Originally Posted by Village Idiot:
I think giving maximum power to existing County and District councils is the way to go. Most people have an affinity to their County (horrible Norman word, that. I prefer 'Shires'!) not to Mercia or Wessex, although there is no harm in seeing a cultural renaissance connected to the old historic regions.

Be careful for what you wish, "maximum power" to existing ..., I don't know whether or not you are a village but the second part of your name seems appropriate.

The English have moved between counties for generations, I have four relations in four different counties at th time of printing.

The "old historic regions" that you refer to were in competition with each other and often at war, you really want to back to the sort of rivalry.

it took generations to get England to act as a separate and cohesive community you now wish to return to the medieval and dark days of our history. - buck up.
[Rep]

Originally Posted by :
Be careful for what you wish, "maximum power" to existing ..., I don't know whether or not you are a village but the second part of your name seems appropriate.

I presume he probably means over things like licensing laws, sports, tax raising powers, zoning etc. rather then War of the Roses type scenarios :-)

Ea of dune
[Rep]

Its whether you're a centralist or a decentralist, I s'pose. As a decentralist I welcome when people express loyalty to smaller areas within nation states. I'm not advocating the break up of England or civil war, but I do support breaking power down to the grassroots.
[Rep]

Originally Posted by Ea of Dune:
I presume he probably means over things like licensing laws, sports, tax raising powers, zoning etc. rather then War of the Roses type scenarios :-)

Ea of dune

Exactly my point, all the "regions" would be trying to outdo the others to be more attractive to potential investors, which would, I assure you, lead to "regional" wars.

Each region would "headhunt" the best doctors, IT boffins, nurses, etc.

Someone at sometime is going to get really pithed off and in the last resort ...
[Rep]

Originally Posted by Village Idiot:
Its whether you're a centralist or a decentralist, I s'pose. As a decentralist I welcome when people express loyalty to smaller areas within nation states. I'm not advocating the break up of England or civil war, but I do support breaking power down to the grassroots.

I spent 27 years in the RN which, you can imagine, was full of men from all over Britain, we were fiercely loyal to our countries, counties and of cities like Liverpool, London, Bristol, Birmingham etc. First and foremost we were British and worked together for the common good (in most cases).
Decentralisation, devolution by any other name, has changed all that for ever, there is now rivalry, jealousy and downright meanness.

This is your way forward for England - thanks, but no thanks.
[Rep]

LE(s) - No I think for msot people the idea of devolving powers to the counties is to prevent things like Gordon Brown forcing counties to build houses and eco-towns and other "one size fits all" matters. It is about local people having more say over how their tax money is spent, about how local historical monuments are preserved and about finding local solutions to local problems.

It is about realising that England is a tapestry of local culture and this should be preserved from our dialects to our local customs and fetes. Labour have done everything to stamp this out and create a monoculture unformity in England, whilst celebrating every other foreign culture that finds its way to our shores. They have gone out of their way to build over our countryside and wreck England.

I don't think anybody is suggesting we would want local rivalry beyond the sporting arena and of course everyones loyalty should be with England as a whole, after all that is what you are defending, and if there is no England there won't be any local English culture in the counties.

Ea of dune
[Rep]

I largely agree with strengthening our links to "Shires" but there are serious problems with local auhorities who use local votes to claim legitimacy but after being elected act as agents for developers against the interests of the community.
I have suggested that the office of "Lords lieutenant, which is appointed by the Monarch, " should be expanded and with a brief to protect local communities." This is a suggestion and would need discussing.
[Rep]

Originally Posted by Ea of Dune:
LE(s) - No I think for msot people the idea of devolving powers to the counties is to prevent things like Gordon Brown forcing counties to build houses and eco-towns and other "one size fits all" matters. It is about local people having more say over how their tax money is spent, about how local historical monuments are preserved and about finding local solutions to local problems.

It is about realising that England is a tapestry of local culture and this should be preserved from our dialects to our local customs and fetes. Labour have done everything to stamp this out and create a monoculture unformity in England, whilst celebrating every other foreign culture that finds its way to our shores. They have gone out of their way to build over our countryside and wreck England.

I don't think anybody is suggesting we would want local rivalry beyond the sporting arena and of course everyones loyalty should be with England as a whole, after all that is what you are defending, and if there is no England there won't be any local English culture in the counties.

Ea of dune

You can't lay the blame, for this state of affairs, solely at New Labour's door nor even Gordon Brown's door.

The conservatives have control of the majority of regional assemblies, these people are the ones to blame, I can only speak for south east region by of the 72 members of the board of Seera, 54 are conservative Councillors, the Chairman is a Councillor elected in Oxford but has deemed it a good idea to build 80,000 houses in the south of Hmapshire, he has never been near the place let alone have cognizance with the aspirations and needs of the local residents.
Central government is not a problem as long as all Counties, Districts, Boroughs and Parishes are treated equally.
If £1 is spent on Mr Jones in Yorkshire, £1 should be spent on Mr Smith in Kent. How that £1 is spent is down to thwe local authority. NO - repeat - NO - interference for central government on how that £1 is spent.
[Rep]

LE(s) - Exactly, and I am thoroughly against the EU and the EU regional assemblies for exactly this reason. However a lot of the blame does lay in the hands of Labour for allowing all this to happen.
I agree with regards to the spending, it should be fairly spent across the board. Advocating the handing back powers to the shires does not some how remove the need for central government, rather it provides a counter balance to it.

Ea of dune
[Rep]

Originally Posted by Village Idiot:
I think giving maximum power to existing County and District councils is the way to go. Most people have an affinity to their County (horrible Norman word, that. I prefer 'Shires'!) not to Mercia or Wessex, although there is no harm in seeing a cultural renaissance connected to the old historic regions.

I agree, I simply think counties are often too small for some functions and cultural identities, to start with at least. Most power should go to the county levels and the local and ward levels but I think then the regions should get the power and identity before any national gov't. It would make safeguarding the counties alot easier. Look at the US, it history from 1787 is one of the federal gov't swallowing the roles and identity of the states.
[Rep]