as a counterbalance to the vigour of our great cities.
The administrative County of Somerset, for example, should be re-united within its time-honoured boundaries by combining with the unitary authorities of North Somerset and Bath and North East Somerset.
As such it would be better able to obviate the threat of Bristol’s urban expansion south and west through the green belt at the expense of rural communities, farming and landscape.
Our traditional counties have been part of the geographic fabric of England, the cultural identity of its people and also the foundations of local government originating from the time of Alfred the Great and Anglo-Saxon Wessex.
Our cities and counties should, of course, co-operate but not be formed into invented or artificial regions to suite a British political establishment which also has those from Scotland and Wales influencing opinion within it.
Regional Government is unwelcome, unwanted and most certainly un-English.
S.W.
English Democrats, Somerset
Who knows what else a Bristol city-region might encompass – perhaps Somerset, Gloucestershire and Wiltshire, possibly even Devonshire and Cornwall too?
Be that as it may, city-regions would be a Trojan horse for regional government, the eventual balkanisation of England and the perfect tactic for a British political establishment determined to prevent the creation of an English Parliament.
Rural areas and the green belt would fall under the control of dominant cities and eventually disappear under a shroud of concrete and tarmac as urbanisation of the countryside inevitably followed.
To buttress England against this unhappy future our shire counties, weakened and dismembered by the Conservatives’ Local Government Act of 1972, must be reformed and re-empowered to act as a counterbalance to the vigour of our great cities.
The administrative County of Somerset, for example, should be re-united within its time-honoured boundaries by combining with the unitary authorities of North Somerset and Bath and North East Somerset.
As such it would be better able to obviate the threat of Bristol’s urban expansion south and west through the green belt at the expense of rural communities, farming and landscape.
Our traditional counties have been part of the geographic fabric of England, the cultural identity of its people and also the foundations of local government originating from the time of Alfred the Great and Anglo-Saxon Wessex.
Our cities and counties should, of course, co-operate but not be formed into invented or artificial regions to suite a British political establishment which also has those from Scotland and Wales influencing opinion within it.
Regional Government is unwelcome, unwanted and most certainly un-English.
S.W.
English Democrats, Somerset
Clive Lavelle commented in similar fashion. Here is his letter published in the Western Daily Press on November 11th 2014 which opposes Westminster's plan to foist piecemeal devolution on England.
The absurd notion of ‘city regions’.
Steve Wright’s excellent letter in the Western Daily Press (November 6) highlights the absurdity of the notion of “city regions” in England. Coincidentally, the previous night, the BBC broadcast a debate, hosted by Points West’s David Garmston on the same subject. There were those who wanted devolution for ancient Wessex (a pretty hefty chunk of England), right down to those who thought that devolution should be at parish council level.
Predictably, local politicians were eager to protect their own town/county/unitary authorities and what was admirably demonstrated was that regionalisation in any shape would pit parts of England against others; something I suspect the Westminster elite want.
The truth is that the only “fair and balanced” devolution settlement for England would be the same package that Scotland enjoys – a Parliament and First Minister. This would render Westminster all but irrelevant; its elite know this and want to preserve their lucrative trough, so the “divide and conquer” approach is the one that they are pursuing.
Clive Lavelle
Weston-super-Mare English Democrats
Predictably, local politicians were eager to protect their own town/county/unitary authorities and what was admirably demonstrated was that regionalisation in any shape would pit parts of England against others; something I suspect the Westminster elite want.
The truth is that the only “fair and balanced” devolution settlement for England would be the same package that Scotland enjoys – a Parliament and First Minister. This would render Westminster all but irrelevant; its elite know this and want to preserve their lucrative trough, so the “divide and conquer” approach is the one that they are pursuing.
Clive Lavelle
Weston-super-Mare English Democrats
