Patriotic campaigner Bryan Smalley has produced two invaluable reports on the Regionalisation of Britain.  Both are published below.  The first is a diary account with concise factual information.  There is also an article by Bryan on Churchill's view of Europe

The Regionalisation of Britain - a diary account

Written by Bryan Smalley for The Campaign for an Independent Britain.

This paper sets out to do two things:
First - it demonstrates that Regionalisation of Britain is entirely an EU project.
Second - it demonstrates that the White paper 'Your Region Your Choice' is a falsehood when it says that it will bring democracy closer to the people.

The paper is necessarily short. It therefore doesn't tell the whole story but gives a diary account.

1965 - The EU published its first Memo on Regionalisation confirming that it is EU Policy.  It has been updated from time to time since then - See May 2001

1972 - Heath took Britain into the EU (EEC) declaring that there would be 'no loss of Sovereignty.  He passed the European Communities Act which made European law superior to British law. He was aware that this would be unpopular so he arranged that money which was returned to us from Brussels should come via the regions creating the impression that we were benefiting from our membership.

1973 - Regional Development Fund established. Heath instituted Local Government re-organisation with a view to moving local government towards regionalisation.

1975 - Prime Minister Harold Wilson organised a referendum on our membership. The government paper stated: 'There was a threat to employment in Britain from the movement in the Common Market towards an Economic and Monetary Union. This threat has been removed. (From: 'Your Vote Counts - Use it'. Issued by H.M. Government).

1986 - Single European Act was passed 'Regionalisation became the central policy of the EU'.

1992 - The Treaty on European Union (the Maastricht Treaty) established the Committee of the regions with its Headquarters in Brussels.

1992 - The European Commission published a map - 'The European Community - a Community with no internal frontiers'. The map showed Great Britain which included Scotland, Northern Ireland, Wales and nine other regions. There was no mention of England.

1995 - Following a review of the local government structure 46 Unitary authorities were established between 1995 and 1998. Evidence shown later in this paper proves that this was part of the regionalisation plan.

1997 - Labour Government took office. It quickly introduced devolution (i.e. Regionalisation) in Scotland, Northern Ireland, Wales & London leaving 8 remaining regions in England

1998 - the Labour Government launched 'the Democratic Renewable Debate' and in the same year the Regional Development Agencies Act  was passed allowing the establishment of Regional Development Agencies. RDAs co-ordinate Land use, Transport, Economic development, Agriculture, Energy & Waste.  All RDAs have Brussels offices. Each region will ultimately have two sections of government: an elected assembly and a development agency.

1999 - Regional Assemblies were established - Members are 'stakeholders' and councillors from local authorities. Representatives are appointed (i.e. not elected). The Government was aware that there would be some opposition to regionalisation and on the assumption that the Anglican Church would be seen as neutral and apolitical, it appointed Bishops as Chairmen of Constitutional Conventions. The purpose of these was to hold meetings to persuade local people that they had a 'regional identity'.

2001 -  Committee of the Regions published its latest paper on Regionalisation entitled 'Major Steps towards a Europe of the Regions and Cities in an Integrated Continent'.

2001-  Government issued a Planning Green Paper.  It removes County Councils from the planning process.

15th November 2001, the DTLR Minister Lord Falconer stated in the House of Lords that 'three tiers of Government are too many' and the government  is 'looking at county and district councils'

May 2002 the Government introduced its White Paper: 'Your Region, Your Choice - Revitalising the English Regions'. It claims to: 'Bring Democracy closer to the people' and that the cost of running a region will be approximately £25 million. This is clearly untrue. Each Region will have  25 elected representatives looking after the region. This is far less than the County and District/ Borough Councillors at present and will make representatives unknown to most of the electorate.

3rd Dec 2003. In answering a questions in House of Commons Nick  Raynsford MP said: 'Where an elected regional assembly is established, existing two tier local government will be restructured as unitary authorities. It is now quite clear that County and District/Borough Councils will be replaced with Unitary Authorities and Regions

Also in 2003  the District Auditor upheld complaints that the North East Assembly was misusing funds by paying for the publication of propaganda promoting an elected assembly. This breached the Local Government Act. The Act gives councillors clear instructions regarding their behaviour as councillors. As a result, at the suggestion of John Prescott, some Regions have set themselves up as Limited Companies to protect their members against legal claims for misuse of public funds. They now claim that they are 'directors' rather than 'councillors'

Costs. The White Paper estimated that each assembly would require about £25 million a year to run. As a number of Regions have already been established it is possible to compare actual costs with estimates.

Scotland. Although there was a perfectly adequate parliament building in Scotland, the new Parliament decided to build a new one at an estimated cost of £40 million. The cost has already escalated to £400 million. A public enquiry is being held after allegations of fraud in the placing of the contract. The cost of this enquiry is estimated at £1.5 million. Scotland used to be run by 5 ministers; there are now 20. Before devolution there were 3,336 officials working for the old Scottish Office; there are now 4,272,  costing an extra £20 million.

Wales. The total number of civil servants has risen from 2,250 to almost 3,400. The Welsh Assembly decided to build a three-storey modernistic glass debating chamber on the edge of Cardiff Bay for £12 million. In 2001, when the costs had reached £27 million the architect, Lord Rogers was sacked. The Assembly then advertised for a fixed-price builder. Taylor Woodrow Construction won the work and engaged Lord Rogers as a sub-contractor. The Assembly then announced that the cost of the work was £41 million, to which has to be added IT equipment, furnishings, professional fees and VAT. During the debate on whether Wales should have an Assembly, those in favour said its running costs would be covered through the money saved from abolishing quangos. In the event, the quangos were merged into the Assembly administration.

Copyright on this paper is waived. It may be copied and Distributed.
 

                   .................................................................

The Regionalisation of Britain by Bryan Smalley

Very few people realise that Britain is being deliberately broken up into regions. The situation is complex because it does not stem entirely from the aims and ambitions of the EU, but the support for regionalisation is playing into the hands of the EU and helping it to acquire yet more control over our lives. It has been known for several decades that the Labour Party has intended to introduce regional government into this country, but it became clear that the EU was also bent on dissembling national governments by dividing them into regions when in 1965 it issued its 'First Commission Communication on Regional Policy'. This was taken up by the Conservative government in 1969 when it established the Redcliffe-Maude Royal Commission which set the process in train.

Over the past few years local authorities have become more and more reliant on central government grants. The distribution of these grants has become a matter of dispute by local authorities. In 1978, the Barnett formula was devised which allocates central government grants. This caused arguments between urban and rural areas each claiming that they had special needs. Scotland was particularly favoured by the formula which caused dissension in the impoverished North East of England. This is probably why the North East is the area which most favours regionalisation.

Typically, the EU seized on this friction to accelerate its ambitions for regionalisation. The Treaty on European Union (the Maastricht Treaty) of 1992 gave authority to establish the EU's Committee of the Regions (COR) which came into being in November 1993. The COR comprises 222 representatives of local and regional authorities. Its stated purpose is 'to ensure that the public authorities closest to the citizen are consulted on EU proposals of direct interest to them, especially when they are responsible for implementing these policies after they are adopted'. But the smoke screen of consultation ignores the fact that the Regions will be responsible to Brussels. The UK has 24 seats on the committee. All representatives are appointed by central government. Once the Committee of the Regions was established, EU regionalisation began to move inexorably forward. In 1996 the idea of Regions was given further substance with the publication of the European Commission's regional booklets. In these booklets all Regions are described in the same way. i.e. London in Europe, Scotland in Europe, Wales in Europe etc., making it clear that their allegiance is to the EU and that they are not free and independent.

Soon after the Labour Party took office in 1997 it started the process of devolution in Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and London. Devolution is another term for regionalisation. This has unbalanced the Constitution in that MPs representing the regions with assemblies can legislate for England but English MPs cannot legislate for those regions. The Scottish Parliament now has legislative power over health, education, local government, housing, law & order and the implementation of the Common Agriculture and Fisheries Policies.

Now that the process has started, the aggrieved English regions are seeking this illusion of independence. Probably the most active area is the North East Region which will comprise Northumberland, Tyne & Wear, Durham and Cleveland and is likely to be the first English Region. It is followed closely by the South West Region.

In 1998 the Labour Government launched 'the Democratic Renewable Debate' and in the same year enacted the Regional Development Agencies Act (1998). The Act brought about the establishment of Regional Development Agencies (RDAs) in each of the the English Regions. RDA members are appointed by the government. They co-ordinate land use, transport, economic development, agriculture, energy and waste. All RDAs have Brussels offices.

Each region will ultimately have two layers of government: an elected assembly and a development agency. For the time being the assemblies are not elected and are referred to as 'chambers'. Regional Assemblies or Chambers first met in 1999. They oversee Regional Development Agencies in the 8 English regions. They are: East Midlands, West Midlands, North-West, North East, Eastern, South East, South-West and Yorkshire & Humber. Each Region will have a local capital and a seat of the elected assembly. In the South East it will be in Winchester and in the South West, Exeter. It can be seen that as these Regions acquire authority, the cohesion of England as a unit of Government within the UK will be eroded. To reinforce the EU Commission's intention of destroying nation states it has established Euro-Regions. They link places which have never in recorded history been united, and they have little in common. Examples are: In Britain, East Sussex is linked with Haute-Normandy and Picardy. Kent is linked with Nord-Pas-de-Calais. In Denmark, the Copenhagen area is joined with Scania in Southern Sweden. German's Euro-Regions tend to envelop land which Germany has claimed or annexed in the past. Examples are: Rhine-Waal - which includes part of the Netherlands; Southern Jutland which is linked with Schleswig Holstein which the Germans conquered and annexed from Denmark in 1864; Rhine-Maas which, is a German speaking area of Belgium, with part of Germany.

With the encouragement of the RDAs, those supporting regionalisation have been holding meetings called Constitutional Conventions. Their aim is to convince people living within a region that they believe in a regional identity. The Church of England takes a leading role in this process. The Bishop of Durham (Rt. Rev. Michael Turnbull) chaired the Archbishop's Committee on the organisation and regional structure of the Church of England which started its deliberations in 1995. He also chairs the North East Constitutional Convention. Additionally, the Bishop of Liverpool chairs the North West Constitutional Convention; the Bishop of Birmingham chairs the West Midlands Constitutional Convention, and the Bishop of Exeter chairs the South West Constitutional Convention. In 1996, the newsletter of the Church of England's organisation 'Christianity and the Future of Europe' admitted that it had received in the previous four years, annual grants of between ECU 5,000 - 9,000 from the the Secretariat General of the EU, plus a grant of ECU 20,000 from the EU's 'Soul for Europe' programme. It is widely rumoured that the Church of England is still receiving government aid for its schools and access to EU money for other projects on condition that its leaders continue to endorse the drive to disintegrate the United Kingdom and advance the creation of the nation of Europe. It may be that the Roman Catholic Church is receiving similar benefits. On 21st March 2001 the House of Lords discussed the possibility of introducing English Devolution to match that already established in Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and London. The debate was initiated by the Bishop of Durham, with the Bishops of Wakefield and Hereford also present in support.

On 16th March 2001 the European Movement held a meeting at Bristol University. Dr Caroline Jackson, Tory MEP, was asked whether Regional Assemblies would become Regional Governments and eventually cause Westminster to be abolished. She replied 'Yes'. But on 19th May 2001 at a meeting of the South West Constitutional Convention chaired by the Bishop of Exeter, all the speakers except one denied any links with Brussels. The exception was Stefaan De Rynck, a Belgian, and a member of the European Commission Governance team. He stated that the Commission was working on a White Paper for governance of the Regions. The convention issued a press release concerning a petition requesting a regional assembly. Then in July 2001, President Prodi (EU) launched his White Paper 'Reform of European Governance'.

The ability for regions to by-pass Westminster has already been demonstrated. Scotland's First Minister, Henry McLeish MSP, (now departed) signed the Colloquium of Constitutional Regions in Flanders. This entitles Scotland to participate directly in the debate on the future of Europe and in the preparatory work for the IGC scheduled for 2004. Other signatories are Bavaria, North-Rhine Westphalia, Catalonia, Salzburg, Wallonia and Flanders. One of Belgium's aims whilst holding the EU Presidency was to give signatories to this document direct access to the European Court of Justice to settle their disputes with their national governments, thus demonstrating that these regions are partially independent of their national governments.

On the 26th October 2001 at a special meeting of the Committee of the Regions Bureau, one item on the agenda was to discuss 'a declaration on the role of regions with legislative powers in the Community decision making process. The aim is to put pressure on national governments to secure an active role for the COR in preparing for the next treaty reform'.

The above short summary of the way the Westminster government is being superseded by regional government is not the full story. The process is being moved forward with considerable haste. Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott and Local Government Secretary Stephen Byers are pressing ahead with reforms. The Labour government's manifesto pledge is to introduce 'directly elected regional government'. This will probably follow a referendum which the government will manipulate to achieve the required result. It will introduce another level of government but the DTLR Minister Lord Falconer has already stated in the House of Lords on 15th November 2001 that three tiers of Government are too many and they are 'looking at county and district councils'. The net result will be to take government further away from the electorate and transfer even more sovereignty to Brussels. 

                        ............................................................

Churchill's view of Europe - by Bryan Smalley

One of the ways that those who support Britain's membership of the EU attempt to justify their position is by stating that Churchill believed in a European Union.  The Bishop of Norwich recently wrote 'What was good enough for Churchill is good enough for me.' (Sept. 2002).  The incorrect assumption is that Churchill intended that Britain should become a member.

The European Movement's website contains the following passage:

WINSTON CHURCHILL
Britain's Greatest Patriot and the founder of The European Movement said "And why should there not be a European group which could give a sense of enlarged patriotism and common citizenship to the distracted peoples of this turbulent and mighty continent and why should it not take it's rightful place with other great 'groupings' in shaping the destinies of men?"

YOU can help make Sir Winston's vision come to pass - Join The European Movement

                        ............................................


This article is a deliberate distortion of the truth.  The quote which comes from a speech made by Churchill is taken completely out of context.  Churchill believed that the German people had an inborn desire to rule Europe and that a European Union would be a way of curbing this, but he had no intention that Britain should be part of it.  The quote is taken from a speech that Churchill delivered at the University of Zurich in September 1946, but it doesn't convey the full message that Churchill was delivering.  In the same speech he went on to say: 'Every step that tends to make Europe more prosperous and more peaceful is conducive to British interests ... But we have our own dream and our own task.  We are with Europe, but not of it.  We are linked but not comprised.  We are interested and associated but not absorbed.  And should European Statesmen address us in the words which were used of old - 'Shall I speak for thee to the King or the Lord of the Host?' - we should reply with the words of the Shunamite woman: "Nay sir, for we dwell among our own people ...'We must build a kind of United States of Europe ... Great Britain, the British Commonwealth of Nations, mighty America must be friends and sponsors of the new Europe'.

This is a clear indication that Churchill supported an EU but from the outside as a 'sponsor'.

Even Jacques Delors confirmed this by saying: 'Even that great European, Winston Churchill, envisaged European integration only for the countries of the European continent, not for Britain'. (Le Monde 3rd May 2000)

Later on, Churchill was more outspoken when he said: 'If Britain must choose between Europe and the open sea, she must always choose the open sea.'