Counter to the Yes arguments
1. The Yes Campaign says: The North East of England is a place to be proud of.
The NO Campaign response: We are in full agreement on this point, but the Yes Campaign have not got the exclusive right to be passionate about the region. All the people behind the No Campaign are born and bred in the region and the supporters of the Campaign care deeply about the North East. The Yes Campaign's argument is an emotive and value-less argument. It is disingenuous to think that to have a regional assembly will create such feelings amongst people and characteristics which already exist have evolved historically. With modern day mobility and relocation, populations are becoming more cosmopolitan as it is. It shows the lack of substance to the argument for an assembly that the Yes Campaign has to rely on such emotional rhetoric.
2. The Yes Campaign says: The future of our region should be in the hands of its people
The NO Campaign response: The future of the North East is in the hands of the people, and again we agree with the 'Yes' statement. However, it is the innovators and entrepreneurs that will create the wealth to drive the economy, and an assembly will merely be another barrier politicising and slowing down these dynamic processes. It is quite clear that people have more power the closer they are to their politicians. An elected assembly will remove this power from the people by taking power from local communities and abolishing some local authorities. The ultimate responsibility will still remain with Westminster because of the lack of real power an assembly will have.
3. The Yes Campaign says: Too many decisions about the North East are taken by London based Ministers and civil servants who don't properly understand our issues.
The NO Campaign response: The White Paper makes it clear that an elected Regional Assembly will have few real powers. What is on offer in nothing like Scottish or Welsh devolution. Lord Rooker stated that there will be no more power or money, but power will be taken from existing councils (planning, transport, fire and possibly police). Ministers in London and civil servants in Whitehall will still make the ultimate decisions. The assembly will just be a fig leaf to disguise London ministers and London civil servants. And, will there be local assembly members, or will we suffer the same imposition as has happened with some of the MP's in the North East…imposed on the region by the party but with no loyalty to the region…such as Blair, Mandelson, Miliband. Will we see party put before issue, as in the total betrayal of personal principle for party allegiance as we witnessed in the top-up fees debate?
4. The Yes Campaign says: An elected assembly would allow the people of a greater say in how we shape the North East future.
The NO Campaign response: An assembly member will be responsible for around 100,000 people, which most certainly is not bringing democracy closer to the people. We already have representatives of the people in the North East… they are called MPs. We also have MEPs representing the region in the European Parliament…and their input has been very conspicuous by its absence.
Devolution elsewhere has created more problems and more expense. It is not clear where, or how, more elected representatives will give a different or louder voice. It is not clear where and by whom assembly member's voices will be heard. It has not been demonstrated in any argument how an assembly will shape the future of the North East, especially with no powers and a budget of £350m.
Our region contains many diverse communities, from large cities to rural countryside, with many different interests and aspirations and it is unlikely that a single assembly could satisfy all of these at the same time.
5. The Yes Campaign says: An assembly can speak with authority and a clear mandate on behalf of the people of the region to the rest of the UK and beyond.
The NO Campaign response: It is unlikely that there will be a clear mandate given the massive apathy towards the proposition. Even with a postal ballot it is not expected that the turnout will rise above 50%. Region's Minister, Nick Raynsford, said the result of a referendum would be rejected if the turnout was derisory. He refused to define derisory.
An assembly would have control over less than 2% of expenditure spent by Government in the region. Lord Rooker on 30th April 2003 stated, "There will be no new power for regional assemblies. They will simply be a different way of scrutinising the amounts of government expenditure."
If other regions are getting a louder voice then an assembly would only be a 'force to be reckoned with' only until other regions had an assembly. Then what power would we have competing with the North West with a population of 7,500,000, and the South East with 10,000,000 and a bigger business base. Anyone thinking that the North East could compete on equal terms is simply deluding themselves. If every region has an assembly then we will simply have a squabbling, divided nation competing for the same money.
The best voices for our region are the people themselves, not a new tier of expensive paid politicians with egos. Also there are many organisations and bodies who can make representations to the government on specific interests. It is important not to lose sight of the fact that such "regionalisation" is part of a long standing European scheme which will give Brussels more direct influence, (i.e. eventually rendering any "English" parliament superfluous)
6. The Yes Campaign says: An elected assembly is a necessary ingredient for ending the North-South divide.
The NO Campaign response: Work on regeneration is already being done by the Regional Development Agency - an assembly adds nothing to this work, and may interfere if politicians start playing party politics.
The North/South divide, apart from being maintained to some extent by vote-catching selective financial support policies by this present government, is partly historical and cultural. It becomes less apparent as time goes by with the modern-day mobility and frequent relocation of the population. It is another emotive red herring of value only principally to those who hope to make work out of it.
As for the North East Assembly being a strong regional institution…it simply does not have the powers and will be a toothless tiger. Future governments with opposing political views may choose to ignore an assembly.
Economic decisions are best made by an unpoliticised RDA driven by dynamic businessmen, and this is where changes and influence is required. It is a utopian dream to imagine that inspirational leaders can be drawn from the current North East political structures, and even if someone was drawn from outside the system they would find it impossible to break the back of a party-dominated cabal.
With regard to the Barnett formula, we have been told that there is no chance of reform.
7. The Yes Campaign says: An assembly will modernise the way we take decisions in the region and make government more open.
The NO Campaign response: And here we are with a referendum potentially in October and no Bill defining powers, roles or responsibilities of an assembly. Is this modern and open Mr. Prescott? Even a spokeswoman from the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, has stated that there may not even be time for the draft Bill to be drawn up in advance of the referendum telling us how modern and open it will be. It beggars belief, and smacks of an ill-conceived, ill-thought out plan which has left the Yes Campaign disillusioned and demoralised. Why are the government refusing to answer questions on this subject?
In a visit to the region in January 2004, Prime Minister Tony Blair refused to take questions on the subject. It is reported that there is deep division in the Cabinet. Perhaps the Yes Campaign can tell us which local councils they think are secretive and undemocratic? Why do we need to modernise with such a quantum leap? Why should not the system we have, which evolved and served for 100's of years be "open".
New ideas, especially ones as ill-thought out as this create new mistakes…and cost a lot of money…YOUR money!
8. The Yes Campaign says: A regional assembly will make quicker and better decisions on transport, job creation, investment and planning. With more powers we could shape our public services to better meet the needs of the region.
The NO Campaign response: This is simply a pipe dream - it will only be 'strategies' that are produced, and one would question whether even they would be delivered as they would still have to be referred back to central Government.
An assembly will not add one new nurse to our hospitals. An assembly will not add one new policeman to our streets. An assembly will not add one new teacher to our classrooms. The cost of the assembly will divert funds away from the public services. (Extra costs are inevitably implied by this "shaping", with dubious chance of any benefit.)
9. The Yes Campaign says: A regional assembly will remove bureaucracy, duplication of effort and waste from our current governing systems.
The NO Campaign response: Every example of devolution has added higher costs and increased bureaucracy. To believe that there will be streamlining, increased efficiency and reduction of red-tape is to believe in fairies.
The example of Scotland and London shows that bureaucratic costs in a new system shoot up dramatically. Perhaps the Yes Campaign should tell us which local councils they consider incompetent and inefficient and then we can have a close look at what they appear to be doing so wrong and compare it with the councils that are successful.
10. The Yes Campaign says: Vote Yes4theNorthEast for a better future.
The NO Campaign response: Vote YES for a better future only if you are a politician or a career bureaucrat. Frustration and lack of trust or belief in political structures and remoteness from the government will grow as an assembly will prove to be nothing more than a talking shop, full of the usual suspects producing more hot air and with no delivery. It won't give us a better future if we launch on an expensive and unnecessary reorganisation to create a new tier of paid politicians with their snouts in the trough.
Our region contains many diverse communities, from large cities to rural countryside, with many different interests and aspirations and it is unlikely that a single assembly could satisfy all of these at the same time.
