John Prescott is set to announce the idea of "local mini governments" called assemblys (similar to the welsh assembly) which gives more control to the region on transport, tourism, economic development, planning and housing.

He plans for Yorkshire and Humberside to be the first one if its voted in by the house of commons

The first step is to hold a referendum to ask the people whether they want a local assembly. JP will announce today which are the first 3 regions to hold a referendum and Yorkshire & Humberside is one of the contenders.

IMO a regional assembly would be good for Yorkshire as long as it wasn't just another layer of bureaucracy. If it actually took away powers from Westminster and allowed local people a say in where their taxes were spent and how they were raised then it might work.

Surely the point about Regional Assemblies is that they should NOT be just another bit of local govenment?

Regional Assemblies, like the Scottish Parliament, Welsh Assembly and the German regions, should be about breaking up the power of central government into more manageable bits.

The more local the government, the easier it is for it to listen and be accountable. Of course it doesn't make either inevitable, but it is harder to justify not listening or not being accountable.

considering they will have the rights to transport id love to see the buses "nationalised" or "regionalised" like they were before

Would this really make a difference? Sheffield City Council cannot sort out its own problems. Do we want to give them the powers to mess up the rest of Yorkshire too?

If we had a regional government committed to making the area better than I say Yes, but what is the chance of that happening...

I'm also worried about more taxes that will be imposed

they cant alter taxes

Do we really want to be run by Leeds. Please vote no! OK they might base it in Wakefield or somewhere 'neutral', but at the end of the day there will be no more money, it will just be collected locally and distributed on a Yorkshire wide basis, and I can see much of it coming our way.......

The important thing to remember is that there will be NO extra money for the proposed new assembly.

So, the costs of running the assembly will come out of the current regional budget, leaving us all worse off before they've even made a single decision.

Do we really need another expensive and useless layer of bureaucracy?

It's a bit strange that the government wants to foist unwanted referendums for regional government on us, but is unwilling to hold a referendum on the much more important issue of the new European Constitiution.

Calendar had a poll on this on Monday, 76% voted NO.

Blueprint for Yorkshire assembly is 'toothless'

'Through his [John Prescott] vision, a Yorkshire assembly would have greater control over planning, tourism, transport and job creation – but not schools and only arm's length control over health'

http://www.sheffieldtoday.net/ViewArticle.aspx?SectionID=58&ArticleID=534131

From the Sheffield Star website (OK, hardly neutral these days but there you go)

Will you vote for an elected regional assembly?

http://www.thecep.org.uk/flyers/folder_images/prezza_lies.jpg

To be perfectly honest, it would seem to be a waste of time. In our area, if you put up a donkey with a jacket on that said 'Labour', it would win.

Having said that, they often do and it does!!

I don't see that a Regional Assembly would make any difference.

I agree entirely. I don't think that people aren't stupid enough to fall for Prezza ruse.

www.yorkshiresaysno.com

www.thecep.org.uk


55% say No to Prescott's parliament for region



John Prescott faces a massive uphill battle to prevent his dream of a Yorkshire mini-parliament ending in humiliating defeat, it emerges today.



An opinion survey has raised the spectre of the Deputy Prime Minister losing the referendum on a regional assembly by not much short of a landslide.
But the survey, carried out by on-line pollsters YouGov and published today, also suggested that Mr Prescott will lose in all three of this autumn's referendums with the North-West and even the North-East voting against.
After putting both pro- and anti-devolution arguments, the survey reported a 13 per cent majority in the North-East against a regional assembly and a 25 per cent "no" margin in the North-West.
But it was in Hull East MP Mr Prescott's home region of Yorkshire and the Humber that opposition was greatest – with only 19 per cent in favour and 55 against – a majority of 36 per cent.
The Deputy Prime Minister, a passionate believer in the power of devolution to narrow the North/South gap, arrives in Leeds tomorrow to launch the Yorkshire Labour Party's assembly campaign.
And last night pro-assembly campaigners both played down the significance of the new survey and highlighted the fact that it was commissioned by the Local Government Association's group of Conservative councillors.
With Liberal Democrats largely supportive of Labour's devolution drive, Tories are the only main party to oppose it.
And Jane Thomas, director of the pro-assembly Campaign for Yorkshire, said: "We recognise this is a Conservative-commissioned poll."
Ms Thomas's organisation, due to launch its formal campaign at the beginning of next month, conceded that the results – especially in the traditional devolution stronghold of the North-East – were interesting.
But in a reference to the region-wide referendums this autumn, she insisted: "The only poll that counts is the one that's going to take place in October."
Tory regions spokesman David Curry, MP for Skipton and Ripon, seized on the results as proof that people, especially in Yorkshire, did not want "another layer of politicians".
He said: "Yorkshire does not want a regional assembly."
However, the Tory spokesman warned that the pro-campaign – backed by Mr Prescott and Government policy publicity – would be able to outspend the anti-assembly movement including the Yorkshire Says No group.
"The dice are loaded against us – Prescott is desperate to get a 'yes' vote," Mr Curry told the Yorkshire Post.
In Leeds next week Mr Prescott will address an audience of business leaders and trade union representatives over his proposals for an elected regional assembly of up to 35 members.
Mr Prescott has long argued that creating an assembly, albeit of limited powers now but able to oversee the region's economy, transport and housing needs, will make a vital difference to Yorkshire's prosperity and future.
But yesterday's YouGov poll found opposition to his dream strongest in this region.
Interviewing 478 people across the region, the pollsters first briefly outlined Mr Prescott's plans and asked respondents "should there be an elected assembly for your region?"
In Yorkshire and the Humber 35 per cent said "yes", 39 per cent "no" and 26 were undecided.
But after a series of arguments both pro and anti-devolution were put, the rejection increased dramatically to: 19 per cent in favour, 55 against and 26 still undecided.
In both the North-East and the North-West there was a "yes" majority before supporting and opposing arguments were made.
But after those details were provided, the North-East reported 34 in favour, 47 against and the North-West 27 in favour, 52 against.
Yesterday Mr Prescott's officials privately scoffed at the 478 sample taken by the pollsters in Yorkshire.
But last year's Government "soundings exercise" on the issue of having a referendum elicited fewer than 1,000 individual responses over several months. YouGov insisted its sample was of a perfectly respectable size.
n YouGov interviewed 3,220 people across the eight English regions (not including London) as a whole between last Thursday and Monday.

John Prescott is an idiot, so I vote no.

A NO vote here.

We have far too many politicians and too little representation already.

Yes! More overpaid self important idiots arguing about how best to waste vast sums of taxpayers money. That's a vote winner for me!





That was sarcasm by the way.

The collective thoughts and comments of communities can be better understood and responded to when they represent smaller areas and so give a broader picture of public opinion and demand to elected administrative authorities
Irrespective of the faults of present political leaders and the failings of present political ideology. I strongly believe that the time is right to introduce Regional Assemblies on a trial basis for the consideration of the populace.
Present day political attitudes lack integrity and so may encourage weakness and corruption.
I think that Regional Assemblies may give the individual a little more control.

We had a sort of devolution with South Yorkshire County Council. That did not work because noone knew what it was responsible for. It proved to be an unnecessary layer of local government. If we were to be allowed to decide really important stuff, then it might be worth voting "Yes", but what will it do? Does anyone know? I am sceptical until convinced otherwise. One thing though, I am fed up of scottish MPs deciding on legislation which only affects England, like tuition fees, but then i suppose that is a different thread.

Pfft... Prescott and Tony Blair are both facing humiliating defeats in the commons in the near future, and these 2 blokes are meant to be running our country?!

Meh, no wonder the country's in such a state....

Originally posted by Funky Dave
More overpaid self important idiots arguing about how best to waste vast sums of taxpayers money.

And Sheffield's money will be desided by the IDIOTS in L**DS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:mad:

Hmm, the "idiots" in Leeds seem to have made a better job of regenerating the city and providing high quality jobs than Sheffied. Maybe it is a good idea?

Originally posted by Tony
Hmm, the "idiots" in Leeds seem to have made a better job of regenerating the city and providing high quality jobs than Sheffied. Maybe it is a good idea?


You have a point there Tony:thumbsup:

But would L**DS give any money to Sheffield:confused:
I dont think so:mad:

Well, Leeds would just be an adminstrative centre with rep's from the whole region, and I assume equal voting powers. It wouldn't just be a case of handing over Sheffield to Leeds City Council.

I still don't agree with it though. We need less politicians, not more. I would support an elected Mayor. That would give the political parties a shock!

I haven't made up my mind on this issue and I have until the referendum sometime in the autumn before I need to. However, there is a balanced website here:

Yorks & Humbs Regional Assembly info (http://www.electionsuk.org/referendum/index.htm)

which gives both sides of the argument.

As to Leeds or Sheffield the current shadow assembly is currently in Wakefield. On the question of another layer of government that already exists in the current Regional Development Agencies which are populated by nominated appointees rather than elected representatives. The RSAs are planned to replace these.

I particularly like argument 10 on the vote no page:

You can have too much democracy.

As I say, I've yet to be convinced either way but will certainly be doing my best to be up to speed on the pros and cons before the referenduum comes.

Originally posted by Tony
I would support an elected Mayor. That would give the political parties a shock!

Looking at what happened in Hartlepool it certainly would. I've been in on a debate about this issue and the conclusion was that the parties would try and field a well known personality in an attempt to win the popular vote. We came up with Bobby Knutt as the possible tory candidate and that pretty much brought the debate to a close.:D

We have trouble running one parliament - I very much doubt we'd do any better with more.

The campaign for a Yorkshire assembly is hotting up. What's your view?

Sounds like a stupid idea if you ask me.

Originally posted by Sidla
Sounds like a stupid idea if you ask me.

Since you're not from Yorkshire, they won't be asking you ;)

I think it's a good idea. Infact lets go all the way and declare independence. Dicky Bird for Prime Minister :cool:

More red tape? No thanks.

Similar threads merged and additional options put in poll.

Do you think it is a good idea for Yorkshire people to have control over their own affairs?

If it did happen, where do you think the Parliament would be based?

lol, no comment, so far

how many layers of government must we suffer. We already have city, parish and town councils, central government, all the areas that have been delegated to local management ie LEA's etc...

Doesn't make any sense to me. If it's accountability that people are worried about, that's what our Councillors, MPs and MEPs are for. It will just be another talking shop, costing millions to run without any real benefit.

Can anyone tell me if the Welsh have noticed their Parliament making any difference?

No we shouldn't have more layers of government adding more costs to the tax payer.

If there is a Yorkshire Parliament odds on it would be in Leeds.

As things stand, NO. A better reform would be to make sure Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish MPs have no say in decisions about what goes on in England as opposed to Britain as a whole. As for devolution in yorkshire, the government is only looking to create a body in order to blame it for the mess we are in now.

I think devloution of power to the regions (england, scotland, wales, n.ireland) is a good thing, but I think splitting it into counties is overcomplicating the system. There are too many levels of local, regional and national gov. already not to mention all the quangos and corporations. I also think there is enough of a divide between the north and south, I think Yorkshire splitting from Westminister would only increase the closed mindedness from each region to the other.

Judging by the voting in the Eurovision Song Ccontest, the European Parliament and its constitution would be biased as well.

Of course South Yorkshire should have regional parliament. In effect it would be a new version of the old South Yorkshire Metropolitan County Council but with more powers.

The Maastricht treaty provided us with the concept of subsiduarity. Which basically means that power should be given to the lowest level (nearest to the electorate) possible. All that is required is a local assembly to take on this responsibility. This does not mean extra cost as the functionality (civil service)already exists. It just that it is responsable to a different body.

The only problem is to get the fat, lazy so-and-so's who can't be bothered to walk to a polling station to go out and make their opinion known at the ballot box.

If you don't vote, you've no right to complain.

of course Walkley should have it's own parliament, and in fact, the street I live on, we want our own parliament too.

Originally posted by superCol
If you don't vote, you've no right to complain.

If I don't believe any of the groups of overpaid monkeys (MPs) out there will do any good for the future of the country then why should I vote for someone I have no belief in?

I can still complain about them if I like. :)

As for a Yorkshire parliament, do we really need to give them an excuse to beef up their salaries even more? Naaaaaaah. :rolleyes:

Originally posted by Pauly
If I don't believe any of the groups of overpaid monkeys (MPs) out there will do any good for the future of the country then why should I vote for someone I have no belief in?

I can still complain about them if I like. :)

As for a Yorkshire parliament, do we really need to give them an excuse to beef up their salaries even more? Naaaaaaah. :rolleyes:

My thoughts exactly.

But then I hate all Politicians equally anyway, especially Labour ones.

Surely we already have too many levels of politicians? Most people don't need, want or even understand such a system.

Another level? Well who remembers the bad old days of South Yorkshire County Council? We even had an agreement that we wouldn't be part of a nuclear war (I don't think) :loopy:

Either beef up the Local Authorities (City / County Councils) or get rid of them and amalgate them to create Regional Assemblies. At the end of the day, having more supposed democracy only creates more cost.

Ask youself a really serious question...

What would be improved by having another level of government...

Schools?
Hospitals?
Regeneration?
Roads?
Planning?
Social Services?
Council house repairs?

Can anyone name a single service that would improve... apart from expenditure on politicians?

Regional assemblies appeal to local civic pride and reinforce political control, but do bugger all for local day-to-day issues.

Now here's a thought: if Yorkshire gets its own parliament will it become traditional to wear a flat cap when making a point of order?

Have seen a few posters and a TV advert for a new elected regional assembly for Yorkshire and the Humber.

The government's site is here (http://odpm-northyorks.rroom.net/)

and there's a "yes" site here (http://www.yes4yorkshire.org.uk/)

whilst "no" is here (http://www.yorkshiresaysno.com/home.asp)

Just wondering what people here think about the whole idea....

More Politicians to lie to us and mess us about?! No ta... It's bad enough we've got the ones in London :loopy:

Although having said that, it could get things done for Yorkshire and the Humber a lot quicker than waiting for the powers that be to do anything.

So really I'm in 2 minds about it to be honest, part of me says no way, and another part says maybe it'll work.

Central Government could do much more within the existing administrative system to make regions more prosperous than they currently do. Bringing in a further tier of government benefits the civil service, quangos and people who can't get a job outside of the public sector.

What powers would a local assemble truly have? And looking at the area - Leeds and Sheffield, down to Hull, cities of hundreds of thousands of people down to villages with a few hundred - will it REALLY be more representative of the region than the central government?

I'd strongly support any steps to improve the services and prosperity of this region - for example, move government departments away fronm London, improve rail services to and through the region, be more pro-active in supporting fishing industries and other threatened industries.

These can only be realistically achieved by central government working with the local people, NOT via a bunch of elected representatives who are probably only wanting a seat in the local assembly to help them get their snouts in the trough at Westminster or Brussels.

Joe

Where will this regional centre be ? Leeds - great, we'll get shafted again whilst Leeds and Harrogate get the spoils.

No thank you. WE could throw out of europe too....whilst we are at it and use the money we pay into it on providing good services for our people (be they black, white, muslim, asylum seeker, political refugee or whatever!)

I like the idea of regional assemblies because I think that there are some issues which central government (which levies taxes on a national basis and has policies which apply to all parts of the country) is not best suited to dealing with but local councils for individual cities and towns are not best suited to dealing with either because they are too small and parochial. For example, if most Londoners want spending on the public transport system in London to be increased since Londoners use it most that decision should be taken by London's regional assembly and the increased spending should mainly be funded through regional taxation. If most people in Yorkshire and the Humber wanted increased spending on public transport (such as electrification of the Sheffield-Leeds and Leeds-York railway lines) or policing or drug treatment programmes a regional assembly should be the means of deciding and funding those things. However, I have two serious reservations about the possibility of a regional assembly for Yorkshire and the Humber.

Firstly, whilst I like the idea in theory when it comes to the reality I'm not sure that there any local and regional politicians that I would vote for. The first political events I vaguely recall are the winter of discontent and the election of Margaret Thatcher in 1979 (I was about half way through primary school) and I became increasingly aware of politics through the early 1980's and when I look back on the political history of the last 25 years it strikes me that Yorkshire MPs hardly played a part in it, despite the huge impact that the recession of the early 1980's and the miners' strike had on the area. Most of the leaders of the left tended to come from Wales or Scotland or other parts of northern England (the obvious exception being Arthur Scargill) whilst the left in Yorkshire was silent or ineffective (the obvious example being Arthur Scargill) and Yorkshire's Conservative MPs have tended to be rent-a-quotes who tried to jump on whatever passing bandwagon they thought would get them re-elected. Local councillors have inspired even less confidence and given the proven scandals of recent years and other questionable decisions you could be forgiven for thinking that Yorkshire is Britain's biggest rotten borough.

Secondly, the idea of a regional assembly which will largely be chosen by the electorates of West Yorkshire, North Yorkshire and Humberside horrifies me. I am particularly horrified at the thought of the county's representatives being partly chosen by the electorate of most of West Yorkshire (the Wakefield district being one of two parts of the county I would exempt) and especially the many thousands of bloodthirsty back-stabbers who voted Conservative in the 1980's and early 1990's before converting en masse to New Labour in 1997 and those bloodcurdingly stupid front-stabbers who have voted BNP in recent years. That is why I prefer the idea of bringing back South Yorkshire County Council to the idea of a regional assembly for Yorkshire and the Humber.

I wonder where the money would come from?

Would the Treasury devolve some of it's expenditure down to the regions?

Would a region be able to sensibly invest in things like mainline rail transport systems which would have a knock on effect in other regions?

If funding for large capital projects were to be partially from central funds and partially from local sources, are we willing to pick the bill up?

Joe

I think that all a Yorkshire Regional Assembly will give us is a chance for the elected representatives to get free lunches, fancy dinners and expensive banquets. They will have to erect a new building which is fancy enough for them to work in and it will all be jobs for the boys time.

Another layer or two of beaurocracy. You might have guessed. I am against an Assembly.:mad:

I'm deeply suspicious of anything 2-Jags has a hand in, and he seems to be sponsoring this regional government thing.

Yet another layer of Quangos and civil servants [perhaps to redeploy the 100,000 Gordon Brown is giving the sack?]

IMO it's just another tactic to divert attention from all the broken promises and seven years of mismanagement.

Sheffield Forum has had 3 polls so far on the subject with the following results:

June 2003
Yes 9 votes 47.37%
No 9 votes 47.37%
I Still Dont Understand 1 votes 5.26%

January 2004
Yes 5 votes 18.52%
No 18 votes 66.67%
Yes, but only if it's not in Leeds. 2 votes 7.41%
Don't know 2 votes 7.41%

May 2004
Yes 9 votes 29.03%
No 18 votes 58.06%
Unsure 4 votes 12.90%

It will be interesting to see the results of the new poll.

Mod: Various threads merged

Originally posted by hotphil
whilst "no" is here (http://www.yorkshiresaysno.com/home.asp)


The "yes" site seems to be broken. On the "no" site is a poll:

If we get an elected Assembly, should it be based in :
Leeds 50%
Wakefield 21%
York 29%


Two points:

1. Why are they even asking that question, if they're the "no" campaign?

2. Do they know there's more to Yorkshire and the Humber than North and West Yorkshire? :loopy: