egafd.com

Approval ratings for the Scottish Parliament are fairly low. But I think it's a civilised assembly, which works to sensible hours and doesn't involve any anachronistic cross-dressers, and convoluted ways of asking questions.

The main down side is that the powers are limited, so these things are like a more potent borough council and a less powerful parliament.

Another thing in its favour, especially as the Scottish example shows, is that those disenfranchised by the Westminster system can have a say. Due to PR, we have a number of Green MSPs, members of the Scottish Socialist Party and a few independents---including one providing a voice for pensioners. Hell, even the Tories have a few seats.

The danger is that a BNP arsehole gets elected. It's bad enough that its "acceptable face," the United Kingdom Independence Party, is conning folk, without the real racist McCoy getting a say.

i haven't a clue what a regional assembly entails but increased democratic subsidiarity (remember when that word was flavour of the month, much like 'chav' is today) has to be a positive thing, especially in a state as centralised as our own. the problems come when you end up with a politically neutered mutt that has a lot of bark but absolutely no bite: an authority without authority or purpose (not necessarily the same thing) but with a hefty bill attached, nonetheless.

the london mayoralty has only been as 'effective' as it has been, imo, because of happenstance. if ken livingstone hadn't stood as an independent and won, i don't think the official labour candidate (frank dobson, a man who was virtually press-ganged into standing) would have done anything other than turn the office of mayor into a poodle for the government to chuck under the chin once in a while. fortunately for london livingstone not only had a point to prove (that tony blair was wrong to predict that his holding office would be catastrophic for london) but he also had a plan! a REAL plan!! the congestion charge, no less, which not only raised his profile to that of something approaching a national politician but which also had a tangible effect on the lives of millions of londoners.

this is the crux of the matter: will the north-east regional assembly be able to impact on voters lives in a noticeable way? politicians can talk all they want about the things they want to achieve (and claim to have achieved) but if nothing they say or do has any discernable impact on your daily life - for good, or ill - why on earth should you care? the congestion charge was ideal for livingstone's purposes, in this respect. it addressed an issue - traffic congestion - that was blighting everyone's lives, which everyone agreed had to be tackled and which everyone also agreed was the result of decades of under-investment by central government. however, it was also something that only a newly enfranchised 'independent', standing on a platform that specifically addressed the issue, could dare to tackle using such a high risk strategy. a radical piece of social engineering like 'the charge' had never before been attempted on such a grand scale and the consequences of it's possible failure ensured that it would never be contemplated in the risk averse environment of mainstream politics.

in a nut shell, he had nothing to lose and everything to gain, which is why when he rolled the dice and won, he won big time! to the point where tony blair eventually admitted that he had been wrong in his analysis of livingstone and arranged for his readmission back into the party so that ken could stand for re-election as labour candidate (from my point of view, this was not a happy day: as soon as a politician is back inside the party tent, we all know that the chances of getting our shoes splashed are that much greater... but let's not dwell on the negative). as a new institution the office of london mayor was always going to be a work-in-progress, moving in directions and taking on roles that were never properly anticipated in any documentation. in this respect it was vital to have someone in office who would seek to wrest as much power from central government, local councils and the civil service as was possible in his/her first term. the alternative was to allow the status quo to persist, albeit with another deadening layer of bureaucracy of the sort that you suspect may be imposed on you.

taking all of this into account, i would say that unless there is genuine desire coupled to specific need for a new democractic structure in the north-east, beyond simply sticking it up a few southern softies, it will likely turn out to be nothing more than the same old faces voicing the same old complaints only in a nice, new, warm, expensive building. the welsh and the scots already had cultural and political institutions in place that were unique to them, as well as the concomitant concerns which naturally arose from them, and this helped to shape and energise political discourse in the post-devolution era. unless there are similarly specific issues inherent to the north-east region beyond the usual primary concerns of employment, healthcare, crime, etc - all of which are can be handled by the existing local authorities - the creation of a new body to deal with things that don't really exist will likely turn out to be the wrong, and expensive, fork in the road that you fear.

what's required is a rallying point for local pride and ambition. perhaps your local language, geordise(?), can provide the vehicle for a renaissance of sorts. you could campaign to adopt the quebecois model of universal bilingualism, passing legislation requiring that everything be translated into both languages: road signs, school books, beer cans, etc, well, it's a start...

(fwiw, i didn't vote for ken at the last election for reneging on his manifesto promise to save the routemaster bus and commission a new production model. we may have more buses now but they are all, without exception, hideous on the eye and painful on the arse)

Just remember that the Venerable Bede was a Geordie, that Lindisfarne and Jarrow were important centres for the church in England in the dark ages, and that the north-east of England has its own identity. It may not be as easily recognisable as that of Wales or Scotland, but it is distinct.

so happens that one of my favourite passages comes from ol' bedey eyes:

"The present life of man, O King, seems to be, in comparison with that time which is unknown to us, like the swift flight of a sparrow through the room wherein You sit at supper in winter, with your commanders and ministers, and a good fire in the midst, whilst the storms of rain and snow prevail abroad; the sparrow, I say, flying in at one door, and immediately out at another, whilst he is within, is safe from the wintry storm; but after a short space of fair weather, he immediately vanishes out of your sight, into the dark winter from which he had emerged. So this life of man appears for a short space, but of what went before, or what is to follow, we are entirely ignorant"

I voted Yes in the referendum in Wales although I had doubts about some of the claims made by the Yes campaign. I nearly voted No as a protest at being called "a bloody Tory" because I challenged some of the more extreme claims. One supporter said a good cause justified lieing in its support.
We will never know how radical the Welsh Assembly would have been under Ron Davies because of his "Moment of madness". I suspect not very because he had a reputation for being either a bully or an arse-licker depending on the company. Blair and Co. parachuted in Alan Michael and fixed the electoral system so that he won the leadership over Rhodri Morgan. Michael wasn't even an elected Assembly member and eventually resigned.
The Assembly doesn't have any law-making powers and is now always called the Welsh Assembly government in an attempt to make people think it is more powerful/important than it really is. However it has taken a stand on some issues in opposition to Parliament.
It also subsidises free bus passes for pensioners throughout Wales.

Mart

"Re: Regional Assemblies - Any Point To Them?"

No. It's a load of old ball-bag. It'll just be a further outlet for wanky public sector sorts to talk pretentious PC cobblers all day at Joe ?Sucker? Taxpayer's expense. We need less government, not more. Which reminds me - anyone care to sign up for my 'Beat A Bureaucrat' campaign?


Officer Dibble