The disappearance of England

England is the country that is not allowed to speak its name. It is the country that has to be wiped from maps of the EU.

The UK government was at it again this week in the Commons. I need to tell you as it was little reported, because the Labour spin doctors did not recommend it for news exposure for obvious reasons.

The House was invited to approve members of Regional Committees for England, as part of Labour’s lopsided devolution to Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland and “the regions”. Once again England was to be balkanised and obliterated.

This is not an official Conservative site, and I do not seek to use it to retail official Conservative soundbites. Perhaps I may this morning say, however, that I was proud of the Conservative party on this occasion. They have refused to put any member onto these new regional committees, and have confirmed they will cease to exist after the next election if Conservatives have the majority.

They are all part of Labour’s attempt to cover over the chasms in their devolution policy. The decisive rejection of elected regional government in the North East meant the rest of England was never given the chance to tell the governent how much we hate the attempts to split England into artificial regions and then to charge us for ever bigger bureaucracies to govern us in this sad condition. Labour thought that maybe setting up regional committees in the Commons would overcome the “democratic deficit”, the lop sided devolution. No chance.

One newspaper did invite me to give a quote they had already made up, to define English nationalism by being anti Scottish. I declined, for that is to misunderstand the nature of the English. Most of us have no wish to define our belief in our country by being unpleasant about the neighbours. For almost two hundred years the English were happy to wave the Union flag rather their own and to sing the UK national anthem when supporting their teams. Labour and the EU have awakened English consciousness to the point where we wave our flag and recognise St George’s day. We still wish to understate, and reject the notion that we must fashion our pride in country out of denigrating others. Lop sided devolution is unfair and is creating ill will within the Union. Regional committees make it worse.

This entry was posted in Blog. Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.

53 Comments

  1. Stuart Fairney
    Posted March 5, 2009 at 7:12 am | Permalink

    Can you also abolish the concept of the honourary Knighthood? Lately the concept seems more devalued than the pound.

    • Brigham
      Posted March 5, 2009 at 8:05 am | Permalink

      I wonder how The family of Mary Jo Kopechne feel about honourary? Knighthoods.

  2. Ian Jones
    Posted March 5, 2009 at 7:18 am | Permalink

    It amazes me how little press the whole anti-English thing gets. It is obvious this is a Scottish Govt and has been for 11 years, just look at the numbers.

    If it wasnt for Scottish and Welsh voters being massively over represented we would never have a Labour Govt…. time for some MP culling me thinks!!!!

    • Martin
      Posted March 6, 2009 at 1:40 am | Permalink

      Perhaps what is needed that Westminster seats for Scotland and Wales should be proportionally elected. This would stop Labour getting two thirds of the Scottish seats with 40% of the vote! The Conservatives get over 10% of the Scottish Vote but only one seat.

      It’s not Scottish voters who are over represented at Westminster but Scottish Labour voters!

      Why on earth don’t the Tories come up with a fairer system for Scottish Westminster MPs that will give them more seats ? An extra 10 or maybe more Conservative MPs would have ended a lot of the unfairness of the Labour block vote.

  3. David b
    Posted March 5, 2009 at 7:48 am | Permalink

    Before anyone contributes anti Scottish comments may I point out that many of the Scots, probably the vast majority bear your country no malice. We mostly accept and want to retain devolution. We regard ourselves as different, and we want to have democratic control over much of what is decided in our lives by government.

    I have long believed that a federal state is the right solution to the “problem”. I read your comments on the German Lander the other day, and I respect your views. And I respect your views about balkanisation of England. But please don’t be drawn into a discussion on Scotland’s devolution. We are happy enough with it.

    I read somewhere that it was the execution of the Irish rebels in 1916 that lost Eire from the empire. The Irish mostly regarded themselves as part of the British family, only to discover that the family regarded them as vassals. Be wary of treating the Scots with such contempt or there will be no UK left.

    I really enjoy your blogs Mr Redwood. I have formed a fairly positive view of you over the past year. In sharp contrast to the contempt I am learning to hold many politicians in. Keep up the good work.

  4. Brigham
    Posted March 5, 2009 at 8:00 am | Permalink

    This government has shown, more than any other, that democracy in this country is dead. Of late I have suspected that we only had it once every five years, and then only for a couple of minutes, and as soon as the polls closed we are back to the old system of being manipulated by our political masters, by the “We know what is best for you” dictum.

  5. alan jutson
    Posted March 5, 2009 at 8:13 am | Permalink

    Perhaps Labour would have felt more at home with your German dinner friends of a few days ago !!!!!

    John Prescott was the inspiration for thought of the Regionalisation of the UK.
    This idea proved to be a failure, as was almost every other idea he had whilst in charge of his various Departments.

    Its still a bad idea, more cost, more confusion, more budgets, more unproductive quango’s, anyone would think this Country covered millions of square miles.

    The thought that the sooner we are wiped away for good from the EU the better for many.

  6. rugfish
    Posted March 5, 2009 at 8:44 am | Permalink

    Scots are Scottish, Welsh are Welsh, Irish are Irish, and English are “British”.

    It says it all really I think when being English is nothing but a conglomeration of the makeup of the mainland union which has obliterated our heritage, our right to govern ‘for ourselves’, and even our name is under threat by those who would call us racists and ‘Little Englanders’ if we dare even to mention the name of our country or show signs of patriotic pride.

    I AM AN ENGLISHMAN AND I’M PROUD OF IT!

    Please let Gordon Brown know that I’m not going away and nor is England.

  7. John Lancaster
    Posted March 5, 2009 at 8:45 am | Permalink

    I wrongly posted my comment on the Intelligent Bank Manager posting.

  8. The Basa
    Posted March 5, 2009 at 8:47 am | Permalink

    Stuart talks a lot of sense. Can you…… Please….

  9. The Economic Voice
    Posted March 5, 2009 at 8:48 am | Permalink

    Well said!! Far from erasing England from the map, hopefully Labour’s actions are more likely to rouse an English nationalist fervour not seen for many a year.
    This is not advocate separatism, but to maintain our heritage.

  10. James Matthews
    Posted March 5, 2009 at 8:48 am | Permalink

    Stuart. Yep. If we have to give one to every prominent American IRA fundraiser they will outnumber the proper knights.

    Returning to the main point, can we plese have a proper English Parliament.

  11. Tally
    Posted March 5, 2009 at 9:11 am | Permalink

    Prescott said an elected north east regional assembly would cost no more than a fish and chip supper. He made a big mistake saying that, no one in the North East would give up fish and chips for a talking shop. However, there is a charge on council taxpayers for the un-elected version and many councils have refused to disclose how much they hand over to RA’s.
    I’m really pleased the Conservatives have taken the stance they have on regional select committees, but I’m wondering if they would have joined the regional committees if their demands for a select committee to reflect the local Conservative voters had been met?
    Another gripe is the British Council and the total blanking of England from its membership. If England is to be denied membership, I suggest that the members pay for it themselves and England set up our own council.

  12. Sheumais
    Posted March 5, 2009 at 9:12 am | Permalink

    Whilst it is true to say the majority of those who voted supported Scottish devolution in the last referendum, that does not equate to a majority of those qualified to vote. Since then, the SNP’s share of the available vote has never risen above 18% and a maximum of 30% support Scottish independence. That being the case, could you close the Scottish parliament too, as I currently have to financially support 5 layers of government and have faith in none of them. I include, for any sceptics, local authority, MSPs, MPs, MEPs and EU Commissioners. I could probably add another layer for the occasional meeting of political heads of state to agree treaties nobody understands, but it is irregular and largely irrelevant. Two layers of government would suffice, covering local, national and international issues. Where politics is concerned, I’ve always been of the view less is more.

  13. E Justice
    Posted March 5, 2009 at 9:28 am | Permalink

    I f a few more Englishmen and woman would speak out like you Mr. Redwood.we would dare to speak our name again,
    And I agree with Stuart Fairney,the latest “honoury Knighthood”
    is shameful

  14. Mr A.D.Dagger
    Posted March 5, 2009 at 9:28 am | Permalink

    Well said Mr Redwood. Now if you could convince your Conservative colleagues to support an English Parliament, with powers at least equal to those of the Scottish Parliament. We would be getting somewhere.

  15. Amanda
    Posted March 5, 2009 at 10:02 am | Permalink

    So how are the Conservatives going to get this out into the news so that everyone can see what is happening? The rumours have been going around on the internet for quite a while, but I have yet to see any newspaper, let alone them all, take it up and push the story.

    Surely if this is know Labour will lose even more votes in England (maybe they will gain more in Scotland and Wales!) the fact they can still attract around 30% of the vote with a broken economy, broken society, and now broken country amazes me.

    And isn’t this all another reason to remove ourselves from the EU, who is pushing for this.

    I have said it before and I will say it again, when are we going to have a vote of no confidence in this ‘shower’ of traitors. So we can find a Government who at least stands up for Britain – England, Scotland, Wales and N. Ireland. I’m beginnng to suspect that Gordon’s economic policy is not so much incompetence as a deliberate attempt to beggar us so we have no means to stand on our own feet, and are forced to accept regions.

    Are we not almost at war with our own Government?

  16. Terry
    Posted March 5, 2009 at 10:17 am | Permalink

    Wow. I agreed with every single sentiment.

    Well said John

  17. Lola
    Posted March 5, 2009 at 10:20 am | Permalink

    No Englishman that I have heard of has ever defined Englishness as being anti anybody. The concept of liberty espoused by Englishmen has always re-affirmed that anyone is perfectly at liberty to say or do or believe in whatever they like as long as they do so without inconveniencing others. I am incencsed that anyone should seek to define English Nationalism as anti Scottish. The Scots are our neighbours and our friends. Together we have been extraordinarily successful for such a small island. As an Englishman I will work hard to maintain that relationship. But, as an Englishman I will not do this at any price, and if the Scots wish to go their own way, I will be content, but saddened, and wish them well.

    In the same way as an Englishman I consider that all foreign peoples, but not necessarily their governments, are our neighbours. I hold no malice towards any other race, anywhere. And as an Englishman I am universally saddened that so many people – my neighbours – are denied liberty and the rule of law by so many gangster like regimes. I am also saddened that so many peoples live under regimes that profess to support the qualities of freedom and the rule of law but are in fact giant self serving bureaucracies.

    Of course those principals sit ill with the likes of the EU and Robert Mugabe, but quite frankly, that’s their problem, not mine.

  18. arisaig
    Posted March 5, 2009 at 10:25 am | Permalink

    As a Scottish Tory (a species rarely sighted!) I totally agree with all you say. The self styled Scottish “Government” is a shining example of waste, self aggrandisement and total pointlessness. The trouble with creating these monsters is that once they are there they specialise in enacting silly legislation for its own sake so they look as though they are neccessary.

    The best answer to the West Lothian question is to do away with the Scottish parliament altogether…perhaps its deeply unattractive and horrendously expensive though very leaky building could be used as a prison, the present incumbents could then stay on indefinitely, babbling the usual rubbish under lock & key!

    Seriously we need far less bureaucracy not more, less state employment and no more state final salary pensions.

    Be thankful you do not have these local “parliaments” yet and hope you get in to stop this rot spreading.

  19. Tom Long, England
    Posted March 5, 2009 at 10:32 am | Permalink

    This democratic deficit is compounded by the fact that this UK government burdens the people of England with higher tax bills in order for it spend more per person on the other UK countries.

    How is it right that the other countries in the UK vote in Gordon Brown to make laws for the English but not for themselves?

    The current worthlessness of the Union to the English is an opinion growing amongst the English like a virus. UK = Unequal Kingdom

  20. chris southern
    Posted March 5, 2009 at 10:36 am | Permalink

    Even with England turned into balkanised regions it will still exist, and anger/resentment will grow even more.
    This banishing of nationalities is a silly thing, born out of idiotic ideas from an age that saw too much power in too few hands.
    History is repeating it’self, and they will blame nationality again, and not themselves.

    Whatever piece of land someone is born from, or lives within you will get people having pride in it, be it a country or even a city.
    a united world doesn’t need tearing up, look what happenend with The middle east after WWII to see the effects of politicians idea’s.
    They will do the same with europe and it’s many nations.

    The movement of people saw the end to conflict, the desire to never see the whole sale slaughter upon their own countries and their new found friends saw that.
    not the flag destruction that the politicians started.

    The UN has the chance of creating a one world goverment, with representatives of each area/nation/region (or whatever you wish to call the pieces of land)
    trade/travel and understanding creates unity and piece, not the directives of a small percentage of people whose authoritive ideas is different to what most people want/wish.

    The idea that these “philosopher” kings can rule (as unelected people do rule) without any comeback for their mistakes is a mockery of democracy and freedom.
    is that their idea of potential world order, it sounds like too much power in too few hands to me, which will see corruption on a scale that politics has never seen (and the UK has seen too much in recent years already)

  21. Lee Jakeman
    Posted March 5, 2009 at 10:37 am | Permalink

    Why are English MP’s generally silent about this issue? It seems that most of them, including most Conservatives, are happy to sell out England for the sake of something called “the union”.

    As the union clearly means little to the Scottish and Welsh, why should it mean anything to the English?

  22. Graham Hamblin
    Posted March 5, 2009 at 10:55 am | Permalink

    I watched part of the debate, a glimmer of hope then for your party.

    Not exactly on message but interesting was the question yesterday, at PM’s Question Time, by Ann Winterton about the privatisation of parts of the Royal Mail which has been described elsewhere as causing an effect in the chamber like someone breaking wind in church.

  23. Demetrius
    Posted March 5, 2009 at 11:07 am | Permalink

    What is even more astonishing about this is the that regions that we do have defined bear little or no relationship to the pattern of living, or the remnants of community left in the 21st Century. Nor do they have much connection with history either. They go back to the mid 20th Century and to civil servants drawing lines on maps to create regional groupings for entirely different purposes. The present regions are a mess, do not serve their purpose, and are wholly out of kilter with any present or future needs. If you want to know why, go to Banbury, in the same region as Dover, but not of Stratford upon Avon, Northampton, nor Moreton in the Marsh. If we are to have regions then the map need radical reshaping, and for my money a larger number in line with modern needs.

  24. Waramess
    Posted March 5, 2009 at 11:25 am | Permalink

    If anti Scottishness is a perceived failure in the English then it has probably been brought about by their perception of the great swindle wrought upon them by the Scottish members of this government.

  25. Thomas Widmann
    Posted March 5, 2009 at 11:34 am | Permalink

    I very much agree that creating English regions solves nothing.
    The proponents of the idea seem to believe that it solves the West Lothian Question (the problem that Scottish MPs can vote on a law that does not affect their constituents). However, unless the English regions were given powers similar to those of Scotland (law-making powers, full control over education, judicial affair and many other areas), there would still be many West Lothian issues in Westminster.
    For instance, university tuition fees were introduced in England (but not in Scotland) with the help of Scottish votes. Would the proponents of English regions really want to devolve university financing to the regions? Wouldn’t this question still have been decided in Westminster for all of England, whether English regions existed or not?

  26. Don Beadle
    Posted March 5, 2009 at 11:40 am | Permalink

    Very glad you avoided the trap of being anti-Scottish as an ingredient of being in favour of a fairer system of government for England. While devolution to Scotland has resulted in this unfairness to England we should not blame all the Scots for this although Blair, Brown and Darling bear a heavy responsibility. We may envy the Scots for having a financial settlement that gives them so many advantages compared to the English but it is not right to blame them for making the best of it.

    So many of us in England have close family relationships with Scots and enjoy visiting their lovely country. We would feel most sad should the Union break up but it is in severe danger of so doing. The English are generally apathetic about constitutional inbalances but as the hardships of the present economic cycle begin to bite they will begin to ask why they should be so unfairly directly governed by the current Scttish leadership of the UK.

    Unfortunately the Conservative party shows little appreciation of the danger and the Clarke proposals are pathetic.
    It is not just about parliamentary control but about who governs, who proposes English legislation and who administers it.

  27. Derek
    Posted March 5, 2009 at 11:44 am | Permalink

    Well said John.

    PS When do we English get our own Parliament?

  28. steve
    Posted March 5, 2009 at 1:00 pm | Permalink

    It all stems from the EU, and its painfully obvious that the Scottish Dominated McLabour Regime are merely implimenting their masters agenda, what would their reward be i wonder?.

    If the only way for England to have its own Parliament is to disband a so called ‘Union’ that has been null and void in all but name as of 1997 then so be it!.

    We must never forget that England needs Scotland, Wales and N Ireland for absolutely NOTHING!, its also obvious that their destiny is to be an “Independent” (yeah right) puppet “Region” of the EU.

    Yes that is all what Scotland and Wales are, in their entirety, EU “Regions”, they already conveniently came in Brussels Bite size, England however did not.

    ————-
    http://tiny.pl/b9d3

    Where is England?

    Within the confines of Great Britain a “country” called the United Kingdom is often referred to and it appears to be made up of three countries which have their own regional assemblies. These are Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales. There is also an assembly for the whole of the United Kingdom located at Westminster in London where MPs who serve in their regional assemblies can also vote.

    The perculiar reality of this set up is that the England, the country which has the largest population amongst the member nations of the United Kingdom, does not have an assembly.

    The result of this assembly imbalance, and failure to represent faithfully the contribution of England, to the United Kingdom as a whole, means that Northern Irish, Welsh and Scottish politicians have assemblies within which they can lever their direct influence over issues in their own national interests. On the other hand the English cannot. The English MPs are excluded from the regional assemblies of Northern Ireland, Wales and Scotland but the MPs from Northern Ireland, Wales and Scotland are not excluded and, indeed, have a direct influence over those aspects of English affairs which come before the Parliament in Westminster.

    A serious issue

    There are two fundamentally important issues tied to this injustice.

    * discrimination against the English
    * erosion of vital English values

    Discrimination against the English

    The politics of each country in the United Kingdom is clearly different with Labour and the Liberal Democrats doing far better in Scotland and Wales. These political parties have therefore ended up with a free hand in running aspects of their own national affairs. The same is true in Ireland where political parties with specifically Irish characteristics are left to run their own affairs. In England there is no assembly so there is no means whereby the politics of England finds expression.

    The current “New Labour” government has a “majority” of some 66 MPs in the Parliament of Westminster. This essential majority for the survival of this government comes from Scottish and Welsh MPs who contribute some 70 MPs to the Labour Government’s double counting system. There is therefore, in the case of England, an imposition of a United Kingdom assembly where the government of the day has manipulated affairs to guarantee a built-in “majority”. This is a minority government which has the “support” of less than 22% of the electorate. This grossly unfair system survives because of the ability of Scottish and Welsh MPs to sit in two houses while preventing the English MPs the same priviledge; this is an unacceptable act of discrimination against the English.

    Erosion of vital English values

    Historically, in terms of the development of democracy, Englishmen have been unique in identifying, defining and giving voice to seminal values which so many hold dear. These include the right to the pursuit of happiness, the setting of individual freedom as the hallmark of a successful system of justice as reflected in the typically English legal imperatives as the right to equality before the law irrespective of status, the assumption of innocence, the right to trial by jury, habeas corpus and freedom of, and the defence of, free speech. These have largely rode on English Common Law and the ability of Judges and Juries to do a fair job free from political interference.

    Such imperatives for the survival of freedom were promoted by the Levellers during the English Civil War and by the group associated with John Lilburne. Cromwell had these inividuals kept in prison. With the collapse of the English Republic and with the return of Royalty their essential writings were very much kept under wraps. The spark which gave rise to a mass revolution in the American Colonies was when the British Crown moved to ban juries because too many were preventing the state enforce arbitrary decisions on innocent “colonists”. It is notable that the American Constitutional components which relate to the pursuit of happiness, individual liberty and freedom are largely based on the early writings of Lilburne written in the Tower of London, 150 years before.

    Unfortunately there has been a slow erosion of this essential spark, this recognition of the importance of the defence of individual freedom, as a typical English value. This has occurred gradually since the ascendency of the Scottish influence in United Kingdom politics. Scotland, it should be noted, has a legal system based on the European system, Corpus Juris, a codified Roman Law which is completely distinct and almost alien from English Common Law. This sustains a position which keeps the influence of the community conscience in legal affairs and court decisions at arms length.

    Elimination through a political Europe

    The lack of an English assembly prevents the English from protecting their rights to sustain their nationality as English. The European project, Corpus Juris and the European Constitutional Draft are aimed directly at “standardizing law” which means, in the United Kingdom context that Scottish Law will eventually reign supreme. The breaking up of England into so-called EU regions has been a subtle and politically destructive means of destroying the coherence of the English nation. England has become the only country in Europe to have been eliminated without a war but rather as the result of the manipulations of Brussels bureaucrats and dishonest and irresponsible politicians in Westminster serving their party interests over country.

    Call for action

    The democracies with the most robust defence and best records for upholding individual freedoms are those whose system of governance are based on the British Parliamentary system founded on the English system and which defend most of the essential elements developed by the Englishman Lilburne and others. These countries include the United States of America, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. There is no reason why the English should endure the insult of having this essential and historic legacy of democracy and individual freedom buried by bureaucrats and politicians who do not uphold such values or who even wish to destroy them. Fortunately there is a slowly growing realization amongst the English as to what has happened. It is very much associated with the expansion of the “political” European Union and this experiment has gone far enough. History demonstrates that it is not a good idea to try and marginalise the English. This is a call for action to reverse this pernicious process.

    • Trebor
      Posted March 6, 2009 at 12:32 pm | Permalink

      Fascinating, but how are we going to stop the inevitable break up & elimination of the country of England with our politicians in a conspiracy of silence ?

  29. Deborah
    Posted March 5, 2009 at 2:47 pm | Permalink

    ” I was proud of the Conservative party on this occasion. They have refused to put any member onto these new regional committees, and have confirmed they will cease to exist after the next election if Conservatives have the majority. ”

    Excellent. It is good to see the Party matching words with deeds.

  30. adam
    Posted March 5, 2009 at 3:00 pm | Permalink

    Britain no longer exists now, the Knighthood offered(?) to Kennedy really demonstrates how meaningless the concept is.

    As for this EU project, politicians think as long as they do it through deception and obfuscation that will make it OK. it is a recipe for disaster downgrading the publics representation from shareholder to stakeholder, just because it is done in secret doesn’t mean they have got away with it.

    • Mary Clogston
      Posted April 19, 2009 at 7:01 pm | Permalink

      Dear Adam

      (Criticism of royalty-ed)
      Indeed she has Hollywood in her pocket but they have another agenda and will make out well in any scenario.

      Did the English object to being called Anglo-Saxons? DNA shows
      there was no Anglo-Saxon invasion. Read Churchill’s “Birth of Britain. Do you have any idea why the Anglo-Saxon fairy tale was put forth.

  31. Sam Armstrong
    Posted March 5, 2009 at 3:20 pm | Permalink

    Bravo Mr. Redwood. I appreciate you bringing this to our attention.

    Combined with Mr. Grieve’s remarks this week on the loss of our culture, this is excellent news.

    Millions and millions of people are aghast at the destruction of our society.

    What’s happening reminds me of when Mrs. Thatcher talked about British culture being “swamped” on World in Action in the 70’s: it was considered too inflammatory to discuss openly but once out in the open it resounded very deeply with the electorate.

    The Tories must take full advantage of this issue in order to halt the disenfranchisement of loyal citizens and the steady rise of the BNP.

  32. Patrick Harris
    Posted March 5, 2009 at 3:37 pm | Permalink

    Where have you been for the last 11 years, hang on!, I feel an election coming on.

  33. John
    Posted March 5, 2009 at 6:20 pm | Permalink

    And just think I used to regard myself as British!

    Thats a long time ago now . Whenever politicians use that word I assume that they are going to announce some plan to shaft England.

    The only way out of this is for England to have a national parliament and government.

    Abolition of the Barnett Rules too.

    The union might survive this but I wouldn’t bank on it and will be a different union. If ever the English get the chance on a referendum they could well go for complete independence.

    John, do the politicians in the bubble understand this?

  34. Toque
    Posted March 5, 2009 at 6:49 pm | Permalink

    Well said John.

    It’s a shame that so many Conservatives failed to vote for Theresa May’s amendment. If the Tories had turned up then they would have defeated the government, as it was the votes of Scottish and Welsh Labour prevailed.

  35. Zenobia
    Posted March 5, 2009 at 9:15 pm | Permalink

    John @ 6.20 – that is a very good quesiton – Do the politicians in the bubble really understand the mood of the English nation?

    Even with this slight movement by the Conservatives, I still doubt they fully understand the discontent spreading. The only workable solution is not a Grand Committee it is a fully devolved English Parliament.

    Alas, I fear David Cameron has lost much support with his foolish comments about “little Englanders” and ‘Scottish blood in these veins” – for I doubt that many of the English will forget or forgive. Perhaps is not just the Labour party that needs a new leader? A Conservative Party which fully understands the mood of the English and fully supports the establishment of an English parliamen (within a loose federation) would gain such support it would consige the Labour party to the shadows for years to come – now surely Mr Redwood that is to be fought for?

    Reply: The Conservative party as a whole understands the modd of England. Under David’s leadership we have opposed bogus regionalism in the refernedum and now in the Commons

  36. Brigham
    Posted March 6, 2009 at 9:41 am | Permalink

    Look at the number of comments on this subject and you can tell it is very much in the foreground of the average person’s thoughts. It is this attempted destruction of England, that is driving, even the most liberal of citizens, into the arms of the BNP. The main party leadership should look at their website, which I have done, to see the depth of feeling. There are, of course, a few “knuckledraggers” but the majority seem to be ordinary people that are fed up with our dictatorship government, and see all the opposition as ineffective.

  37. Patrick Harris
    Posted March 6, 2009 at 12:26 pm | Permalink

    ” the Conservative party, as a whole, (whatever that means) understands the modd (sic) of England.
    Under David’s leadership we have opposed bogus regionalism in the refernedum (sic) and now in the commons.”

    I take it you refer to the “referendum” in the north of England, there has never been a referendum, on regionalism, in England “as a whole”, or, do you mean the Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish referenda? in which the concerns of the English, for or against, were totally ignored.

    As for opposing regionalism, SeEra had 74 board members 51 of whom were CONsevatives, tories held sway in many other regional assemblies throughout England and could have, if they had the mind, killed off the whole rotten system at birth.

    As a pre-election ploy the CONservative party have declined the offer to take part in regional committees

    As I said earlier, I sense an election coming on.

    Reply: The Conservative party as a whole means what it says – the MPs and the members.
    Yes of course referendum means the one we were allowed in the North.
    The South East Assembly Councillors voted for their own abolition but the government’s place people blocked that vote.

  38. Trebor
    Posted March 6, 2009 at 12:42 pm | Permalink

    Fascinating, but with the main-line politicians in a conspiracy of silence how are we to elimanate the break up of the country of England ?. Also, it is inevitable that the BBC will be part of this conspirancy, but why has not the press picked up on this & reported and commented on it ?

  39. Vanessa
    Posted March 6, 2009 at 4:14 pm | Permalink

    This is all the fault of the EU which is trying to obliterate England from the world atlas. Also its need to divide and rule. If this country were to be divided up into eight regions (Regional Assemblies) it would be extremely difficult for any dissent or uprisings. These Regional Assemblies are funded by the EU and not run by elected councillors and will be our Local Government. UNITED WE WIN!

    • Mary Clogston
      Posted April 19, 2009 at 6:35 pm | Permalink

      Dear Vanessa

      Why didn’t the English object to being called “Anglo-Saxons” for so many years?

      The Anglo-Saxon premise was that the early Britons and Romans were a bunch of dolts until this superior Germanic tribe arrived.
      Do you know the reason this fairy tale was put forth?

      I read a lament from a Scot a few years ago “Who are these Anglo-Saxons and where is my history?” Was he wrong?

      One question I have is if the Saxons were so great, why did they have to come to the British Isles to achieve. Why wasn’t Saxony a world power?

      Have you read Winston Churchill’s “Birth of Britain” on why the Saxons were in Britain, and why their language intermingled with Latin took hold? If you haven’t it will be an eye opener.

      Recent DNA has backed up Churchill’s account that the early Britons far outnumber the Saxon population and were never inferior in any way.

      Do you have any idea on why the “Anglo-Saxon” fairy tale was put forth?

      History needs to be revised with the good peaceful people being given first place, and the murdering conquerors being identified as disfunctional.

  40. Patrick Harris
    Posted March 6, 2009 at 4:28 pm | Permalink

    Wrong, the 51 Tory board members could have voted with their feet thereby robbing the assembly of any democratic semblance, remember, the “Councillors” were “appointed”.

    As for having a handle on the mood of England, cast your eyes over the results of two recent bye-elections in Buxton and Atherstone.

    An English Parliament – Anything less is not acceptable.

  41. Puncheon
    Posted March 6, 2009 at 8:21 pm | Permalink

    It has been an objective of French foreign policy for hundreds of years to break up the UK, and now thanks to our feeble political/media class, they are almost in sight of it. The EU and France are almost the same thing – just check out the staffing of the main Commission apparats. My question has always been why our political and media class go along with this, have they all got cottages on the Dordogne?

  42. Mr A.D.Dagger
    Posted March 7, 2009 at 9:02 am | Permalink

    Unfortunately Patrick, John is a member of the Conservative and Unionist party led by “I’ve got Scottish blood in my veins” Cameron.
    They can write their sympathies for Englands plight. But it’s action thats needed.
    I agree, English Parliament – now.

  43. Derek W. Buxton
    Posted March 7, 2009 at 3:36 pm | Permalink

    I am not happy with the deliberate break up of the Union, even less happy about the silence of the politicians on the issue. Mr. Redwood is to be congratulated on the article and I hope that the party does as he claims but can the leadership be trusted? I have seen no sign that it can, as mentioned above he did claim some Scots blood. To come out into the open and make public Mr. Redwood’s idea could result in a better election result, but he has not done so. It would seem that there is no unique selling point, it is expected by CC Office that they will win, by default, but it would be far better to win by a big margin with a big idea.

    Derek

  44. Mike Cunningham
    Posted March 9, 2009 at 9:53 am | Permalink

    I welcome your words in the post on Conservative policy where it is confirmed they will cease to exist after the next election if Conservatives have the majority.

    Will you also remind your colleagues who sit on the Conservative Front Bench that we, the long-forgotten voters, also wish to see the return of Democracy to Westminster, and the abolition of all the undemocratic legislation and laws which have been laced around us by this evil bunch of power-mad ZaNuLabour clowns.

    Will you be urging the repeal of the Civil contingencies Act, along with the removal of the Closing of Places of Association Order? Will you be restricting the present access by local councils to the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act so they cannot go snooping to video whether a parent has legal access to a school for her child? Will you be investigating the Police Structure so that innocent people are no locked up because they stood up for their rights?

  45. Toque
    Posted March 10, 2009 at 12:11 pm | Permalink

    England is disappearing from politicians’ vocabulary.

    Read Gordon Brown’s “Working Together” foreword and you’ll see that he doesn’t mention England once.

    I actually put in an epetition on this subject and he just brushed it aside.

    The Conservatives are no better, judging by their press releases they just view England as the rump of the UK, if they think of England at all.

    Here’s Andrew Lansley, for example, issuing a press release about the King’s Report (which was only about England) and neglecting to mention England; and here’s Michael Gove doing the very same thing with English education.

    I could give numerous examples. It happens on an almost daily basis. Westminster politicians, for the most part, have absolutely no respect for English national feeling. Reluctantly I have to conclude that independence is the best answer.

  46. Ian Campbell
    Posted March 10, 2009 at 3:00 pm | Permalink

    Well said John and please continue to press your colleagues to say England when they mean England. They may have resisted the regionalisation of England but they seem to prefer that England should become the national equivalent of Middlesex, a forgotten administrative unit that occasionally puts out a sporting team.
    It’s very sad that our oldest political party, the Tories, appears unable to mention the oldest and most successful nation on earth. Re-branding themselves as Conservatives, Scottish Conservatives and Welsh Conservatives only suggests to the Scots and Welsh that the Conservatives are an English party, which is what they suspected anyway, while to the English it suggests that Conservatives care nothing for England, are ashamed of England and would rather that England did not exist.
    Who speaks for England? The Conservative party chooses not to. England has no spokesman, no represenative. Perhaps Mr Cameron might make you Shadow Secretary of State for England.

  47. Mary Clogston
    Posted April 19, 2009 at 6:06 pm | Permalink

    As am American I am very surprised at English angst at not being identified as “English” because it is nothing new. One thing I could never understand was the use of the term “Anglo-Saxon” in connection with the English. Why didn’t any English person object to that? Were the English ever really called “English.”

    It was as if the early Britons (remember “British Isles”) were a bunch of dolts who never accomplished a thing until the Germanic “Anglo-Saxons” arrived. What became of the Normans and Jutes? Obviously they too were inferior to the magnificent Saxons. Americans know the reason for the “Anglo-Saxon” myth, but do Britons?

    I read and sympathethized with a Scot who lamented “Who are these Anglo-Saxons and where is my history?” I can only wonder why the English didn’t lament being called “Anglo-Saxons” instead of English.

    We have a group of sillies in the USA who identify themselves as WASPS, not English. WASPS means “White Anglo-Saxon Protestant,” and these nut cases glory in the term. They do not call themselves English and indeed many of the dolts are not even from the British Isles. It is used as an elitist term although many of them could not be identified as “superior” in any fashion.

    Recent DNA research has put to rest the fairy tale of the “Anglo-Saxon” invasion. But why was this myth put forth in the first place? We know. Do you.?

    Incidentally it seems your Queen and her cousins across Europe has her eyes set towards us. Such a coupe would certainly enhance the royal treasury. However we did have that revolution. My advice to the royals is “Get a Job.,” and to the English “Wake up.”

  48. M Anderson
    Posted May 24, 2009 at 8:36 pm | Permalink

    Mary Clogston

    “DNA shows there was no Anglo-Saxon invasion. ”

    What DNA would that be?

    “One thing I could never understand was the use of the term “Anglo-Saxon” in connection with the English.

    One thing I can’t understand is how people can be so ignorant. Though in this case I think the author is just trying to be sarcastic. Sarcasm minus humour I might add.

    “Why didn’t any English person object to being called Anglo-Saxon?”
    Is anyone supposed to answer this? Oh yeah, you’re just trying to be funny. I forgot.
    Anglo obviously refers to the Angles and Saxon obviously refers to Saxons. As for saying why didn’t the Saxons make it in Saxony (in an earlier post) I would say that is a very ridiculous question. The Saxons did “make it” in Saxony. That is why there was a Saxony and still is a Saxony. Is there anything else you need me to explain? The Jutes came from Jutland. This still exists to.

One Trackback

  • About John Redwood


    John Redwood won a free place at Kent College, Canterbury, and graduated from Magdalen College Oxford. He is a Distinguished fellow of All Souls, Oxford. A businessman by background, he has set up an investment management business, was both executive and non executive chairman of a quoted industrial PLC, and chaired a manufacturing company with factories in Birmingham, Chicago, India and China. He is the MP for Wokingham, first elected in 1987.

  • John’s Books

  • Email Alerts

    You can sign up to receive John's blog posts by e-mail by entering your e-mail address in the box below.

    Enter your email address:

    Delivered by FeedBurner

    The e-mail service is powered by Google's FeedBurner service. Your information is not shared.

  • Map of Visitors

    Locations of visitors to this page