The BBC says the English don’t want devolution

! This post hasn't been updated in over a year. A lot can change in a year including my opinion and the amount of naughty words I use. There's a good chance that there's something in what's written below that someone will find objectionable. That's fine, if I tried to please everybody all of the time then I'd be a Lib Dem (remember them?) and I'm certainly not one of those. The point is, I'm not the kind of person to try and alter history in case I said something in the past that someone can use against me in the future but just remember that the person I was then isn't the person I am now nor the person I'll be in a year's time.

The BBC is asking “Why don’t the English want more power” in response to the Scottish independence referendum in defiance of the evidence that actually they do.

In an article promoting the balkanisation of England into artificial regions, they make the ridiculous claim that 19% of English people support regional government and only 15% support an English Parliament. Toque has been keeping tabs on English Parliament opinion polls since 2002 and not once has support for an English Parliament dipped that low – in fact, in a 2007 ICM opinion poll for the Telegraph 15% supported English independence. Are we to believe that just because people have stopped asking the question in the last year and a half, the support for an English Parliament that has consistently been between more than 50% and almost 70% depending on the question asked has suddenly nosedived to just 15%? That’s rubbish and the BBC know it which is why they’ve left it unsourced.

You can gauge the support for an English Parliament quite easily by just asking any random sample of people – your family, friends or work colleagues – whether they think England should have its own government like Scotland does and unless your circle of friends are ill-informed hardcore British nationalists, most of them will say yes.

The case for an English Parliament does need to be made again because there hasn’t been an effective campaign highlighting the issues and the solution since the Campaign for an English Parliament collapsed into a mere parody of itself a few years ago but support for an English Parliament is still high. Support for regionalisation is still low but increasing in Yorkshire and Cornwall where Labour and Mebyon Kernow respectively are peddling their divisive, anti-English politics.

The message for Yorkshire and Cornwall – and elsewhere in England for that matter – is that an English Parliament and regional devolution aren’t mutually exclusive. There is no reason why Cornwall or Yorkshire shouldn’t have an assembly of its own if that’s what the majority of people there want but that power has to be devolved democratically from an English government, not given away by the British government to frustrate the wishes of the English people. A Cornish Assembly or Yorkshire Assembly could never compete with the Scottish Parliament or Welsh or Northern Irish Assemblies let alone a G20 country but England in its own right would be a G8 country, one of the largest economies in the world. The British government won’t devolve meaningful power to a region and that’s one of the reasons why the regional assemblies were rejected by the electorate but a devolved English Parliament with greater autonomy for county or regional government under that English government could deliver local decision making where it’s more efficient or a national approach isn’t appropriate without breaking up England.

The message for the BBC is that we do want our country back and you can quote all the dodgy, unsourced statistics you want and give as many column inches to the regionalists as you like but you won’t change the facts. The majority of people in England want an English Parliament.


  1. Sarah Wood (1 comments) says:

    I wholeheartedly agree with this. An English Parliament but with some power devolved to the Counties

  2. Simon M (30 comments) says:

    The English do want more power, just not in the way the Westminster establishment thinks we should get it.

  3. Bernard from Bucks (1 comments) says:

    No to the EU.
    No to Regionalism.
    No to Devolution.
    We need to unite against our common foeu, not go along with anything we are Directed to do. I’m saddened by the way the Welsh and Scots play along on this path to breakup and oblivion.

  4. Sarah (21 comments) says:

    actually it was 19% Eng Parliament and 15% regions but even though the regions even with their carefully selected regions came last, the biased broadcasting corporation pushed the regional agenda.

  5. Bob Anglorum (86 comments) says:

    I Live in Yorkshire and will have utterly nothing to do with devolved power. I am an English national, and Yorkshire is simply an administrative district of England, which is subject to any national laws, as will in the furure be enacted by a properly constituted English parliament.

    Most normal people in Yorkshire can see through the psychological attack and war fare being carried out by the criminal political class, as they divide and rule, and unite with the other perverts of the lands.They have invented something called “Yorkshire day”, during the Olympics they used psychology by saying “if Yorkshire was a country it would be fith in the medals table”. Even the Tour de France as good as it was is infact being used for psychological programming.

    But the same thing happens in other areas, “the only way is Essex” is again psychological programming to attempt to divide and rule the nation of England. My answer to all their crap is “The Only Way is England”

  6. Simon M (30 comments) says:

    “Don’t make me be “English”. Please”.

    • Daggs (55 comments) says:

      Frankly that makes me want to puke. If she’s that Scottish, she needs to sod off back to Scotland. I’m English and i’m proud of that. I look forward to the day when my country governs itself.

      • Sarah (21 comments) says:

        No dates on the pieces that I can see and no comments. Probably can’t find many people that interested in maintaining the union.

        • Stan (222 comments) says:

          She’s got a lot of support on twitter

          • Sarah (21 comments) says:

            Maybe but the face book page of the site seems to have bugger all on it neither does its twitter page in fact that latter seems to largely contain tweets by a Scots Nat.

      • Bob Anglorum (86 comments) says:

        I would’nt worry the woman is as thick as pig shit. If her dad is “Douglas Alderson” his surname indicates he is not Scottish but descended from Nordic peoples, i.e Viking or even older Anglo-Saxon. In fact she may even find that her dad is regarded by some elements in the West of “Scotland” as the “Hun”.

        She says “my DNA is officially 7/8th Scottish (the other eighth is Irish)”. Well the Scottish themselves are Irish who invaded Caledonia, many old documents do not mention Scots but the Irish as invading Caledonia, the Scots are simply an Irish tribe, but I do not think the Irish want them back in any hurry.

        The Scots brutalised and enslaved the “Picts”, renaming their country “Scotland”. No doubt at the time the Picts were shouting “dont make me be Scottish, please”

        But the pig shit woman can rest assured we will not make her be English, we are a little more choosy, she is not good enough to be English. She will remain an alien or return to her beloved “Scotland” where she will pretend she is not a “Hun” to avoid future persecution by the rabid Scots. Thank God I am English.

        • Stan (222 comments) says:

          Hi Bob
          “I wouldn’t worry the woman is as thick as pig shit”
          She’s an ex-editor at the Evening Standard, had a column in the Times, published a dozen or so successful books and has a degree in Art history. One of the other organizers of the blog is a former director general of the Royal Horticultural Society. She might be a lot of things but she’s not thick.

          “his surname indicates he is not Scottish but descended from Nordic peoples”
          According to the PoBI study at Oxford University, UK DNA originates from either Danish/German peoples or the French, so genetically she’s pretty much like the rest of us.

          “The Scots brutalised and enslaved the “Picts”
          We are on pretty dodgy ground if we start picking others up on being Brutal. We didn’t get and keep an empire by saying please and thank you. As for slavery, just google Liverpool Slave trade.

          “we are a little more choosy”
          We can’t be that choosy. Our royal family is a mish-mash of German, Greek, Scottish, Indian (really – google it) and Horse.
          Well possibly not horse.

    • William Gruff (138 comments) says:

      We don’t want that sort of Anglophobic filth in England, taking our jobs, driving up our house prices and insulting our history, heritage, culture and identity. The sooner we get rid of the little countries and kick out those from there who do not like us and work to undermine us while profiting from us the better.

      Here’s to independence for England, and good riddance to Scotland, and Northern Ireland and Wales.

  7. Bob Anglorum (86 comments) says:

    We need to get our facts straight Stan, and you miss the point of why many people detest the “British”. It was the “British” who had a slave trade and an Empire not the English, it was the English who had slavery abolished, Liverpool was under the control of the “British”, not the English. The “British” are pure evil and have murdered and enslaved millions across the globe including the English.

    The “British” between 1754 and 1767 killed thousands of American Indians by deliberately giving them infected blankets from small pox patients. The “British” in 1830 massacred virtually every native on Tasmania. The “British” between 1757 and 1947 were responsible for the deaths of 1.8 billion people in India, via massacres and engineered famine. The “British” stood back and allowed two million Irish to perish during the potato famine, even sending troops to take by force remaining food suplies. The “British” or rather a one Alan Lennox Boyd were responsible for a policy which saw an estimated 50,000 native Mau Mau slaughtered. And to bring you up to date the “British” as the Labour Party from 1997 on were responsible for over seeing an estimated 900,000 “unnecessary” deaths in the NHS. The same “British” lied to instigate the murder of a million Iraqi peoples.

    So the English did not get and keep an Empire at all, we like millions of others around the world are victims of the evil “Briish”. Nota Bene, I AM NOT BRITISH, I AM ENGLISH.

    I do not care what the pig shit woman has and has not done, especially since achievement and position often has very little to do with intellect, but rather political opinion and network. Neither would I take much of what Oxford University has to say these days, surely you can not be oblivious to the odd balls that often come out of Oxford and Cambridge. Why do you think most foreign powers recruit from Oxbridge to sabotage our country and recruit their spies. Yet I do agree with them that the English are made up of Danes, Angles and Saxons, though when they say French, I presume they mean the Normans who are not “French”, but Norwegian vikings.

    Unfortunately my points all still stand, and if the women is so fantastic then why does she talk crap? If “genetically she’s pretty much like the rest of us”, then tell that to wonder women herself, because at this point you seem to agree with me that she is as thick as pig shit.

    Final point “our Royal family” so happens to be the “British” Royal family, not the English Royal family, the Queens title is “Her Britanic Majesty”. She has never been elected by an English parliament, therefore her position is de facto, she may as well be a horse.

    • Stan (222 comments) says:

      Hi Bob
      To be fair I just said she wasn’t stupid, I didn’t say she was right. I disagree with most of the views on this blog but I definitely wouldn’t say that any of the regular contributors are stupid.
      I genuinely do not understand your distinction between British and English. At what point did we become English and not British? When did the British, the evil slavers suddenly become the English, who abolished slavery in a process legally kicked off by the Earl of Mansfield – who just happened to be a Scot?
      Thatcher was responsible for a vast amount of social upheaval, inequality and premature death:
      Was she British or English?

      I agree with what you say about Oxbridge, however since nobody else has the resources to do genetic studies it’s the only reference point we have. I’m not sure that foreign powers need to recruit from Oxbridge as our own Oxbridge politicians seem to be able to sabotage the country perfectly well by themselves.

      I regret comparing the royals to horses and humbly apologise to any horses that may have taken offence.

      • Bob Anglorum (86 comments) says:

        Hi Stan
        “at what point did we become English and not British?”
        The point is Stan at what point did we become British and not English. British is a re-invented term for political and perverse reasons, English is a nationality with a country, the English are not British. I would go further an state that the “British” are a cult in the same way as the Moonies and the Church of Scientology.

        You have just been brainwashed over the years to believe you are “British”, to the point that you have forgotten that you are actually English. We have Scottish and Welsh neighbours, some of them hate us and some do not, some prefere to maintain the British myth in order to carry out their hatred of England under cover of being “British”, this is an unfortunate reality.

        The 3rd president of the United States of America Thomas Jefferson stated-

        “It was the Anglo saxon ancestry of the American colonists that gave them a natural right to build for themselves a free and independant state, liberated from British rule”

        It is the British cult which believes it has a right to enslave the world, including the English. There are various reasons for this and the underlying factors are controlled by the Masonic networks. I suppose you could always join up, but I would’nt recomend it.

        “England is a free country”, this is what the British cult hates. Serfdom and slavery naturally died out by the English common law,and when British slave traders ever tried to bring a slave into England, the slave by English common law immediately became free. Using English law and specifically the right to petition, it was William Wilberforce from Hull who sent a petition to the British authorities to shame them into abolishing slavery through out their empire.

        The British pretended to abolish it in 1807, but Wilberforce persisted in getting it abolished by Act of Parliament in 1833. In England and maybe Scotland and Wales the public had raised £700,000 to give to Spain and Portugal to encourage them to stop dealing in slaves. All slaves in the British Empire became (due to Wilberforce and Fowell Buxton and the publics common law) free by 1834. I am sure many Scots and Welsh were in support of Wilberforce and English common law, I dont think they want to volunteer to be British slaves any more than the English.

        The reality is that the “British” are a vicious cult, history proves it. I forgot to mention that the British murdered 28,000 Boars in concentration camps in Africa between 1899-1902, that included women and children. And that the British were global drug dealers, and the British sent a fleet of ships to threaten to kill the Greeks in 1808, who were refusing to pay their “national debt” to the Jewish money lender Don Pacifico. Who was from Portugal, but some how was claiming to be a member of the British cult.

        Cecil Rhodes who Rhodesia was named after and who married into the Jewish banking dynasty of Rothschild, revealed what the ultimate purpose of the British cult was when he said they were going to “gradually absorb the wealth of the world”.

        You may not have liked me calling the said lady as “thick as pig shit”, but I have got to the point where I will counter vexatious comments with vexatious reply. She has also said “since the early days of the Union, we have together created one of the finest societies which the world has ever seen…a major influence for good across the world”. When the truth is the British cult has tortured, murdered enslaved and thieved across the globe. Untill she acknowledges the truth I will refuse to award her much respect.

        The Queen has issued a statement which goes like this “a horse a horse my kingdom for a horse”, thats Queen Anne by the way.

  8. Stan (222 comments) says:

    Sorry Bob, I still don’t get it. I don’t get how all good stuff is attributed to the English and the bad stuff by the British

    Britain is a geographical term for an area of land of which England is a part. So I am both British and English, in the same way I am also European and from the western world.
    I’m not entirely sure how I can be brainwashed into coming from an area of land.
    I haven’t forgotten I am English but I think there are more important matters than which piece of the UK I was born on
    Whether or not I choose to believe the political or social ideology that hold sway in any of these geographical areas is another matter. I know I am not Scottish but I’m not entirely convinced that there is that much difference between the people of Norham and those from Chirnside, nor do I believe that the good folk of Berwick undergo a cultural identity crisis whenever the border is redrawn.

    Thomas Jefferson was a slave owner (over 600 during his lifetime) and an advocate to the eradication of native American culture so I’m not a big fan.

    Yes, slaves were set free, but those British slave traders were also English and we had workhouses and colonies to make up for it. The last reported case of wife selling in England was in 1913

  9. Bob Anglorum (86 comments) says:

    How much did he get for his wife? just out of interest.

    Nationality has nothing to do with geographical land mass, otherwise the Chinese could claim to be Spanish. Nationality is a natural human condition, where a group of humans have laid claim to a specific area, and after such have developed unique characteristics which in some cases may mirror those of other “countries”. After this developement evolved international law, a country had rights to defend the lands in which the nation lived, this is a principle part of the UN Charter. A country will have it’s own culture and it’s own municipal laws, just as the law of Scotland is different to the law of England.

    The British Isles is simply a made up name to identify a larger land mass, as is the word “Europe”. Neither of these terms relate to a nationaltiy, like France or Greece. The forming of nations is the reality of human history and human activity, even though there are people who mainly for hidden reasons wish to do away with this natural human characteristic and establish a one world government. Hence the “European Union” and “Great Britain”, both of these are to do with power grabbing for the benefit of an elite. The power grabbing is masked by claims of mutual benefit and economic prosperity.

    I was merely pointing out what Jefferson said, also you have to understand that Black people were regarded as sub-human even by many scientific and intelligent people. The original American constitution itself states that Africans are only three fiths human. Never the less under English law they were regarded as free when ever anyone attempted to have slaves in England. Of cours what the law says and what happens are two different things.

    I could mention John Pym who prior to the English civil war was demanding a return to “Saxon Liberty”. Or Cobbet and other Chartists who were fighting for the “principles of the original saxon constitution” against the British. Even the Edinburgh chartists were arguing for the “saxon constitution”.

    Everything that has been done by the British government and parliament has nothing to do with the English per se. In the same way that everything done by the EU parliament has nothing to do with the Belgians. Because international organisations are not national organisations, the British parliament is an international organisation which sits in England, it is not an English parliament, it is not a Scottish parliament.

    It all becomes an important matter when the people of England are blamed for what the British have been doing, and some people around the world will seek revenge against the English, because this international organisation sits in England. I am sure you would’nt advocate attacking the Belgians because of the actions of the EU which sits and debates in Belgium. Therfore I clearly make a distinction between British and English, and the distinction between international organisations and national ones.

    • Stan (222 comments) says:

      Hi Bob

      £1 in old money which, according to Wikipedia, is about £90 today.

      I suppose the Jefferson thing was a cheap shot – it’s easy to judge people in hind-sight. I don’t use quotes as a rule because it’s easy to cherry pick good/bad stuff or take things out of context.

      I think when it comes down to it, I don’t really care where anyone is from, it’s what they do as an individual that matters.

      • Bob Anglorum (86 comments) says:

        Hi Stan,
        Not a bad price that, I could do with some help with the house work, and £90 sounds a bargain, I might be a bit late to put in a bid though?

        I would argue that true socialism has no regard for what an individual does good or bad, so long as the doctrines are achieved, they even declare that “individual suffering” is ignored for the “needs of the State”. Your doctrine of individual judgement regardless of origin may meet their international agenda, but not their agenda to destroy individuality in favour of collective necessity. Which would and has been advocated as even killing those who become a burden on the collective.

        I dont believe you carry this hard core socialist aptitude though, these are the types of socialist I despise, especially when they hide their agenda and bullshit the electorate. Now we just need to get you to realise that it does’nt matter if people have more money than you, or live in a bigger house, it’s what they do as an individual that matters.

        “Class war” was invented to divide and rule our country, and the reality is “equality” can only be achieved by despotism. If the choice is seeing someone driving about in a bigger car than me, and having Fabian death squads enforcing their fascist beliefs, there is no choice. What price do we put on our freedom? We have to do what we can to prevent any form of social tyranny, the rich murdering the poor, or the poor murdering the rich, it’s all just a state of mind being stired up by the true enemies of our country.

        “Saxon Liberty” has even been advocated as being an early form of social justice and democracy. But not fascist control and murder which has now blighted Socialism forever.

        • Stan (222 comments) says:

          Hi Bob

          “Now we just need to get you to realise that it does’nt matter if people have more money than you, or live in a bigger house, it’s what they do as an individual that matters.”

          Actually I’m quite happy with the size of my house and I don’t want or need any more money.
          As a matter of fact, if you are unemployed in the UK with no savings you are in the top 30% of the worlds wealthiest people…..

          There is only a finite amount of money in the world and so in order for someone to be rich there needs to be a hell of a lot more who are poor. I’m not jealous of the wealthy, I just don’t agree that large numbers of people have to live in poverty so that the rich can have their big houses, cars etc……

          ““Class war” was invented to divide and rule our country”
          I agree, but divide and rule is a right-wing tactic – you’ve only got to see how the Tories have got the working poor to demonize the non-working poor to see that. It’s hard to divide people if everyone is equal.

          • Bob Anglorum (86 comments) says:

            Hi Stan,
            “divide and rule is a right wing tactic”, unfortunately you fall into the trap when you think like that. There is no left wing and right wing, there is no Labour and Conservative, you are being psychologically manipulated. The powers who really control our country and lurk in the shadows of Masonic Lodges, want you to think exactly like that.

            “Socialism”, “Capital” and “Labour” are all invented terms to get you to react in a certain manner. I’ll admit it’s not easy to disregard the mind control, I also struggle at times.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Time limit is exhausted. Please reload CAPTCHA.