Impressive line-up of speakers at the forthcoming Social Democratic Party conference.

The Social Democratic Party holds its annual conference in London on November 6 and appears to have lined up an excellent group of speakers.  Good to see that, among others, David Starkey is there along with Clair Fox, Rod Little and Patrick O’Flynn. 

The party leader, William Clouston will obviously be speaking – it was interesting, and noteworthy, that he was interviewed on GB News recently.  Perhaps the SDP will undergo a resurgence if such prominence is given to it on a regular basis.

As a supporter of the establishment of a dedicated English Parliament I am pleased to note that the SDP is in favour of such a policy.  It will be fascinating, and significant, if any of the speakers make any observations on the issue.

I will not be voting for any of the establishment parties again as they all appear to be singing from the same woke/PC hymn sheet these days.  Therefore, as I sympathise with practically all of the SDP’s policies I will be voting for them if ever they stand candidates, at whatever level of government, in South Somerset.

The Social Democratic Party calls for an English Parliament.

As a former member of the Campaign for an English Parliament I was interested to come across the Social Democratic Party website and find that the party is also in favour of an English Parliament.  I found the SDP’s 2019 policy statement on the constitution makes very interesting reading.

It calls for an English Parliament outside the no longer English city of London, and the abolition of that over indulged institution - the House of Lords.  All elections should be held using proportional representation – much more democratic than the system currently in operation. They call for a Bill of Rights reflecting national culture, custom and traditions – I hope freedom of speech is included and given the prominence it needs and deserves. No public employee should be paid more than the Prime Minister – a much needed rule considering the vast salaries paid to those in local government administration, and the BBC.  

I hope the SDP will not mind me reproducing below their policy statement covering the constitution.  I give it 7 out of 8!

An English Parliament will be established outside London. Bids from cities in the Midlands and the North wishing to host it will be invited.

The Parliaments of England, Wales and Scotland will have powers equivalent to, or greater than, those of the current Scottish Parliament.

All public elections in the UK will be conducted under proportional representation to ensure that legislatures better reflect public opinion.

The House of Lords will be abolished.

The UK Westminster Parliament will become unicameral.  The House of Commons will have responsibility for matters affecting the whole of the UK such as foreign policy, defence, national security, and immigration.

The House of Commons will be reformed so as to increase the power of individual MP’s in relation to the government.  Select Committees will be given more power and there will be more free votes to reduce the stranglehold of the whips.

A British Bill of Rights will be introduced which reflects national culture, custom and traditions.

No public sector employee should be paid more than the Prime Minister.  Going forward, all new local government and quango employment contracts shall be subject to this limit.

The Social Democratic Party, seemingly a patriotic party with a social conscience believing in a nation-state independent of the EU.

I just came across the Social Democratic Party website and had a look at their policy pages.  Among the policies listed the call for an English Parliament caught my eye.  On the same “Constitution” page was advocated the abolition of the House of Lords, proportional representation and a statement saying “No public sector employee should be paid more than the Prime Minister”.  Any English patriot should be delighted with such policies!


Reading further I was delighted to find that on animal welfare the SDP calls for a ban on non-stun slaughter “as requested by the British Veterinary Association and the RSPCA”.


The SDP advocate a cap on net AND gross immigration while current arbitrary spending on Foreign Aid would be scrapped - a common sense approach to both issues.


On land the railways would be re-nationalised and funding for regional and rural bus travel would be increased.  Meanwhile at sea the Royal Navy’s aircraft carriers appear to have top priority with regard to defence spending.


The Social Democratic Party seem to me to be a patriotic community-centric party with a social conscience which believes not in nationalism, but nationhood with the nation state being independent of the European Union.


I will seriously consider voting for them if given the chance, and if I was not too old I might even be tempted to join them!

The British political landscape fractures as Brexit approaches, what will fill the voids?

If the cracks now appearing in the unity of the two main British political parties turn into a chasm I wonder what will rush in to fill the void.  Now that moderate and Jewish MPs are abandoning the Labour party as it steers a course to the extreme left  under the leadership of Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell will others  amongst the more moderate  Labour MPs jump ship and join Chukka Umunna’s crew in “The Independent Group”?

Will the free marketers in the Conservative Party drag it to the right and allow unrestrained capitalism to run riot for the benefit of the rich and powerful at the expense of the less well off?

With the Greens and Liberal Democrats, according to the opinion polls, apparently unable to make progress there are several parties, some new and several long-established, which could step into the spaces created by Labour and Conservative fractious in-fighting.

The pro-Brexit SDP could revive with the assistance of politicians like prominent former UKIP member Patrick O’Flynn.  UKIP itself could make a comeback with Gerard Batten and possibly Tommy Robinson at the helm.  Anne Marie Waters and her For Britain Movement with its pro-Brexit and patriotic working-class stance could burst upon the scene.  Robin Tilbrook’s English Democrats could be of appeal to those supporting English nationhood and a parliament for England.

Meanwhile, the fissures in the British political landscape develop as Brexit approaches, but will the British Political Establishment connive to rescind the referendum result?  If it does, Nigel Farage and his Brexit Party are waiting in the wings to avenge such duplicity!

English voters are " . . . ignored, marginalised and abused in political debate."

I came across this letter in The Week (December 1) from former Labour MP John Denham who is now the director of the Centre for English Identity and Politics at the University of Winchester.  In his letter he notes that: “Theresa May, Jeremy Corbyn and Vince Cable managed to mention England just once between them at this year’s party conferences.”  He also states that English nationalism has no serious political party; it seems he is yet to be impressed by the English Democrats.

Without an English Parliament the people of England have no dedicated political representation and therefore no effective collective voice.  Quite rightly the Welsh, Scots and Northern Irish have their own parliaments and assemblies to represent them.  Aren’t they lucky!

Below is Professor Denham’s letter.  It was first published in The Guardian.   

An overlooked nation.

To The Guardian

It is far too lazy to blame Brexit chaos on English nationalism.  It is a strange type of nationalism that never names the nation, has no serious political party, no leaders or public intellectuals, and no significant cultural expression.  Neither Leavers nor Remainers made an argument about what was best for England (though they did for Scotland and Wales).  Brexit is being led by elite politicians who identify as British, not English.  And Theresa May, Jeremy Corbyn and Vince Cable managed to mention England just once between them at this year’s party conferences.  If English voters have a problem, it is that they are frequently ignored, marginalised and abused in political debate.  Asserting distinct English interests reflects frustration much more than nationalism.

Professor John Denham, director, Centre for English Identity and Politics, University of Winchester

Robin Tilbrook, Chairman of the English Democrats, highlights how British Government spending discriminates against England.

I have just come across a tweet from the Scottish Conservatives lauding the “Union Dividend”.  The tweet proclaims: “This week we once again saw the benefit of being in the UK.  Thanks to the Union every Scot received an extra £1,576 above the UK average . . . .”  Do not the Scottish Conservatives wonder how these words will be received by the English and Welsh? 

In such circumstances it is timely of Robin Tilbrook, Chairman of the English Democrats, to have just written an article on his blog, using figures from a House of Commons research paper, highlighting how British Government spending discriminates against England.

Here are the basic facts given in the first three paragraphs of Robin Tilbrook’s article.

“The House of Commons Library published a paper in November last year which was brought to my attention recently.  The report has the figures for the financial year 2016/17 of the Barnett Formula.  The Barnett Formula determines that differential spending on UK citizens depending on which of the UK countries those citizens live in. 

The summary of the House of Commons research paper shows that England has the lowest national average spent on every man, woman and child.  This was £8,898 in 2016/17.  In Northern Ireland by contrast, it was £11,042. 

If you live in the English “Regions” of the South East, East of England, East Midlands, South West or West Midlands you get less spent on you than even the average of England.  It is only in London that British Government spending is more than even one of the other Nations of the UK.  It is slightly more than Wales.  London has £10,192 for every man, woman and child, instead of the Welsh average of £10,076!”

The entire article is well worth reading, here is a link:

http://robintilbrook.blogspot.com/2018/08/england-discriminated-against-by.html

"English patriotism is strengthening", claims Robin Tilbrook Chairman of the English Democrats.

A shaft of sunlight illuminates the Cross of St. George against the backdrop of a menacing thundercloud. 

A recent poll on English identity, questioning just over 20,000 adults, conducted by YouGov for the BBC produced some interesting results.

In general the poll suggested to me that the further away from London you go the greater the sense of being English becomes.  In London over a third of those questioned did not feel English at all or not very strongly – disappointing, but hardly surprising given the pattern of recent mass immigration.  In the rest of England the percentage of those identifying strongly as English was approaching a very satisfactory 85 per cent!  

As for the creation of an English Parliament, 41 per cent were in favour with 24 per cent against.

Robin Tilbrook, Chairman of the English Democrats, commented:

“The English Democrats are delighted to hear that the BBC's latest Poll, due to be published on Monday 4th June, finds more and more English people being proud to be English and wanting England to have our own national Parliament and our own Government. 

Could this be not only the product of the 40m leaflets the English Democrats have now distributed, but also from watching our Welsh, Scottish and Northern Irish neighbours getting unfairly favourable treatment from the British Government and from the growing realisation that the UK and Westminster system often operates against the interests of the English Nation and that therefore we need our own English Government to look after our nation's interests?

The latest research shows that English patriotism is strengthening!"

Here is a link the BBC report:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-44142843

The Labour Party's reluctance to talk about England makes it sound "out of touch with millions of voters".

In a recent post on his blog Robin Tilbrook, chairman of the English Democrats, drew attention to an article by John Denham, former Labour Cabinet Minister and now the Professor of English Identity and Politics at Winchester University.  In the article entitled Why does our Labour Party refuse to talk about England?  Mr Denham bemoans the fact that the Party appears extremely reluctant to even mention the word “England”.  Below are a couple of paragraphs from the article:

“The 1997 Labour government did not make a serious attempt – despite John Prescott’s best efforts – to shift power and resources out of London. England saw no constitutional change (except, ironically, in London). England needs devolution today because the last Labour government, of which I was a part, failed. Labour members should be asked about the governance of England as a whole: how power and resources will be devolved, how laws for England are made, and about England’s relationship with the rest of the UK.

The party must stop talking as though England and Britain are the same thing. This lazy confusion feeds nationalist propaganda in Scotland, discourages party members from thinking about England’s needs and makes us sound out of touch with millions of voters.”

Here is a link to the entire article:

https://labourlist.org/2018/04/john-denham-why-does-our-labour-party-refuse-to-talk-about-england/

After reading the whole article I am tempted to think that nothing much has changed in the 78 years since George Orwell wrote the following words in his essay The Lion and the Unicorn: 

“In left-wing circles it is always felt that there is something slightly disgraceful in being an Englishman and that it is a duty to snigger at every English institution, from horse racing to suet puddings.  It is a strange fact, but it is unquestionably true that almost any English intellectual would feel more ashamed of standing to attention during ‘God save the King’ than of stealing from a poor box”.

The Campaign for an English Parliament exposes European Union plot to regionalise England!

Reproduced below is part of an article from The Campaign for an English Parliament. 

“Regionalisation exposed by the CEP as a devious EU tactic to destabilise the UK (& England!)

 
Many initial responses to hearing that there is a Yorkshire independence movement and a Yorkshire Party is to pour scorn on the idea as being fiscally irresponsible or plainly unworkable. This is because it is obvious that without the British government’s subsidies Yorkshire Services wouldn't function properly.

However, to simply dismiss these two organisations that have the same Liberal Democrat leadership is to underestimate the manipulation and the devious actions of the EU in supporting a new sounding name for the old EU Regionalisation project for Britain and for England. http://www.e-f-a.org/about-us/

First it is important for any patriots to realise that the EU is supporting the Yorkshire Party as it belongs to an EU umbrella organisation, called the European Free Alliance (EFA). That EU organisation gathers together 45 “Progressive nationalist, regionalist and autonomist” parties throughout Europe. This grouping can only be conceived as an EU attempt to break-up and digest those nations that the regionalist organisations work within. This is because the EU supports the Regionalisation agenda because it makes resistance to their EU federalism agenda difficult if the nation state is fighting on two fronts. (the EU commission and EU supporting regionalist voices within).

The structure in Catalonia and Spain is a good example showing how devious the EU truly is:- The EU has openly distanced itself from those Catalonian parties that have called for full independence but it fails to mention that some of these parties are also included in their EU, European Free Alliance organisation. In effect, they are funded encouraging Regionalisation behind the scenes but are publicly slapping down independence. That is because the regionalist within the nation state is an EU regionalist patsy!

Once you accept that Regionalisation is all about pushing the EU Federalist agenda then you realise that The Yorkshire Party is not about benefiting the people of Yorkshire but about promoting EU federalism. This makes the Yorkshire party dangerous because it is about creating internal divisions and arguments within England and the UK whilst the British Government are engaged in full Brexit negotiations.”

Here is a link to the whole article:

http://thecep.org.uk/c-e-p-news/regionalisation-exposed-as-a-devious-eu-tactic-to-destabilise-the-uk/

I suspect that the British Political Establishment is just as keen to see England destabilised and regionalised as the European Union.

Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland now have their own devolved governments; any such recognition of English nationhood would be anathema to the Westminster elite who much prefer to vaingloriously cloak themselves in British nationalism while ruling over their last remaining “colony” – England. 

 

Be that as it may, it seems the Yorkshire Party has joined Mebyon Kernow as the two foremost county/regionalist parties in England.  Here in the West of England the Wessex Regionalists still persist, but have fielded only a handful of candidates in elections this century.  In the last General Election Jim Gunter stood as the Wessex Regionalist candidate in the constituency of Devizes, in Wiltshire, receiving 223 votes (0.4 per cent).  Mebyon Kernow, formed as a pressure group in 1951, did not field any candidates in the 2017 General Election saying its timing made it impractical to do so, but the Party does have four local councillors at present.

I imagine it could well be in Yorkshire, due to its size and economic clout, where a regional or county based party has any hope at all of gaining any sort of "regional" electoral success.

In my opinion, if the British Establishment succeeds in breaking England into regions we may as well return to the Anglo-Saxon Heptarchy and rebuild the nation state of England from that starting point, as it was originally.

Eddie Bone, director of the Campaign for an English Parliament, says Theresa May is not doing enough to support England.

In an interview with the Daily Express Eddie Bone, of the Campaign for an English Parliament, complains about the disproportionate funding Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland receive through the Barnett Formula, at England’s expense.  He goes on to raise the issue of the extra £1billiion Theresa May has promised for Northern Ireland in order to garner the support of the DUP for her minority government.

Here is a link to the interview with Mr Bone.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/823826/theresa-may-dup-snp-united-kingdom-eddie-bone-campaign-for-english-parliament

While I sympathize with Eddie Bone’s concern over another £1billion being sent to Northern Ireland, it seems a price worth paying if it helps smooth the way for Brexit.  The UK’s membership of the EU is a far greater threat to the existence of England than even the Anglophobic British political establishment.

Veronica Newman of the Campaign for an English Parliament suggests size is no impediment to the case for an English Parliament.

Veronica Newman of the Campaign for an English Parliament had an excellent letter in the Western Daily Press on April 29th.  It was a rebuttal of a previous correspondent’s claim that due to the size and population of England an English Parliament would lead to an unstable United Kingdom.  The letter contains pertinent and illuminating facts about some of the states making up the federal systems of other major nations.

Below is Veronica Newman’s letter as published in the Western Daily Press.

Size not important in democracy fight.

In his letter of April 21, Robert Craig asserts that there will never be an English Parliament as England would need to become independent from the UK and due to the size of England’s population a federation would be unstable.

I would like to draw Robert Craig’s attention to some countries which currently have federal systems that function perfectly well even with states of very different sized populations:

USA – Largest state California population 39,250,017, smallest state Alaska population 739,828

Canada – Largest state Ontario population 13,448,494, smallest state Yukon population 35,874

Germany – Largest state North-Rhine Westphalia population 17,904,65, smallest state Saarland population 1,027,700

I venture to suggest that size does not matter in the case of a parliament for England, in a federation it would be unable to dictate to the other states and there is no prerequisite for independence.

Veronica Newman
The Campaign for an English Parliament
Trowbridge, Wiltshire

As a further example I would add Australia to Veronica Newman’s list.  Of its six States, New South Wales has the largest population at 7,757,800, which is 32% of the nation’s population while Tasmania, the smallest, has a population of 519,800 making up only 2% of the total.

Veronica Newman of the Campaign for an English Parliament asks if Gordon Brown's latest plan to keep Scotland in the UK has a price worth paying.

Activists from the Campaign for an English Parliament have obviously been busy with pen and paper as another letter appears in the Western Daily Press, this time from Veronica Newman.

Gordon Brown has popped up again with yet another plan to keep Scotland in the same Union as Wales, Northern Ireland and "the Regions".  "The Regions" being, of course, England but we all know Mr Brown finds mentioning the "E" word extremely uncomfortable. 

Be that as it may, Veronica Newman asks if the price of Gordon Brown's plan is worth paying.  Here is her letter published on March 23rd.

Is price of this plan worth us paying?

Gordon Brown has proposed a patriotic third way for Scotland in exchange for it remaining in the UK.

This includes giving Holyrood the authority to sign treaties with other EU countries, control after Brexit of the £800 million they currently contribute to the EU, control over fisheries, agriculture, environmental regulation, employment and energy and the authority to set VAT.

On top of this he wants the Barnett Formula to remain in place and the Bank of England to become the Bank of England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. One has to ask is the price being demanded one worth paying.

Not only does Gordon Brown want Scotland to have its cake and eat it too he also has the effrontery to propose that EU powers be devolved to the Scottish Parliament, Welsh and Northern Irish assemblies and the regions. By regions it must assumed he means England.

What then will be a patriotic option for England?

Oh yes, that would be an English Parliament.

Veronica Newman
Campaign for an English Parliament Trowbridge, Wiltshire



I entirely agree with the sentiments expressed but, as readers of this blog know, I would prefer independence for both England and Scotland.  Perhaps all the nations making up the UK should have a referendum as suggested in this letter below, published in the Western Daily Press  on March 27th.

I hope England opts for independence
I sympathise with Veronica Newman of the Campaign for an English Parliament when she questions whether Gordon Brown’s recently suggested proposals– or should that be bribes – to keep Scotland in the UK come with a price worth paying ( Western Daily Press March 23). Any such price would, of necessity, be paid by England and English taxpayers.

As far as the future of the UK is concerned, I rather liked the eminently reasonable idea suggested by Piers Morgan when, after a heated discussion about Scottish independence on GMB, he said: “I think if we allow Scotland to have another referendum so soon after the last one then, at the same time, there should be a referendum in England, and Wales, and Northern Ireland.”

Let’s see which nations choose the road to independence – I certainly hope England is one of them.

S.W.
Ilminster, Somerset

Ian Holt of the Campaign for an English Parliament hopes the Scottish people "vote for independence and have done with it."

In this letter to the Western Daily Press, published on March 18th, Ian Holt of the Campaign for an English Parliament reflects the growing feeling of exasperation in England toward never-ending demands from the Scottish National Party.

Time to give Scots their independence 
Nicola Sturgeon wants another Scottish independence referendum. This time I hope they vote for independence and have done with it.

The British state has bent over backwards for Scotland over the last 20 years – at the expense of England.

Theresa May should give England its own parliament and government. If she does not, she may find that we English will start to demand an independence referendum of our own.

Ian Holt

Campaign for an English Parliament, Hucclecote, Gloucester

I sympathise with Mr Holt's view, but I doubt if Scotland could maintain its current level of public spending outside of the UK and would soon be looking south for assistance.  I wrote this letter in response and am pleased to say it was published in the Western Daily Press on March 21st.

Either way the Scots will get our cash
I sympathise with Ian Holt of the Campaign for an English Parliament when he hopes Nicola Sturgeon’s new shot at Scottish independence succeeds ( Western Daily Press March 18).

English taxpayers’ money heading north of the border as a result of the British Government’s allocation of public funds through the Barnett Formula should stop if Scotland becomes a foreign country. However, I suspect a newly independent Scotland would doubtless qualify for shedloads of money from the Department for International Development’s burgeoning £12 billion foreign aid budget.

Whether Scotland votes for independence or not, English taxes might still be filling Scottish coffers!

S.W.
Ilminster, Somerset

Campaign for an English Parliament activists advised by police in Stoke that playing Jerusalem and flying the English flag "might cause offence".

Would singing La Marseillaise in France bring about the attendance of the CRS?  I doubt it.  Would flying the Stars and Stripes from your car in the USA prompt a cautioning word from officers from the Highway Patrol?   I don’t think so.

Be that as it may, when activists from the Campaign for an English Parliament played Jerusalem and flew the Cross of St. George in Stoke during the recent parliamentary by election their vehicle was stopped by police who advised that their actions “might cause offence”.

This sort of thing could only happen in England!

For the full story of this astonishing incident visit the CEP website.  The link follows.
https://thecepreview.wordpress.com/2017/02/18/fury-as-police-warn-stoke-campaigner-england-flag-and-jerusalem-hymn-may-offend-locals/