featured_spectre Posted September 23, 2014 Posted September 23, 2014 (edited) Did you know this is the proposal for a federalised UK http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-CZ6kFCOkSu4/VB12U-S8PlI/AAAAAAAADoI/XeGYswc8ZIo/s1600/ferderal%2BUK%2Bmap.png Not too sure about the flag change, but the rest would make sense. Also the proposed flags for each section of England Central England http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Ys3rmwTAzZg/VB2bjr-ojQI/AAAAAAAADoY/Lzy8JkU8Vac/s1600/Central%2BEnglanda.png South England http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-kTYWVGgM3do/VB2bkEztjUI/AAAAAAAADog/IcXq2ARtqqE/s1600/South%2BEnglanda.png Northern England http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-1suK3GuE1oM/VB2bj1rymSI/AAAAAAAADoc/vpNVRwQljvY/s1600/North%2BEnglanda.png Greater London http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-sbd8ueEHi0c/UuGJdkcOpeI/AAAAAAAACEg/nIYCB8_a5Rw/s1600/london%2Bflagab.png Proposed flags for first ministers of England Central England http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-kVFQS1DJgYQ/VB2gTp9pFTI/AAAAAAAADo8/gmT7fNukWgo/s1600/Central%2BEngland.png South England http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-abHHvpVOXW4/VB2gTaj5S7I/AAAAAAAADo0/7G70Xn0gWWM/s1600/Southern%2BEngland.png North England http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-SJUydnSYTgg/VB2gTlsQTkI/AAAAAAAADo4/C6b1NnyyyUg/s1600/North%2BEngland.png Greater London http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-JiacPMWAT6I/VB2iJPy2eEI/AAAAAAAADpQ/dXYxBmigAg4/s1600/london%2Bflaga.png Edited September 23, 2014 by featured_spectre added all flags
featured_spectre Posted September 23, 2014 Posted September 23, 2014 Proposed Assembly coats of arms Scotland http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-A2WrsAEDM5U/VB2j4Hiz5OI/AAAAAAAADp4/FieGAto4iRI/s1600/Scotland%2Barms.png Wales http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-9Fbl-v-CelQ/VB2j5Io1n-I/AAAAAAAADqQ/ZEdcGmoVUGE/s1600/wales%2Barms.gif Northern Ireland http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-HppPWle3gXM/VB2j3RTPU4I/AAAAAAAADpw/xwoy05ENfg4/s1600/Northern%2BIreland%2Barms.jpg Greater London http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Yw7AA4E2YUI/VB2j21ooHUI/AAAAAAAADpo/6uKIIMTJoXU/s1600/London.png Southern England http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Fk5GI_DHi-Y/VB2j4qAlSII/AAAAAAAADqI/28A6DG_hjFg/s1600/South%2BEngland%2Barmsd.png Central England http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-46p-JYeo6vg/VB2j2smXF2I/AAAAAAAADpk/AisIzDjuQZc/s1600/Central%2BEngland%2Barms.png Northern England http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-D04DF9ovPKg/VB2j2hU_hpI/AAAAAAAADps/adwChcxHudE/s1600/North%2BEngland%2Barmsl.png England as a whole http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-gYPorYerA8M/VB2nzny9ThI/AAAAAAAADqs/S9o0GC0uvyo/s1600/england.png
witch Posted September 23, 2014 Posted September 23, 2014 I really don't think you can lump the South in as one place because of London and the South East
localzuk Posted September 23, 2014 Posted September 23, 2014 Indeed. The south west and the south east are very different areas.
featured_spectre Posted September 23, 2014 Posted September 23, 2014 (edited) The proposal separates London into its own entity, so the South is covering the entire south, both east and west. FYI this is not my proposal, but one that was put forward to an MP in my area and is being discussed by him and further people (As is my understanding). *edit* Each sectioned area (as is my understanding) pulls in roughly the same income as Greater London, which is why it was partitioned in this way. My understanding could be wrong but that is what I was told. Edited September 23, 2014 by featured_spectre
penfold_99 Posted September 23, 2014 Author Posted September 23, 2014 As for the transport subsidy - the government provide a Bus Service Operators Grant to help provide bus services in remoter areas. Of course, IMHO buses should NEVER have been privatised anyway but that is another issue Privatising buses is not the problem is the way privatisation has been done which is the problem. They have found that same thing with trains. Instead of companies getting a subsidy they are moving to companies have management fees which are fix and performance related. Transport is still owned by the council/city but managed day to day but someone else with expertises.
penfold_99 Posted September 23, 2014 Author Posted September 23, 2014 The proposal separates London into its own entity, so the South is covering the entire south, both east and west. FYI this is not my proposal, but one that was put forward to an MP in my area and is being discussed by him and further people (As is my understanding). *edit* Each sectioned area (as is my understanding) pulls in roughly the same income as Greater London, which is why it was partitioned in this way. My understanding could be wrong but that is what I was told. Where would Manchester sit? Look like its within central england or straddling the boarder. If both Manchester and Birmingham are in the same area there will be problems.
featured_spectre Posted September 23, 2014 Posted September 23, 2014 Manchester sits in Northern England, Birmingham sits in Central England.
Trapper Posted September 23, 2014 Posted September 23, 2014 The problem is, as always, once they've gotten to the top of the ladder (or the old greasy pole) are the really going to kick the ladder from underneath them and change the entire electoral system? No. Yes, Prime Minister did a very good episode on this - Power to the People (Yes, Prime Minister) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Pyroman Posted September 23, 2014 Posted September 23, 2014 (edited) I'm not having that bloody flag! Great big red lancashire rose on in, no thankyou! Edited September 23, 2014 by Pyroman
localzuk Posted September 23, 2014 Posted September 23, 2014 I'm not having that bloody flag! Great big red lancashire rose on in, no thankyou! Needs the White Yorkshire rose! That's not a Lancashire rose - its the Tudor Rose. Back to school for you! 1
Pyroman Posted September 23, 2014 Posted September 23, 2014 That's not a Lancashire rose - its the Tudor Rose. Back to school for you! /Hangs head
sted Posted September 23, 2014 Posted September 23, 2014 none of this solves what i see as the main problem though. Access / influence on politicians. Im sure that if say to pick a random entity big oil company would have far more influence over a politician than teir constituents anyway as thats where their funding comes from. until we take money out of the system (and by that i dont just mean donations by companies and rich individuals i mean mps quitting and suddenly getting jobs in companies that they wrote the trading rules for and so know the loopholes they put in there) Much as id rather not use the monet that way maybe its time elections were paid for from taxes every standing politican gets £x and thats it and it all has to be documented. There is also the problem with a few big parties just look at the us where the republicans are basically acting like a bunch of 8 year olds (if i cant have my way then im going to take my ball home and nobody can play) and causing suffering for many as they just wont compramise on anything as they know they are right so nothing gets done
tmcd35 Posted September 23, 2014 Posted September 23, 2014 Id like to see MPs in the same light as school governors. Voluntary work for people passionate about the post they are holding. Only then will we see a change to the world of politics. Failing that id love the Queen to snap her fingers and return to a monarchy, rule Britannia and all that. So you'd prefer either: a) Only people rich enough to be able to dedicate the time required to pursue the gentlemanly art of public debate or b) a dictatorship Puts 300 years or so worth of emancipation in it's place (but then so does current voter apathy and low turn outs).
Trapper Posted September 23, 2014 Posted September 23, 2014 As has always been said those who want power and to become senior politicians are the last people who should get it. MPs like the trappings, the status and the patronage. Sadly so do a lot of local politicians. Volunteers like school Governors could be better. Still some governors do it just for the power and prestige!
witch Posted September 23, 2014 Posted September 23, 2014 As has always been said those who want power and to become senior politicians are the last people who should get it. MPs like the trappings, the status and the patronage. Sadly so do a lot of local politicians. Volunteers like school Governors could be better. Still some governors do it just for the power and prestige! I have just relinquished my post of governor because of the excessive amount of stuff governors are expected to do now, and all for free. Because I work full time I was unable to give the time that the job requires now so I had to give it up. Governors will very soon be retirees or the rich only which will not be a good thing. As for MPs - they really aren't ALL about trappings etc. My own MP is brilliant - she really cares about the local people and is always seen around and yet she spends a great deal of time in the commons as well. There are others like this - don't go all Daily Mail and presume they are all out for what they can get - you just havent heard of the ones who get their heads down and help the community who voted them in.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now