Options
North England Government for the North England People. Freedom for the North of Eng
Antony_Edge
Posts: 95 Forum Member
✭
Life for Northern people will never improve when the country is run by a London Government who are interested in the south east England.
0
Comments
If northerners think they can do without the south's tax revenues fine.
Enjoy your massive tax rises and the service cuts that would follow. Cos in reality that is what would flow from your independence..
then perhaps any talk of England 'breaking up' would be consigned to the comedy bin.
The further away from London you go -- in any direction -- the more neglected the area.
Scotland and Wales benefit from having a degree of autonomy.
If the North, and other areas would be worse off without London, then surely London should be in favour of getting rid of the regions?
Have you been to Tottenham or Peckham or Harlesden? London has some of the worst poverty and poorest housing in the UK. The streets are not all paved with gold!
Not if they had the opportunity to tackle the regional inequality that has become such an issue in the UK. It's not a problem we see in other countries on the same scale that is has become in the UK. It's a fairly recent issue and it ought to be tackled. A federal England might be a solution. At the same time it would help if people in the South realised there really is nothing special about them other than they live in an area that has an economic policy which is designed to maximise it's potential at the expense of other regions.
Who said anything about poverty?
Well neglect was mentioned and that is often correlated with poverty,
Yet again it's apparently all down to the government to sort out all the problems. And that of course is the problem with the north ie far too much government and not enough enterprise.
Maybe it's not the fault of us southerners who suffered under a Durham and Scottish PM for 13 years but possibly northerners who think the world owes them a living. Go independent then - as a Londoner we would be a lot better off financially.
It's down to government to do all it can to create the necessary conditions to encourage enterprise. Westminster governments tend to be good at representing the interests of big business but they are no good at supporting small to medium sized business.
This is so ignorant. There are countries with far more government than here in the UK, at all levels, and they have more successful regional economies. Look at the success of countries like Norway and Germany. Britain is a great place for big businesses that pay low wages and little taxes but it's not good at encouraging enterprise in order to attract the kind of business that would provide decent work, wages and revenue.
As a Londoner you are more reliant than anyone else in the UK on public spending and receive higher spending accordingly. I'm not a northerner and I'm not English. I'm from Scotland and we're one of the most economically prosperous parts of the UK alongside London and the South East, however that doesn't mean I'm so ignorant and arrogant that I can't see the obvious; that the North of England, once an economically prosperous part of the UK, has suffered as a consequence of an economic policy that has favoured one part of the UK over the rest. Are you really so consumed with arrogance you truly believe that Southerners are somehow superior than the rest of your countrymen in the North of England? I'm an outsider on this issue but the reality is that the UK has become, over the past few decades, regionally highly economically unequal. This was not always the case and it didn't happen by accident, it's the result of poor a failing economic model.
The problem the North faces is precisely excess government -- spending and spending and spending on projects that benefit London to the exclusion of everywhere else.
Surrey is as badly affected as Northumberland -- but the former has merely turned into a commuter-belt wasteland.
Federal governance would indeed negatively impact remote parts of England in the short term, but within a generation those parts with the desire to succeed would be given the opportunity to prosper in their own right. As it stands, the centralised system is creating the dependence culture we see around us.
Why would northern England want independence?
It doesn't have any oil.
The problem is that too many people from the North want to live in the South and very few people from the South want to live in the North.
How would you change that?
i say independance!
We have water which is being stolen from us by the effin southerners.
About time the North gets a vote as to what happens to our water?
This so called 'freedom' is as much a myth.
South Sudan got theirs and now they are wanting freedoms.
I can't see any southern person on here who doesn't like the idea, just a question you ignored.
Disintegration is a chain thing. Might even happen to Scotland post independence.
Repeating myself, we really do need a new governance capital. It would even help calm 'overheated London's' housing situation.
Its irrelevant where politicians live, because the people who own the politicians mostly live in London, as the City of London controls most politicians in the UK. They will not risk those cushy directorships and board jobs so meekly bend over for the financial sector which is based in the South.
I was in favour of one parliament for the whole of England but I realise now its too big for devolved government purposes so maybe we should start thinking of regional devolution.
The question is what sort of regional devolution do we want in England? As this thread is about the north of England I'll ask people up there what would you prefer? One devolved government for the whole north of England or devolution for different regions within the north? If its the latter, what regions would you have? Would you have devolution along the official government region lines? This would mean a devolved government each for the north west (Lancashire, Merseyside, Greater Manchester, Cheshire and Cumbria), Yorkshire & Humberside(the name pretty much covers it)and the north east (Durham, Tyne & Wear and Northumberland.
If that doesn't appeal then where would you draw the boundaries?
There is another option. You could devolved power down to each individual county? I'd like to know what people throughout England think of that idea as it would definitely bring power closer to the people wherever you live as counties tend to cover quite small areas unless you live in Yorkshire or Lancashire though both counties could devolved power to each county and metropolitan county within each of those ceremonial counties if they preferred.
As a Londoner I would not object to the north going independent - we wouldn't have to subsidise you anymore!
As an example local government services in England are funded by business rates - redistributed from rich areas to poorer one. Just one London borough (out of 33) generates more business rates income for the government than Manchester, Birmingham, Newcastle, Sheffield and Liverpool city councils combined!
So basically all those lovely council services in the north - are actually funded by businesses in London.
London is an international city - a world city. Sorry but the north needs London a lot more than London needs the north.
Sorry if you don't like the hard cold facts - but enjoy your independence, service cuts and tax rises. And you can keep George Osbourne too!:D