Regional spin
From Dr Jeremy Stocker Sir; Martin Vander Weyer ('Regional forecast', 4 September) is right to draw attention to the stealthy advance of regional government. Here in the north-east John Prescott's campaign to persuade us that we do want it is in full flow. We all recently received a government leaflet, 'Your Say', which purports to set out the issues in advance of November's postal referendum.
Readers will not be surprised to learn that it is a heavily 'spun' document. For example, the Yes and No arguments are illustrated by people with their thumbs up or down, respectively. Those with thumbs up are an attractive smiling lot. Those with thumbs down merely scowl. The message is clear: vote yes, be happy; vote no, remain unhappy.
More seriously, we are tempted by the financial savings to be made in Durham and Northumberland if the present two-tier local government is replaced by new 'unitary' authorities. What is not given is the cost of a new regional assembly, which we may be sure will far outweigh any savings at the local level. Nor is it explained why we cannot realise these savings without a regional government on top, as local government will only be rationalised in the event of a Yes vote.
This is curious, as the leaflet assures us that a regional assembly will only exercise powers currently held in Whitehall and by various quangos. If that is so, why should local government reform be conditional upon it? One suspects that regionalism is as much about centralisation 'up' and devolution 'down' — hence the reason that less genuinely local representation will be required.
The political upshot is likely to be that Labour and the Liberals (the two are pretty much indistinguishable in this area) will end up running every bit of the north-east, instead of just most of it. Hence Prescott's enthusiasm for the project.
Jeremy Stocker
Durham
Previous page
