Comments on: Regional governance and the English parliament http://britologywatch.wordpress.com/2008/04/22/regional-governance-and-the-english-parliament/ Resisting the efforts to impose a unitary British value system and identity Sun, 22 Nov 2009 09:44:33 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 By: David http://britologywatch.wordpress.com/2008/04/22/regional-governance-and-the-english-parliament/#comment-1067 David Tue, 22 Apr 2008 23:54:29 +0000 http://britologywatch.wordpress.com/?p=110#comment-1067 Thanks, Alex. Yes, I agree with you about the possibilities of continuing union between England, Wales and Northern Ireland if Scotland opted for independence. And I have in the past adopted a more gloomy point of view about Brown's and New Labour's intentions with respect to England's survival as a distinct nation. See for instance my earlier post, http://britologywatch.wordpress.com/2007/10/30/why-cant-gordon-brown-say-england/. I think you just have to try to get to the bottom of what is actually motivating New Labour's / GB's constitutional innovations. I don't think it's a malevolent or genocidal wish to destroy England as such; but it is a wish to relegate what I, and doubtless you, consider to be the <i>nation</i> of England to sub-national status in political terms; i.e. a '(multi-)regional' entity, and merely a cultural / historical nationality, while 'Britain' / Britishness is elevated into the primary nationality of the UK. Thanks, Alex. Yes, I agree with you about the possibilities of continuing union between England, Wales and Northern Ireland if Scotland opted for independence. And I have in the past adopted a more gloomy point of view about Brown’s and New Labour’s intentions with respect to England’s survival as a distinct nation. See for instance my earlier post, http://britologywatch.wordpress.com/2007/10/30/why-cant-gordon-brown-say-england/. I think you just have to try to get to the bottom of what is actually motivating New Labour’s / GB’s constitutional innovations. I don’t think it’s a malevolent or genocidal wish to destroy England as such; but it is a wish to relegate what I, and doubtless you, consider to be the nation of England to sub-national status in political terms; i.e. a ‘(multi-)regional’ entity, and merely a cultural / historical nationality, while ‘Britain’ / Britishness is elevated into the primary nationality of the UK.

]]> By: Alex http://britologywatch.wordpress.com/2008/04/22/regional-governance-and-the-english-parliament/#comment-1066 Alex Tue, 22 Apr 2008 19:05:56 +0000 http://britologywatch.wordpress.com/?p=110#comment-1066 "I think maybe that when New Labour was planning to introduce democratically elected devolved regional government throughout England, and when GB mooted that now (in)famous concept that Britain ‘as it should be’ was a “Britain of nations and regions”, they genuinely didn’t fully realise that this would be perceived as expressing an intention to dismember England into a set of regions of equivalent size, and with equivalent political powers, to Scotland " You ARE being far too generous. Brown's phrase "nations and regions" is truly sinister. Of course Brown realised what he was proposing. It involved the abolition of England just as Hitler tried to abolish Poland. Hitler's aproach to the situation was a lot more vicious but did involve regionalising the territory of Poland out of existence. Perhaps Hitler was simply being more pragmatic in that he also caused the forced movement and termination of vast numbers of Poles. After all, if you try to eradicate a large increasingly self aware country simply by fiat ie regionalise it but leaving the population intact, you are likely to meet with opposition. Thank you for tabling the possibilities so well though I don't agree with all of the detail . The end result is that England must resume national control of her own destiny be that within or without a federal United Kingdom. One angle you do not cover is the difference in relationships between England and the other "home" countries . ie England and Wales have quite a different relationship than England and Scotland. Ditto England and Northern Ireland . A further possibility not covered is that an independent England could be leagued with Wales and Northern Ireland not in federation but in alliance, confederal I suppose. This is likely to be more stable than anything with Scotland in it since it would be shorn of much of the ongoing aggravation that distinguishes the present day United Kingdom . “I think maybe that when New Labour was planning to introduce democratically elected devolved regional government throughout England, and when GB mooted that now (in)famous concept that Britain ‘as it should be’ was a “Britain of nations and regions”, they genuinely didn’t fully realise that this would be perceived as expressing an intention to dismember England into a set of regions of equivalent size, and with equivalent political powers, to Scotland ”

You ARE being far too generous. Brown’s phrase “nations and regions” is truly sinister. Of course Brown realised what he was proposing. It involved the abolition of England just as Hitler tried to abolish Poland. Hitler’s aproach to the situation was a lot more vicious but did involve regionalising the territory of Poland out of existence. Perhaps Hitler was simply being more pragmatic in that he also caused the forced movement and termination of vast numbers of Poles. After all, if you try to eradicate a large increasingly self aware country simply by fiat ie regionalise it but leaving the population intact, you are likely to meet with opposition.

Thank you for tabling the possibilities so well though I don’t agree with all of the detail . The end result is that England must resume national control of her own destiny be that within or without a federal United Kingdom. One angle you do not cover is the difference in relationships between England and the other “home” countries . ie England and Wales have quite a different relationship than England and Scotland. Ditto England and Northern Ireland . A further possibility not covered is that an independent England could be leagued with Wales and Northern Ireland not in federation but in alliance, confederal I suppose. This is likely to be more stable than anything with Scotland in it since it would be shorn of much of the ongoing aggravation that distinguishes the present day United Kingdom .

]]>