The self-appointed and otherwise nominated members of the Regional Assemblies are, in the main, a group of anti nation state subversives’. They do the bidding of a foreign power in their assistance with the EU’s agenda to turn our country in a vassal collection of obedient regions – divide and conquer is their strategy. Quislings! All of them. A word that Norwegians are not very proud of having given to the world: it derives from Vidkun Quisling (1887-1945), a Norwegian politician who collaborated with the Nazis during World War II. He established his name as a synonym for "traitor", someone who collaborates with the invaders of his country, especially by serving in a puppet government. Vidkun Quisling was rightly hung for treason in 1945

The following paper is reproduced by kind permission of the author, Tony Bennett.

This summary of the case against Regional Assemblies for England was originally prepared for East of England Regional Advice (EERA - see website www.eera.org.uk). It updates a paper that the author prepared in February 2002, shortly before the publication of the government’s White Paper on the subject. It tries to explain why we must all vigorously oppose Regional Assemblies.  Here are some key points about the long-standing plan of the European Union, and those behind the E.U., to use Regional Assemblies as a means of undermining still further the sense of nationhood in this United Kingdom:

1.   Undermining of Parliament  

As Parliament’s existing powers over, e.g. education, health, transport, planning etc. are handed to the regions; it continues to weaken the authority and power of Parliament, already gravely weakened by the massive transfers of powers to Brussels.

2.   Passing power to Brussels 

The proposed Regional Assemblies, now operating as ‘shadow’ regional assemblies, already have strong links to Brussels, with E.U. observers on them. If and when they become elected, E.U. Directives from Brussels will be enforced directly by these regional assemblies and their funds will be increasingly drawn from Brussels not Westminster.

3.   ‘A Europe of Strong Regions’  

There is voluminous literature published by various E.U. institutions emphasising that Europe is to be a ‘A Europe of Strong Regions’. It doesn’t take an Einstein or rocket scientist to work out that a ‘Europe of Strong Regions’ is likely therefore to be one of relatively weak nations.  The President of the Committee of the Regions recently described regions as “a factor of European integration”.

4.    Pre-Planning  

Evidence that break-up of the government of England into nine Regional Assemblies has been meticulously planned over at least two decades includes:
(1) The existence and activities of the E.U.’s ‘Committee of the Regions’. The plan is for each of the 111 already-mapped-out regions of the European Union each to send a total of four representatives to the Euro Committee of the Regions in Brussels. It is a classic case of undermining the role and influence of national Parliaments. The legal basis of the Committee of the Regions was established by the Treaty Establishing the European Community.  Its main provisions (Articles 263-5) are:
(a) each Region to send two delegates and two ‘alternates’ to the Committee
(b) England (population 45 million) is to have nine regions and 36 representatives; by comparison Luxembourg (population 350,000) has three ‘regions’ and 12 representatives! – so much for ‘leading in Europe’
(c) the Committee of the Regions will be ‘advisory’ only i.e. just like the European Parliament, it will be able to say whatever it likes, but ultimately the European Commission and the Council of Ministers decide
(d) members of the Committee of the Regions must make their decisions ‘in the general interest of the European Community’ and ‘may not be bound by any mandatory instructions’!  To sum it up, the Committee of the Regions means 444 extra representatives to pay for in Europe, plus their staff, travel and other expenses - as has been admirably summarised, ‘another costly waffle shop’

(2) The creation of the new regional boundaries well over a decade ago - and used in the 1999 Euro Parliament elections

(3) The map in the foyer of the European Commission office in London, titled: “Local Authorities in the United Kingdom”. Each Euro-region of England is shown in a separate bold colour!

(4) The creation during the past few years of the following, all with the same Euro-regional boundaries: (a) Government Offices for each region, (b) Regional Development Agencies, (c) Regional Assemblies (all unelected)

(5) Many institutions already use the proposed Euro-regional boundaries for the purpose of their internal organisation: Legal Services Commission (Legal Aid Board), Tourist Boards, Federation of Small Businesses. In addition, all government departments have for many years used the proposed Euro-region boundaries for their internal organisation

(6) As long ago as 1992, Companies House changed their forms. From then on, the forms asked companies to state the ‘County/Region’ of their registered office (previously County only)

(7) The European Union’s own web-site!  Visit the website of the ‘Committee of the Regions’ and you’ll find the ‘Chart of Progress towards Regionalisation: Major Steps towards a Europe of the Regions and Cities in an Integrated Continent”. I defy anyone to visit that site and say that regional government has ‘nothing to do with Europe’ www.cor.eu.int  

Their own chart boasts the following milestones on the way to regional government for Britain (and these are only selected extracts):

(a) 1951 Foundation of Council of European Municipalities and Regions (CEMR) set up to ‘…make regions sufficiently strong and able to deal with their central state and to fight for the political union of Europe’

(b) 1965 First European Commission Statement on Regional Policy

(c) 1969 Second European Commission Statement on Regional Policy

(d) 1975 European Regional Development Fund set up

(e) 1979 Regional ‘Structural Reform’ Funds set up

(f) 1984 First European Parliament Conference on the Regions

(g) 1985 Assembly of European Regions set up

(h) 1988 Consultative Council of Regional and Local Authorities set up

(i) 1991 Second European Parliament Conference on the Regions, and

(j) 1991 Charter of the Regions of the European Community issued

(k) 1994 Inaugural Session of the Committee of the Regions

(l) 1996 Third European Parliament Conference on the Regions

(m) 1997 European Charter of Regional Self-Government and

(n) 1997 Amsterdam Summit of the Regions and Cities of Europe

(o) 1998 Inaugural Session of the Second Mandate of the Committee of the Regions

(8) Lambrini Yalamboukidou of the E.U. Committee of the Regions said in March 2001:
“For the founding fathers of the E.E.C., things were already quite clear: even more than economic ambitions, the Community needed to have political ambitions. The Committee has applied itself to…the establishment of new forms of governance”
If anyone doubts the extensive European involvement already in the Euro Regions, take these Minutes from an ‘East of England Region’ document as far back as 1999: “The East of England must have an effective voice in Europe…our ‘Europe Working Group’ has considered issues relating to the legislative framework, business developments, funding and resource opportunities and European Union regional policy development…we have worked with the European Commission, the European Parliament and the Region’s Brussels office…regions like the East of England in Europe often find more in common with a region on the edge of a capital city like Paris, Brussels, Stockholm or The Randstadt in the Netherlands”. They spoke of their progress as ‘a leading region in Europe’ (i.e. not the United Kingdom).

5.   The Abolition of the Counties 

Integral to the Regional Assembly plan is the abolition of the Counties, and their replacement by unitary authorities. A good example is the South West Region, where the shadow Regional Assembly has already proposed in writing the carve-up of the region into unitary authority boundaries. No County boundary survives!  The proposed boundaries of the unitary authorities cut right across existing county boundaries. It must be clearly understood that those who support Regional Assemblies support the destruction of English counties (whether or not they are aware that they do so).  Local Government Minister in the Lords, Lord Falconer, conceded to Parliament in November 2001 that: “If one has a Regional Assembly and two other tiers, that looks to be too many. As to which is the right one to remove, it is not for me to say at this stage” (Hansard).  But other government Ministers have dropped heavy hints that the Counties will go, and the Conservative Shadow Minister for Local Giovernment, Malcolm Moss, said: “The cat is out of the bag. Labour’s plans for Regional Assemblies will mean the abolition of England’s historic Shire Counties. Rather than devolving responsibilities to local communities, Labour are going to transfer power to a new tier of regional politicians”.

6.   Regional Archives

If one had any doubt about the plan to abolish the Counties, let’s examine the activities of the ‘Regional Archive Committees’. Already they have been planning, for well over 10 years, the dissolution of County Record Offices and other County archives - with a view to creating Regional Archives.  Years have been spent re-cataloguing archives on a regional basis. A report from Mr Steve Reed (Glastonbury, Somerset) states that there already exists: (a) a South West Region Museums Council,  (b) a South West Regional Archive Council, and (c) a South West Regional Library System. It is believed that similar Councils and systems exist in other regions but we have not had time to research this. It is also known that a Non-Governmental Organisation, the Museum Association, has been running a series of ‘regional roadshows’ and setting up regional organisations for a number of years.  At its 2000 Annual Conference, its Director, Mark Tyler, said: “Regional Museums in England are the most significant initiative of the last 20 years”. One seminar at this Conference was entitled: “Regional Strategies”.

7.   Regional Flags 

In the North East, the Regional Assembly has already had a competition to design a flag for the proposed North East Region. Let it be noted that many buildings in Scotland now fly the Scottish Saltire alongside the European Union flag with the Union Flag nowhere to be seen.  The shape of things to come?

8.   Our history  

Just as France has a tradition of ‘Departements’ and Germany a history of ‘Laender’ (Regions), English history has a tradition, since the establishment of shires by the Kings of Wessex, of ‘Shire Counties’. Regional government and the abolition of Counties will destroy this link with our history. In short, Shire Counties are part of our national identity. The Yorkshire/ Humber Euro-region does, it is true, approximate to the former boundaries of Yorkshire. But no other County will survive the creation of Regional Assemblies.

9.   ‘Divide and Conquer’ 

A technique of powerful empires from time immemorial has been to break up powerful states into subservient regions or ‘vassal’ states. For example, the eurosceptic Campaign for an Independent Britain used the metaphor ‘Divide and Conquer’ for its own leaflet on why Regional Assemblies should be opposed.

10.   The Agenda against the Nation-State 
Let’s look at the statements of some of those most closely associated with promoting regional government in Britain. Take Labour MP Roy Hattersly: “The old nation-state is, in the modern world, too small to take some decisions, and too big to take others. Power has to be passed up to Europe and out to the devolved Parliaments and Assemblies. In a hundred years’ time, politicians will marvel that anyone ever thought otherwise”.  Take Michael Davey, current Chair of the North East Regional Assembly: “We are talking about bringing national government down to a regional level”.  A leading supporter of Regional Assemblies is Charter 88. On their website, they quote with approval the 1994 statements of Neal Acherson, a member of the pro-E.U. Federal Trust Round Table:
-  “the British doctrine of sovereignty is wrong, obsolete and pernicious…”
-  “the unreformed British state...is incompatible with European norms”
-  “increasing unity at the European surface and increasing diversity at regional level are in fact parts of a single development, the weakening of the nation-state...that’s why Maastricht designed fresh steps to supranational unity...and included the Committee of the Regions to ensure national powers were devolved to the regions”.

 11.  Regional Identity?     The Campaign for the English Regions, a pro-Regional Assembly body funded by obscure charities and other funds believed to come from the E.U., speaks of each region having ‘a distinct identity and culture’. Are they right?  Many would argue that England has a distinct identity and culture. Take our region, the so-called ‘East of England’. Do the people of Watford share a ‘distinct identity and culture’ with the people of the Norfolk Broads or the ‘Fenmen’ of east Cambridgeshire? (both in the proposed Region). No wonder when MORI Opinion Polls did a survey of public opinion about regional identity in 2000, a mere 11% of those questioned said they felt any affinity at all with an entity called the ‘East of England Region’. Try telling the people of Cornwall, for example, that they share a ‘distinct identity and culture’ with people in Bristol!. Yet they’re both in the same (South-West) Euro-region. Do the rural dwellers of north Oxfordshire share a ‘distinct identity and culture’ with the people of the tourist resorts of Kent and Sussex? (all in the South-East Euro-region). A recent meeting of the South-East Regional Assembly was held in London.  An observer in that meeting astutely commented:
“The South-East Region is a totally artificial construct, has no identity, no obvious centre or focus either geographically or economically within it…so the Committee met outside the region, in London”. In the North East and Yorkshire, for example, people may well have a stronger sense of regional identity than in, say, the Home Counties. But elsewhere, the Regional Assembly fans are going to have their work cut out to manufacture a ‘regional identity’ which simply doesn’t exist.

12.  Remote Government   Under Regional Assemblies, many local authority functions now carried out County level will go to these new bodies. Inevitably, that makes local accountability, participation in the local government process and democracy more remote and difficult.

13.   A Recipe for Squabbling    In general, local decision-making is good, though that should mean at the County and District levels. But important issues for the national well-being should be decided nationally. Two Scottish Parliament decisions, for example, have led to controversy: 1) abolishing student tuition fees, and (2) proposing the abolition of home care charges. These decisions make regional government sound like paradise - Scotland appears to benefit from having its own Parliament (we must noted here that Scotland has years had a disproportionately generous  central government grant under the so-called ‘Barnett formula’- to meet its higher welfare needs). The result of Scotland abolishing tuition fees and home care charges will be that other parts of the country will want the same. In the longer-term, there is the prospect of national services like the health and education services having vastly different policies and standards from one region to another.

We can be sure that if Regional Assemblies develop and start making radical policy decisions, controversy and jealousy between one region and another will inevitably develop. To a certain extent, there is already local decision-making.  Take ’bus passes for example. Some areas have poor schemes; others have generous ones. But policy decisions for major national services should be consistent across the nation, otherwise it will become a ‘disunited kingdom’. And as funds become ever more channelled via Brussels, English regions will be fighting against each other in Brussels over their rightful share of the ‘European cake’. Westminster will eventually have no funds of its own and no policy role at all.  That is the deliberate and sinister aim of those promoting and supporting Regional Assemblies.

14.  England, uninvited to the Brussels ‘Constitutional Convention’
A major E.U.-wide conference, lasting over two years, began this spring in Brussels. It is being held to discuss the constitutional future of the E.U. - in particular, to develop a written constitution for the coming Euro-state. Representatives from many ‘E.U. regions’, like Scotland and Northern Ireland, will be invited because they have law-making powers. Wales may get an invitation as their Assembly has limited law-making  powers. But England isn’t invited, nor will any part of England be invited to meetings of this ‘Constitutional Convention’ - not unless and until we get regional government here with law-making powers in each region. Those regions which get law-making powers will then be able to take seats at meeting of the Constitution Convention. Could the E.U. agenda of killing off the unity and identity of England by Regional Assemblies be any plainer?

15.  The Church of England’s role in promoting Regional Government
The fact that senior Church of England Bishops have taken a leading and proactive role in trying to build public support for Regional Assemblies might suggest that regional government must be a ‘good thing’. Let those who are tempted to do so look at history and they will see that very often the worst abuses of mankind are committed when religious leaders become actively involved in advancing the government’s agenda. The burning of 284 Protestants for the offence of ‘heresy’ in Queen Mary’s reign (1553-8) is a classic example. The Roman Catholic leaders of the day co-operated with the state in the arrest and execution of those who did not consent to the Church’s teachings.  An insight into how these Bishops are thinking comes in a letter from the Bishop of Worcester to a campaigner against Regional Assemblies: “Your ‘eurosceptic’ position is extreme, if I may say so. It rests on a belief that it is possible to recover patterns of national sovereignty which were appropriate to previous ages and which in a globalised world are simply unavailable. We live at a time when the only way for nations to flourish culturally, as well as economically, is to pool sovereignty with others in a pattern of international agreements that make for the best balance between central, regional and  local governments…”   The Bishop of Manchester, commenting on Regional Assemblies for the North West and North East wrote: “The Bishops of Durham and Liverpool have involved themselves in the appropriate Regional Constitutional Conventions and deserve our prayerful support for the work that they are doing”.

 ........................................................................
I URGE YOU TO COPY THIS PAPER AND DISTRIBUTE IT TO YOUR FRIENDS AND FAMILY.