New monarch may help us face future (From York Press)

No we need regional parliaments, effective local government and a proper democracy.

We do not need a monarch blasting out demands to all and sundry.

Slight exaggeration of the Sovereigns power methinks

Toff, First of all, regional parliaments will be a further waste / drain of funds, added to the current devolution measures. Just look at what the Scottish Parliaments costs us for example; and for what?
Coming back to the question: on a tour of South Wales, looking at the unemployment problems in November 1936, Edward VIII was heard to say 'something must be done' before the old Queen Mother and Baldwin had him removed.
The writer mentions Chamberlain, who not only tried to appease Hitler but failed to get industry properly moving by sending Hitler a strong message by matching his re-arming, just like the modern nuclear deterrent.
Because of the events of December 10th 1936 the Queen is unlikely to resign, her mother's influence remains. While a reign of Prince William looks to be a future breath of fresh air one could not possibly relish the prospect of Prince Charles on the throne. If there was a case for instant abdication or pass go then the outspoken environmental nut Charles is it!

ColdAsChristmas wrote:
Toff, First of all, regional parliaments will be a further waste / drain of funds, added to the current devolution measures. Just look at what the Scottish Parliaments costs us for example; and for what?
Coming back to the question: on a tour of South Wales, looking at the unemployment problems in November 1936, Edward VIII was heard to say 'something must be done' before the old Queen Mother and Baldwin had him removed.
The writer mentions Chamberlain, who not only tried to appease Hitler but failed to get industry properly moving by sending Hitler a strong message by matching his re-arming, just like the modern nuclear deterrent.
Because of the events of December 10th 1936 the Queen is unlikely to resign, her mother's influence remains. While a reign of Prince William looks to be a future breath of fresh air one could not possibly relish the prospect of Prince Charles on the throne. If there was a case for instant abdication or pass go then the outspoken environmental nut Charles is it!

Balderdash!

Regional parliaments would each have their own budget, local MP's and voting structure independent of a natioanal centralised government and one party.

What are you afraid of? Democracy?

Also coldaschristmas.

Chamberlain bought Britain time as we were not ready for war. He had been through the Great War and like many of his generation who actually fought in war was appaled at another even greater one.

Britain was building more fighter aircraft than Germany by the time war began.

But the monarchy is ridiculous and should end.

Edward VIII was heard to say 'something must be done' before the old Queen Mother and Baldwin had him removed.

Actually Cosmo Lang was primarily responsible for forcing the abdication crisis. Baldwin was just the messenger. Lang had a deep dislike for Edward VIII since the early '30s, when Edward had opposed Lang in the so-called 'tithe wars', refusing to back his stance on the Church of England taxing tenant farmers in Kent and East Anglia. Edward regarded Lang as an authoritarian retrograde; Lang regarded Edward as a promiscuous hippie who was unfit to be King. When Edward became involved with Wallis Simpson shortly before the scheduled coronation, Lang told Baldwin in no uncertain terms that he wouldn't crown Edward if he was in any way still involved with Simpson. With the Archbishop of Canterbury refusing to plonk the crown on the head of the new King, Baldwin had the makings of an almighty constitutional clusterf*** on his hands, and was basically left with no choice but to tell Edward to dump either Wallis or the throne. The rest, as they say...

Agreed with the broader point that both Baldwin and Chamberlain have got a very bad press over the years, and unjustifiably so. In particular, Baldwin's success in treading a very fine line in the 1935 election campaign between the needs for economic growth and rearmament put us in a much better position in 1939 than we would have been otherwise.

We don't need an unelected monarch telling elected politicians what to do.

YorkToff wrote:

ColdAsChristmas wrote: Toff, First of all, regional parliaments will be a further waste / drain of funds, added to the current devolution measures. Just look at what the Scottish Parliaments costs us for example; and for what? Coming back to the question: on a tour of South Wales, looking at the unemployment problems in November 1936, Edward VIII was heard to say 'something must be done' before the old Queen Mother and Baldwin had him removed. The writer mentions Chamberlain, who not only tried to appease Hitler but failed to get industry properly moving by sending Hitler a strong message by matching his re-arming, just like the modern nuclear deterrent. Because of the events of December 10th 1936 the Queen is unlikely to resign, her mother's influence remains. While a reign of Prince William looks to be a future breath of fresh air one could not possibly relish the prospect of Prince Charles on the throne. If there was a case for instant abdication or pass go then the outspoken environmental nut Charles is it!

Balderdash! Regional parliaments would each have their own budget, local MP's and voting structure independent of a natioanal centralised government and one party. What are you afraid of? Democracy?

Afraid of wasting money through duplication, extra layers of bureaucracy - a feeding frenzy of politicians all with their snouts at the expenses trough, causing disputes and confusion. We need less politicians, not more !

Mr Crabtree wrote:

YorkToff wrote:

ColdAsChristmas wrote: Toff, First of all, regional parliaments will be a further waste / drain of funds, added to the current devolution measures. Just look at what the Scottish Parliaments costs us for example; and for what? Coming back to the question: on a tour of South Wales, looking at the unemployment problems in November 1936, Edward VIII was heard to say 'something must be done' before the old Queen Mother and Baldwin had him removed. The writer mentions Chamberlain, who not only tried to appease Hitler but failed to get industry properly moving by sending Hitler a strong message by matching his re-arming, just like the modern nuclear deterrent. Because of the events of December 10th 1936 the Queen is unlikely to resign, her mother's influence remains. While a reign of Prince William looks to be a future breath of fresh air one could not possibly relish the prospect of Prince Charles on the throne. If there was a case for instant abdication or pass go then the outspoken environmental nut Charles is it!

Balderdash! Regional parliaments would each have their own budget, local MP's and voting structure independent of a natioanal centralised government and one party. What are you afraid of? Democracy?

Afraid of wasting money through duplication, extra layers of bureaucracy - a feeding frenzy of politicians all with their snouts at the expenses trough, causing disputes and confusion. We need less politicians, not more !

Crabby there would be less not more.

650 MPs stuck in Westminster making decisions from gathered representatives from round the country.

Westminster would cease to exist being subsumed by southern regional parliaments.

Regional parliaments would include many MPs who are part-time many women who could handle their families comfortably while being an MP.

National issues would be handled by a national cabinet of elected first ministers who would sit as a committee.

Gone forever general elections and local elections and MPs second homes.

YorkToff wrote:

ColdAsChristmas wrote:
Toff, First of all, regional parliaments will be a further waste / drain of funds, added to the current devolution measures. Just look at what the Scottish Parliaments costs us for example; and for what?
Coming back to the question: on a tour of South Wales, looking at the unemployment problems in November 1936, Edward VIII was heard to say 'something must be done' before the old Queen Mother and Baldwin had him removed.
The writer mentions Chamberlain, who not only tried to appease Hitler but failed to get industry properly moving by sending Hitler a strong message by matching his re-arming, just like the modern nuclear deterrent.
Because of the events of December 10th 1936 the Queen is unlikely to resign, her mother's influence remains. While a reign of Prince William looks to be a future breath of fresh air one could not possibly relish the prospect of Prince Charles on the throne. If there was a case for instant abdication or pass go then the outspoken environmental nut Charles is it!

Balderdash!

Regional parliaments would each have their own budget, local MP's and voting structure independent of a natioanal centralised government and one party.

What are you afraid of? Democracy?

Not often I agree with ColdasChristmas, but come on. One thing we don't need is more self-important little-leaders marching round town squares and red-taping us all to death.
What have national assemblies in Wales or Scotland done for anyone?

Glad we can agree on that Andy D. I would go further and half the number of MP's.
Guy Fawkes, you are correct in that I should have added Cosmo Gordon Lang, making a trio who kicked Edward off the thrown. My mistake. Lang however was a bit of a hypocrite in criticism of Edward's associations with married women. There is evidence to show Lang had homosexual tendencies, now that would have been the bigger scandal if it was ever suspected at the time, outside the inner sanctum in the 1930's.

The National Government pushed "politics to one side"?

Piffle!

The assaults on wages and conditions were deeply political and ideological, just as they are today.

The attempts to ensure the rich benefited from the crisis were just the same as well.

The worry has to be that as this slow-motion replay of the 30s gathers pace (eg the French Nazi party gained a large vote in the recent presidential election), we could be headed for massive conflict and bloodshed around the world.

Even AndyD wrote:

YorkToff wrote:

ColdAsChristmas wrote:
Toff, First of all, regional parliaments will be a further waste / drain of funds, added to the current devolution measures. Just look at what the Scottish Parliaments costs us for example; and for what?
Coming back to the question: on a tour of South Wales, looking at the unemployment problems in November 1936, Edward VIII was heard to say 'something must be done' before the old Queen Mother and Baldwin had him removed.
The writer mentions Chamberlain, who not only tried to appease Hitler but failed to get industry properly moving by sending Hitler a strong message by matching his re-arming, just like the modern nuclear deterrent.
Because of the events of December 10th 1936 the Queen is unlikely to resign, her mother's influence remains. While a reign of Prince William looks to be a future breath of fresh air one could not possibly relish the prospect of Prince Charles on the throne. If there was a case for instant abdication or pass go then the outspoken environmental nut Charles is it!

Balderdash!

Regional parliaments would each have their own budget, local MP's and voting structure independent of a natioanal centralised government and one party.

What are you afraid of? Democracy?

Not often I agree with ColdasChristmas, but come on. One thing we don't need is more self-important little-leaders marching round town squares and red-taping us all to death.
What have national assemblies in Wales or Scotland done for anyone?

You obviously are unwilling or incapable of digesting what I said and described about proper regional parliaments - not run from London. Same goes for cold obssessed christmas.

Even AndyD wrote:

YorkToff wrote:

ColdAsChristmas wrote:
Toff, First of all, regional parliaments will be a further waste / drain of funds, added to the current devolution measures. Just look at what the Scottish Parliaments costs us for example; and for what?
Coming back to the question: on a tour of South Wales, looking at the unemployment problems in November 1936, Edward VIII was heard to say 'something must be done' before the old Queen Mother and Baldwin had him removed.
The writer mentions Chamberlain, who not only tried to appease Hitler but failed to get industry properly moving by sending Hitler a strong message by matching his re-arming, just like the modern nuclear deterrent.
Because of the events of December 10th 1936 the Queen is unlikely to resign, her mother's influence remains. While a reign of Prince William looks to be a future breath of fresh air one could not possibly relish the prospect of Prince Charles on the throne. If there was a case for instant abdication or pass go then the outspoken environmental nut Charles is it!

Balderdash!

Regional parliaments would each have their own budget, local MP's and voting structure independent of a natioanal centralised government and one party.

What are you afraid of? Democracy?

Not often I agree with ColdasChristmas, but come on. One thing we don't need is more self-important little-leaders marching round town squares and red-taping us all to death.
What have national assemblies in Wales or Scotland done for anyone?

Crabby there would be less not more.

650 MPs stuck in Westminster making decisions from gathered representatives from round the country.

Westminster would cease to exist being subsumed by southern regional parliaments.

Regional parliaments would include many MPs who are part-time many women who could handle their families comfortably while being an MP.

National issues would be handled by a national cabinet of elected first ministers who would sit as a committee.

Gone forever general elections and local elections and MPs second homes.

Zetkin wrote:
The National Government pushed "politics to one side"?

Piffle!

The assaults on wages and conditions were deeply political and ideological, just as they are today.

The attempts to ensure the rich benefited from the crisis were just the same as well.

The worry has to be that as this slow-motion replay of the 30s gathers pace (eg the French Nazi party gained a large vote in the recent presidential election), we could be headed for massive conflict and bloodshed around the world.

Bravo!

Zetkin wrote:
The National Government pushed "politics to one side"?

Piffle!

The assaults on wages and conditions were deeply political and ideological, just as they are today.

The attempts to ensure the rich benefited from the crisis were just the same as well.

The worry has to be that as this slow-motion replay of the 30s gathers pace (eg the French Nazi party gained a large vote in the recent presidential election), we could be headed for massive conflict and bloodshed around the world.

We're all in it together.

YorkToff wrote:

Even AndyD wrote:

YorkToff wrote:

ColdAsChristmas wrote:
Toff, First of all, regional parliaments will be a further waste / drain of funds, added to the current devolution measures. Just look at what the Scottish Parliaments costs us for example; and for what?
Coming back to the question: on a tour of South Wales, looking at the unemployment problems in November 1936, Edward VIII was heard to say 'something must be done' before the old Queen Mother and Baldwin had him removed.
The writer mentions Chamberlain, who not only tried to appease Hitler but failed to get industry properly moving by sending Hitler a strong message by matching his re-arming, just like the modern nuclear deterrent.
Because of the events of December 10th 1936 the Queen is unlikely to resign, her mother's influence remains. While a reign of Prince William looks to be a future breath of fresh air one could not possibly relish the prospect of Prince Charles on the throne. If there was a case for instant abdication or pass go then the outspoken environmental nut Charles is it!

Balderdash!

Regional parliaments would each have their own budget, local MP's and voting structure independent of a natioanal centralised government and one party.

What are you afraid of? Democracy?

Not often I agree with ColdasChristmas, but come on. One thing we don't need is more self-important little-leaders marching round town squares and red-taping us all to death.
What have national assemblies in Wales or Scotland done for anyone?

You obviously are unwilling or incapable of digesting what I said and described about proper regional parliaments - not run from London. Same goes for cold obssessed christmas.

Follow the money Mr Toff - its never going to the regions, anything looking like it will be a sop. Those in power won't give it up for the regions - your views are understandable but a little naive.

Even AndyD wrote:

YorkToff wrote:

Even AndyD wrote:

YorkToff wrote:

ColdAsChristmas wrote:
Toff, First of all, regional parliaments will be a further waste / drain of funds, added to the current devolution measures. Just look at what the Scottish Parliaments costs us for example; and for what?
Coming back to the question: on a tour of South Wales, looking at the unemployment problems in November 1936, Edward VIII was heard to say 'something must be done' before the old Queen Mother and Baldwin had him removed.
The writer mentions Chamberlain, who not only tried to appease Hitler but failed to get industry properly moving by sending Hitler a strong message by matching his re-arming, just like the modern nuclear deterrent.
Because of the events of December 10th 1936 the Queen is unlikely to resign, her mother's influence remains. While a reign of Prince William looks to be a future breath of fresh air one could not possibly relish the prospect of Prince Charles on the throne. If there was a case for instant abdication or pass go then the outspoken environmental nut Charles is it!

Balderdash!

Regional parliaments would each have their own budget, local MP's and voting structure independent of a natioanal centralised government and one party.

What are you afraid of? Democracy?

Not often I agree with ColdasChristmas, but come on. One thing we don't need is more self-important little-leaders marching round town squares and red-taping us all to death.
What have national assemblies in Wales or Scotland done for anyone?

You obviously are unwilling or incapable of digesting what I said and described about proper regional parliaments - not run from London. Same goes for cold obssessed christmas.

Follow the money Mr Toff - its never going to the regions, anything looking like it will be a sop. Those in power won't give it up for the regions - your views are understandable but a little naive.

The only people naive are the ones who vote for any of the main parties.

Just because those in power do not like the idea of democracy does not mean I can't shout about it.

You still do not understand what I mean about regional parliaments, I give up with you.

Toff, failure is when you throw the towel in! Now you won't see me doing that with regard to the carbon con. How about £3Billion for a Green investment bank? Did you know that the impact assessment for the Climate Act Oct 2008 was not made available to MP's. In it it states that the costs were more than twice the value of benefits. No wonder as a nation we are bankrupt and have no money for your regional administration!

ColdAsChristmas wrote:
Toff, failure is when you throw the towel in! Now you won't see me doing that with regard to the carbon con. How about £3Billion for a Green investment bank? Did you know that the impact assessment for the Climate Act Oct 2008 was not made available to MP's. In it it states that the costs were more than twice the value of benefits. No wonder as a nation we are bankrupt and have no money for your regional administration!

Ignoring the bit about green issues.

It would not be regional administration but a root and branch reform of our parliamentary system.

Westminster would be turned into a profit making museum for tourists - the first time ever the buliding will make any money rather than being filled with fatuous, pompous London centric politicians making duff Bills for the UK as a whole.

Regional parliaments would each have their own budget pro-rata to their demographics.

They would appoint their own MPs elected by the regions voters.

The regional parliaments would make all budgetary decisions affecting their region.

When it comes to national and international decisions the first ministers of all regional parliaments would meet by conference broadcast and/or in a cabinet meeting of first ministers. Their decisions could be evaluated by all the regional parliaments based on consultation with the regions electorate.

All MPs would be elected for short terms to keep them on their toes, and could be part-time so more people with families could participate.

Councils and councillors would be scrapped.

By the way. The new York council HQ could be turned into a shopping centre of sumfing.

Toff, ignore my 'anti' green bits at your peril and wake up. the 2008 climate act is the most costly bill in our history and you want to ignore it! (Like most of our MP's have done!)
You might just about be able to squeeze the suggested new stadium for York City into the area of the new Council HQ, ideal for travelling fans on public transport. BTW, you would need local income tax and other local taxes to make your suggested system work. Oh, and a local Customs and Revenue, more bureaucracy to pay for.

Does this mean Hugh Bailey will get even more expenses ??

ColdAsChristmas wrote:
Toff, ignore my 'anti' green bits at your peril and wake up. the 2008 climate act is the most costly bill in our history and you want to ignore it! (Like most of our MP's have done!)
You might just about be able to squeeze the suggested new stadium for York City into the area of the new Council HQ, ideal for travelling fans on public transport. BTW, you would need local income tax and other local taxes to make your suggested system work. Oh, and a local Customs and Revenue, more bureaucracy to pay for.

I am ignoring the green bits because this topic is not about them.

The taxes would not be local they would be collected as now but the Treasury pie would be distributed per demographics for each region. There would be no need for regional HMRC.

There would be far less bureaucracy as the councils and councillors would be scrapped and council HQs, MPs second homes and reduced MP expenses would result.

mickrick wrote:
Does this mean Hugh Bailey will get even more expenses ??

Hugh Bayley would be sacked and have to stand for re-election in the regional parliament he chose to represent.