North East NO Campaign

'No' Says Yes A Regional Assembly...of Current MP's

A recent debate in the House of Commons, called by the Lib-Dem MP Andrew George, discussed the number of MP's we elect. He stated that 150 of the 659 MP's could very well be given the chop. It would save substantial money. In any case, much of their work has been handed over to Brussels, or to assemblies in Scotland, Wales, and London, and Deputy Prime Minister, John Prescott aims to shift yet more to other Elected Regional Assemblies, if this Autumn's referenda in the three Northern Regions actually go ahead. It has become very unclear even what MPs think they are there for, other than authorising taxes on us and fixing pay rises for themselves.

But we have to watch Mr. George and what he is really up to. He is a Lib-Dem and wants to see the "Europe of Regions" in place, which means doing away entirely with meaningful national parliaments. Weakening Westminster by reducing the number of MPs is essential part of that package. However Mr. George certainly has a point in asking whether we need all these people now that they have given away most of the work we elected them to do. The fact that they never had permission from us, or lawful authority to do so is the ultimate battle and a one that will rise further up the agenda as the debate over the European Constitution grows.

Contrary to Mr. George's wish it is in fact vitally important that we maintain a strong parliament. A strong parliament is most likely to give us good governance, a weak parliament bad governance.  There must be enough MPs to provide an adequate stock leadership talent. There is not an abundance of it even now. Moreover, the main political problem in Britain today is reconnecting the electorate with the ballot box. Voting gimmicks and desperate attempts seen to increase the turn-out are not the solution. More enfeeblement of Westminster could only advance it's divorce with the voter, further decay of parliamentary democracy, and further diminishing of democracy itself, all inevitable requirements of the europeanist calendar. We cannot afford any of that, and the public once fully aware, will reject any further the duplicitous theft of their democracy, and the handing back of what has been taken.

Nevertheless, the question remains:  How can the seeming excess of MPs be used productively and parliament strengthened at the same time?

The 'Yes Campaign' and its supporters continually state that the 'No Campaign' is negative and has not come up with something positive. Well, we are simply rejecting the proposition that Prescott is attempting to foist upon us. Perhaps there is an alternative. The answer is staring us in the face. Give the MPs regional responsibilities as well as constituency duties! The present arguments for English regionalisation are largely fraudulent, divisive and destructive. The Prescott plan requires us to turn out to vote for new people for new elective assemblies. The electorate knows that it has too much worthless government already, and will turn its back...hence a total avoidance of any substance to Prescott's proposals. The vision sounds good. People initially respond favourably. Add reality to the vision and public support disappears and regionalisation campaigners are left with the line, 'we must seize the opportunity and hope to make what is on offer better.'It has already been recognised by many however, that the assemblies have no real power and in essence are europeanist-agenda bribery pieces of gravy train provided for the benefit of greedy factotums and ambitious politicians. But if members instead were sitting MPs the position of the assemblies would change immediately. They then would then carry enormous clout. Unlike Prescott's version where the elected assemblymen are virtually powerless, MP assemblymen would also sit in the Commons which makes all the difference. For genuine regional issues, as for example the dualling of the A1, these MPs could be expected in public assembly session to work out a cross-party concensus (not that it would be difficult with only one Lib Dem and one Conservative), and have to stick to it in Westminster, all fixed before the party whips can get at them. Prescott's elective assemblies could not start to do any such thing.

And why should not our MPs form the regional assemblies? We already vote for them. They have done away with much of their previous workload so they cannot claim to be overworked.  MPs are quite close to the electorate and face deselection or defeat. Their performance in a Regional Assembly over things that are of immediate consequence to us would give us a much better grasp of what sort of persons they really are. This could be the start of real "Bottom Up" democracy, and the revival of parliamentary democracy, the breaking of the parliamentary party stranglehold. It would save us much money. No need for a new building. No need to raise the Council Tax to pay for the running costs. No need to create another raft of politicians, their apparatchik and new salary commitments. Who cannot want all this?

Despite all the fizz and splutter of the regionalists, the genuinely regional issues are few. They cannot be many when the current unelected regional assemblies make do on three plenary sessions a year. MP-assemblies, or Select Committees, might well manage with monthly sessions. The behind-our-back manipulations of our affairs currently the rule could become out of fashion. The shadowy English Regional Network would be dismantled, the Local Government Association regain independence, unharried Counties could get on with their jobs, the voracious and burgeoning secretariats of the current assemblies could be pruned right back, the cascade of worthless seminars, and workshops beloved by factotums and fellow travellers would be cut off, and we would start reducing on the 354,000 new public servants that have been appointed since 1997.

And at the next election there may be candidates standing with a regional and local agenda which could ensure that incumbent MP's will have to be aware that a lot more people are watching what they are up to. I think this would certainly spice up North East politics and once the electorate realise that they are in control and have the power we may end up with a better class of political representation.

ENDS

For more information, contact:

Neil Herron
Campaign Director
North East No Campaign
48 Frederick Street
Sunderland
SR1 1NF
Tel. 0191 565 7143
E-mail mail@northeastnocampaign.co.uk
Website www.northeastnocampaign.co.uk

Ackn. Dr. P.Kaye

	*Press Release*

Press Release 12.25pm Wednesday 7th July 2004 'No' Says Yes A Regional Assembly...of Current MP's A recent debate in the House of Commons, called by the Lib-Dem MP Andrew George, discussed the number of MP's we elect. He stated that 150 of the 659 MP's could very well be given the chop. It would save substantial money. In any case, much of their work has been handed over to Brussels, or to assemblies in Scotland, Wales, and London, and Deputy Prime Minister, John Prescott aims to shift yet more to other Elected Regional Assemblies, if this Autumn's referenda in the three Northern Regions actually go ahead. It has become very unclear even what MPs think they are there for, other than authorising taxes on us and fixing pay rises for themselves. But we have to watch Mr. George and what he is really up to. He is a Lib-Dem and wants to see the "Europe of Regions" in place, which means doing away entirely with meaningful national parliaments. Weakening Westminster by reducing the number of MPs is essential part of that package. However Mr. George certainly has a point in asking whether we need all these people now that they have given away most of the work we elected them to do. The fact that they never had permission from us, or lawful authority to do so is the ultimate battle and a one that will rise further up the agenda as the debate over the European Constitution grows. Contrary to Mr. George's wish it is in fact vitally important that we maintain a strong parliament. A strong parliament is most likely to give us good governance, a weak parliament bad governance. There must be enough MPs to provide an adequate stock leadership talent. There is not an abundance of it even now. Moreover, the main political problem in Britain today is reconnecting the electorate with the ballot box. Voting gimmicks and desperate attempts seen to increase the turn-out are not the solution. More enfeeblement of Westminster could only advance it's divorce with the voter, further decay of parliamentary democracy, and further diminishing of democracy itself, all inevitable requirements of the europeanist calendar. We cannot afford any of that, and the public once fully aware, will reject any further the duplicitous theft of their democracy, and the handing back of what has been taken. Nevertheless, the question remains: How can the seeming excess of MPs be used productively and parliament strengthened at the same time? The 'Yes Campaign' and its supporters continually state that the 'No Campaign' is negative and has not come up with something positive. Well, we are simply rejecting the proposition that Prescott is attempting to foist upon us. Perhaps there is an alternative. The answer is staring us in the face. Give the MPs regional responsibilities as well as constituency duties! The present arguments for English regionalisation are largely fraudulent, divisive and destructive. The Prescott plan requires us to turn out to vote for new people for new elective assemblies. The electorate knows that it has too much worthless government already, and will turn its back...hence a total avoidance of any substance to Prescott's proposals. The vision sounds good. People initially respond favourably. Add reality to the vision and public support disappears and regionalisation campaigners are left with the line, 'we must seize the opportunity and hope to make what is on offer better.'It has already been recognised by many however, that the assemblies have no real power and in essence are europeanist-agenda bribery pieces of gravy train provided for the benefit of greedy factotums and ambitious politicians. But if members instead were sitting MPs the position of the assemblies would change immediately. They then would then carry enormous clout. Unlike Prescott's version where the elected assemblymen are virtually powerless, MP assemblymen would also sit in the Commons which makes all the difference. For genuine regional issues, as for example the dualling of the A1, these MPs could be expected in public assembly session to work out a cross-party concensus (not that it would be difficult with only one Lib Dem and one Conservative), and have to stick to it in Westminster, all fixed before the party whips can get at them. Prescott's elective assemblies could not start to do any such thing. And why should not our MPs form the regional assemblies? We already vote for them. They have done away with much of their previous workload so they cannot claim to be overworked. MPs are quite close to the electorate and face deselection or defeat. Their performance in a Regional Assembly over things that are of immediate consequence to us would give us a much better grasp of what sort of persons they really are. This could be the start of real "Bottom Up" democracy, and the revival of parliamentary democracy, the breaking of the parliamentary party stranglehold. It would save us much money. No need for a new building. No need to raise the Council Tax to pay for the running costs. No need to create another raft of politicians, their apparatchik and new salary commitments. Who cannot want all this? Despite all the fizz and splutter of the regionalists, the genuinely regional issues are few. They cannot be many when the current unelected regional assemblies make do on three plenary sessions a year. MP-assemblies, or Select Committees, might well manage with monthly sessions. The behind-our-back manipulations of our affairs currently the rule could become out of fashion. The shadowy English Regional Network would be dismantled, the Local Government Association regain independence, unharried Counties could get on with their jobs, the voracious and burgeoning secretariats of the current assemblies could be pruned right back, the cascade of worthless seminars, and workshops beloved by factotums and fellow travellers would be cut off, and we would start reducing on the 354,000 new public servants that have been appointed since 1997. And at the next election there may be candidates standing with a regional and local agenda which could ensure that incumbent MP's will have to be aware that a lot more people are watching what they are up to. I think this would certainly spice up North East politics and once the electorate realise that they are in control and have the power we may end up with a better class of political representation. ENDS For more information, contact: Neil Herron Campaign Director North East No Campaign 48 Frederick Street Sunderland SR1 1NF Tel. 0191 565 7143 E-mail mail@northeastnocampaign.co.uk Website www.northeastnocampaign.co.uk Ackn. Dr. P.Kaye

© 2004 North East No Campaign