Saturday 20 September 2014

Based In Lanchester, County Durham

People have been having some trouble with the Labour Uncut link, so here is my article in full; those who have been able to read it have been very impressed:

There is no West Lothian Question. The Parliament of the United Kingdom reserves the right to legislate supremely in any policy area for any part of the country. It never need do so and the point would still stand, since what matters is purely that it has that power in principle, which no one disputes that it has.

The grievance of England, and especially of Northern and Western England, concerns cold, hard cash. What, then, of those who bellow for an English Parliament to bartenders who cannot follow everyone else and leave the room? They fall into two categories. There are the Home Counties Home Rulers. And there are those wishing to live under the Raj of the Home Counties Home Rulers.

On the one hand are those from the South East, Essex, Hertfordshire and Bedfordshire. Their definition of England is the South East, Essex, Hertfordshire and Bedfordshire, or at least a certain idea of that area. Give them something for that, and they would be perfectly happy, at least until the votes started to be tallied up. Everyone gets a vote. Even the people whom they have bawled out.

On the other hand are those from everywhere else. Their definition of England is also the South East, Essex, Hertfordshire and Bedfordshire, or at least a certain idea of that area. Although they are often professionally “local” to elsewhere, especially in Yorkshire but also in pockets of other parts of the country, the basis of their political position has always been that they were a cut above their neighbours.

That made them Conservatives until recently, and it increasingly makes them UKIP supporters. That is who the UKIP supporters in the North and elsewhere are. They were never Labour. That is also the context for the fact that there has been a UKIP MEP in Wales for some years and that there is now a UKIP MEP in Scotland, too.

They may never have elected an MP or even a councillor in their lives, or they may live in the only ward or constituency for miles around where their votes ever elected anyone. But enough MPs were returned from elsewhere to make Margaret Thatcher Prime Minister. That suited them down to the ground.

Quite wrongly, since it would be run by Labour as often as not, they see an English Parliament in the same terms. Their more numerous and concentrated brethren elsewhere would deliver them from the rule of their neighbours. It is very funny indeed that those brethren think that they are those neighbours.

In 1993, 66 Labour MPs voted against Maastricht, far more than the number of Conservatives who did so. Yet there were far more Conservative than Labour MPs at the time. Of those 66, at least three campaigned for a Yes vote in the Scottish independence referendum, including that campaign’s chairman, Dennis Canavan.

While it is true that several of those from Wales went on to be among the strongest opponents of devolution, the 66 also included the late John McWilliam, one of the first campaigners for a North East regional assembly.

So much for the dissolution of the United Kingdom as some kind of EU plot, and I write as an inveterate social democratic Eurosceptic and Unionist. If anything, the pressure for that dissolution is a reaction against the effects of Thatcher’s Single European Act, of Maastricht, and of the Stability Pact to which we are pretty much adhering despite not being in the euro. The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership looms large.

If there is one group of people to be avoided at all costs, then it is the ones who go on about some EU map with England divided into regions. If anyone had paid any attention to them, then the toothless and Tyneside-dominated regional assembly would have been set up in the North East, purely and understandably in order to spite them.

City regions are what used to be called metropolitan counties, which Thatcher abolished because she did not like Ken Livingstone. No, that never did make any sense. But that was what she did. Similarly, many unitary authorities bear more than a passing resemblance to county boroughs. These things have to keep going around and coming around, in order to justify the salaries of the people who write the research papers.

But since city regions are now to be revived under that name, whatever powers are proposed for them must also extend to a body covering each of those 40 English ceremonial counties which are neither Greater London, nor the City of London, nor any of the former metropolitan counties.

In many cases, the obvious body already exists. Where it no longer does, then that raises the question of why it no longer does. And where, as here in County Durham, the legacy of the last Government is such as would leave that body unbalanced, with existing local government responsibilities for part but not quite all of its area, then that, too, would be called into question. Leading to the restoration of the former district councils.

This promise of significant devolution to rural communities might go some way to making up the support that Labour has been too lazy to build up during this Parliament by properly opposing cuts in those communities’ services, and by selecting strong local campaigning candidates, with or without prior party allegiance.

Whatever the conurbations are getting, as well they might, then so must the counties. The loyally Labour old coal and steel belts of County Durham, South Yorkshire, Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire are among the places that will need to be convinced that our, as often as not Conservative or Lib Dem, urban neighbours quite deserved all of this city regions carry on.

At the very least, we are not having the powers of our own local authorities transferred to them. In fact, since we are fairly populous, we may reasonably demand that whatever they got, then so should we. At least that money and those powers would always be under the control of members of Ed Miliband’s own party.

Will Devo Max really be opposed only by implacable Tory ultras? What about implacable Labour ultras? Or implacable Lib Dem ultras? Labour MPs for Scotland hold the Scottish Parliament in extremely low regard, and they did so even before it fell under the control of the SNP, as it did quite some time ago now.

Labour MPs from the North of England have spent an electoral generation voting powers to Scotland and to Europe, to Wales and to London, to Northern Ireland and to the judiciary, to everyone but themselves or their constituents. It is not as if Scotland has proved loyal to Labour in the way that the North very largely has.

All these years after devolution, Lib Dem MPs see that the Highlands and Islands are the only part of Scotland among the 11 parts of the United Kingdom that are poorer than Poland. Although Cornwall and Devon are both also on that list, as well as both being among those nine out of the 10 poorest parts of Northern Europe which are in this country.

Bringing us to the Barnett Formula, which has been elevated to the status of an article of the Constitution. Lord Barnett has long been on record that it was only ever supposed to last for one year. It is an outrage against social democracy and even against basic justice, being not remotely needs-based.

The canonisation of the Barnett Formula imperils the Union by raising serious questions among the Welsh about why they should bother with a State that treated them so shabbily. Heaven knows, it does no good to the poorest people in Scotland. Their condition is as abject under Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon as is that of their counterparts under David Cameron and Iain Duncan Smith.

Labour MPs from Wales and the North of England need to band together with Lib Dems from Wales and the West Country, and indeed from the North of Scotland, so that, perhaps even joined by Plaid Cymru and undoubtedly alongside all parties from Northern Ireland, they might propose a long-overdue replacement, based on need and organised through direct funding to localities without reference the Nationalist nomenklatura in Scotland.

The areas of Scotland that would benefit most from such a new approach are those which suffer most as a result of the old one. Outside the rural Lib Dem strongholds, those are mostly the areas that return devosceptical Labour MPs to Westminster. As much as anything else, this offers the possibility of taking Holyrood seats from the SNP, by correctly presenting it as the party that hordes money away from the communities that need it.

Devo Max will pass. In order to force these concessions in the course of that Bill’s parliamentary progress, there should be 200 votes against it at Second Reading, perhaps even 250, and possibly even 300. There ought to be. But will there be? If not, why not?

With any luck, it now adds, “David Lindsay is a writer and activist based in Lanchester, County Durham.”

6 comments:

  1. Putting the place on the map as ever. I assume this would have appeared in the Lanchester Review if no one had taken it up. This is an amazing piece, you are a brilliant man.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You are very kind. I admit that this one was pitched rather than by invitation. But I never had any doubt that someone would pick it up.

      Delete
    2. Sorry, but I struggled to understand a word of this. It reads like an undergraduate essay, full of theoretical self-importance and lacking in life experience. And as for the pomposity of saying 'I never had any doubt that someone would pick it up' - well, those words speak volumes.

      Delete
    3. It does rather, doesn't it?

      If you could not understand it, then it was clearly not aimed at you, dear.

      Delete
  2. Just because you are a gifted, polished writer that doesn't make you Labour. Labour Uncut should change its name if it is going to go publishing a man who has been refused membership of the party, an extremely rare measure.

    But they are your mates, like the Buchananite right wingers at the American Conservative that should also consider a name change if even you are now in the fold. There is an interesting lack of women in any of these drinking clubs with websites. It is not hard to imagine all of them together over some very fine whiskies with you at the head of the table.

    Your intervention like this and the considerable offline attention you know it is getting are as bizarre as the regular pronouncements by Gordon Brown. He is a backbench opposition MP who hardly attends Parliament, you are a retired Independent parish councillor soon to enter a second decade as a full time blogger.

    Long ago expelled from Labour, stood unsuccessfully against us for the old district council you want to bring back in this post, threatened to stand against us for Parliament, publicly endorsed an Independent (Tory) ally of your old Labour district council mates against the Labour candidate, voted Labour and Independent instead of Labour and Labour in the county election only hours before you applied to re-join.

    A failed Telegraph blogger, a failed author whose books sank like stones, somehow allowed to keep a Durham University staff card and email address despite having no remaining duties, not had a day job in years, effectively retired before you are 40, engaged in long running feuds with two of the biggest figures in media London, one of its rising stars, one of think tank land's big hitters and one of the most senior Labour staff members plus all his relatives.

    Yet they are all talking about this post and people who thought a page had been turned in political life in these parts are beside themselves. It should never have been published no matter how good it was.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Real Lanchester Lad21 September 2014 at 18:35

      Speak for yourself. Most people here never wanted David out of the party and wish Neil Fleming would fall under a bus so he could be let back in. This seat would then be his in 2020.

      We'd pay good money to read anything a tenth as good as this by Fleming who has never had an original thought in his life.

      The threat of Fleming in 2010 led the NEC to impose a women only short list. That's right, to stop one of their own employees from becoming an MP. Much of the NEC like much of the political blogosphere now seems to be made up of David's mates.

      The sour grapes comments on Labour Uncut are hilarious. Especially the one assuming anyone on there above or below the line cares about Damian Thompson and Dan Hodges of all people.

      Delete