Total Visits

Wednesday 17 January 2018

LABOUR’S DEVIOUS DAN JARVIS AND HIS DODGY DEVOLUTION DOSSIER


LABOUR’S DEVIOUS DAN JARVIS AND HIS DODGY DEVOLUTION DOSSIER

In the best Blairite traditions, the EU Remainiac, Dan Jarvis, who ironically is the MP for the strongly Leave constituency, Barnsley Central, got his debate on Yorkshire devolution last Wednesday afternoon in the Westminster Hall annex to Parliament.  Here is a link to the record of that debate from Hansard >>>

It is lucky for Dan Jarvis that the debate took place in Westminster Hall rather than on the floor of the House of Commons, as then he might be in trouble for misleading the House of Commons. 

In the debate he said:-

“Barnsley and Doncaster made their voices heard. Some 85% voted in favour of a wider Yorkshire deal, 

The marching orders are thus: go back to the Government and get the deal the people want.

It is absolutely right that we listen to what the people have told us”

“My constituents were very clear about what they were voting for—a wider Yorkshire deal—because they believed that that would be in their economic interests.”

“Indeed, if we are prepared to ignore an 85% majority, what does that say about the state of our democracy?”

“They were very clear in what they said, and it would be wrong for them to be ignored”

“I do not say for one moment that Yorkshire and the Humber should be a special case, but I do believe—I make no apologies for stating it in these terms—that it is a special place. There is something special about what John Sentamu described this morning as God’s own county.  There is a huge strength in our diversity. If we could create an arrangement that brought together 5.3 million people into an economy bigger than 11 EU nations, we would truly be a force to be reckoned with, not just in this country but around the world. In the far east—China, Japan or wherever—people know about Yorkshire.”

Mr Jarvis is referring not to a “democratic” vote, like a referendum or an election, but to what would normally be called a consultation.  (Here is a link to a report on this >>>http://www.itv.com/news/calendar/2017-12-21/barnsley-and-doncaster-voters-overwhelmingly-in-favour-of-one-yorkshire-devolution-plan/).  This consultation only offered two options, neither of which were very attractive to any patriots.  The options were a South Yorkshire Region, based around Sheffield, or alternatively a “One Yorkshire” Region.

Since the last thing that Barnsley and Doncaster people want is to be dominated politically by Sheffield it is not surprising that many of them voted for their county to be the devolved body. 

Even so out of a total electorate of Yorkshire and the Humber region of 3,835.075 only 41,952 “votes” have now been made for “One Yorkshire” devolution. 

In Barnsley, 40,280 residents took part in the “community poll” - that's 22.4% of the electorate. Of those, 34,015 (84.9%) chose “One Yorkshire”, while 6,064 (15.1%) opted for Sheffield City Region.

Meanwhile in Doncaster, 45,470 residents voted - a turnout of 20.1%. Of those, 38,551 (84.7%) came out in favour of “One Yorkshire”, with only 6,685 (14.7%) preferring “Sheffield City Region”.

For Mr Jarvis to talk about 85% as if that was of the whole electorate and to make remarks about democracy, can only be sensibly described as disingenuous and deceitful.  The total number of people who participated in the consultation was only 85,750, the total number people who voted for “One Yorkshire” devolution was 72,566.  That is not only less than 85% of the consultations but also is just over 1% of the electorate of Yorkshire and Humberside!

It is also interesting, when considering Dan Jarvis’ deviousness and disingenuousness, to pick up the way he jumps from talking about the county of Yorkshire, which even so is not all the historic county of Yorkshire to “Yorkshire and the Humber”.  Yorkshire and the Humber is of course the name of the EU “Region” which includes North Lincolnshire, but does not include, for example, Middlesbrough. 

In doing this he, of course, gives his game away.  He as discussed in the previous article on this blog, is not a patriot or even a Yorkshire nationalist but is a “Europeanist” or Europhile who is looking at ways to try to break up the integrity of not only the UK, but also England, in continuing to push for Regionalisation, as per the EU’s Regionalisation project. 

Mr Jarvis not only has no care for our Nation in pursuing this project, but also he would appear not to even care for his own constituents in Barnsley Central, since if England was in fact effectively Regionalised there would be every chance that the politicians of each “Region” would be wanting to hang onto all the tax take of their “Region” and this would be very likely to mean that there would be a dramatic reduction in the Government subsidy to people in Yorkshire. 

Again Mr Jarvis is deceitful in his use of the statistics as to what way Yorkshire stands on the level of subsidy, since he quotes a comparison to UK subsidies and thus the vastly inflated subsidies of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland under the Barnett Formula rather than looking at the average level of Government spending across England only.

The other thing about Mr Jarvis’ focus on devolution for Yorkshire and Humber is that he and his other “Europeanists” do not seem to have learnt from the fiasco of their attempt to try and entrench Regional Assemblies in “Yorkshire” and in the “North East”.  It was the very fact that the proposed regionalisation for Yorkshire was not the traditional county but instead the EU Region of Yorkshire and the Humber which led to the proposal for Yorkshire and the Humber being so unpopular that John Prescott did not even try to have a referendum there, but instead went for the only “Region” where he thought he had any chance, which was the “North East”.  Even then his proposal utterly flopped at the ballot box - getting only 29% support!

As it says in Proverbs, Chapter 26, Verse 11:- “As a dog that returns to his vomit, so is a fool who repeats his folly”.  So can we say to devious Dan “Ay up lad! Sup up!?”

Here are all the comments which Mr Jarvis said in the debate which I found to be “interesting”. 

What do you think? 

Here they are the extracts from his comments:-  All of us here have a responsibility to work co-operatively together to best serve the interests of our region. 

A constructive way forward for a future devolved settlement for Yorkshire
people of Barnsley and Doncaster made their voices heard. Some 85% voted in favour of a wider Yorkshire deal, 

The marching orders are thus: go back to the Government and get the deal the people want.

It is absolutely right that we listen to what the people have told us.

The status quo is not delivering. People are disillusioned, and they have a right to feel that way.

Not only do the people of Yorkshire receive an income that is 80% of the national average, but they also receive £300 per head less in terms of public spending, 

Secretary of the State to send the strongest signal of intent to the north of England that they are listening to what people are saying, and are prepared to make decisions that best serve those people’s interests.

This Friday in York, the coalition of the willing—leaders from across our area—will meet to reaffirm their support for the wider Yorkshire proposal.

I do understand why people in our region are disillusioned and angry.

We need a new economic and political settlement that involves genuine devolution of political and economic power that will spread prosperity and opportunity to towns and counties of all regions.

The solution must be as ambitious as the challenge is profound. That is why I believe that a wider Yorkshire deal is the way forward. By working together across the whole of our county and, like in the west midlands, not being confined to just one city, we would have the collective clout and the brand reputation to co-operate and compete not only with other parts of the UK, but with other parts of the world.

My constituents were very clear about what they were voting for—a wider Yorkshire deal—because they believed that that would be in their economic interests.

Could not have agreed more. Both nationally and internationally, a single Mayor would provide the single voice required to unlock the much-needed new investment. That is critically required in areas such as our transport system.

A wider Yorkshire combined authority directing investment decisions and using its purchasing power to negotiate

Devolution is about more than just transport infrastructure. It is about accessing funding for skills and training, building affordable homes, and preserving our unique culture, countryside and heritage by working together, harnessing our talents, combining our energies and maximising our influence, all of which is in reach.

The sense of place, community and belonging that comes from identifying with Yorkshire is, in many ways, our greatest asset. 

That will take more time, so first we need an interim solution not only to preserve the goal of a wider Yorkshire deal,

Indeed, if we are prepared to ignore an 85% majority, what does that say about the state of our democracy?

They were very clear in what they said, and it would be wrong for them to be ignored, not least because the Secretary of State was right when he told the Local Government Association that the driving force behind devolution is the desire to bring decision making to a more local level. 

This is not a political argument, in the sense that there is cross-party support.

As part of the coalition of the willing, some people have said to me that we should press for a wider Yorkshire settlement earlier than 2020,

I do not say for one moment that Yorkshire and the Humber should be a special case, but I do believe—I make no apologies for stating it in these terms—that it is a special place. There is something special about what John Sentamu described this morning as God’s own county.  There is a huge strength in our diversity. If we could create an arrangement that brought together 5.3 million people into an economy bigger than 11 EU nations, we would truly be a force to be reckoned with, not just in this country but around the world. In the far east—China, Japan or wherever—people know about Yorkshire. It means something to them, and it means something to us. This is a once-in-a-generation opportunity to put in place an arrangement that could be really meaningful for the people we represent, and I very much hope that we will not miss out.

Where there is political will to make changes, it should be entirely possible to do so".

8 comments:

  1. Labour is looking for any method to entrench itself and regionalism is how it manifests itself. We need to repeal the Local Government Act 1972 to stop them in their tracks.

    Francis

    ReplyDelete
  2. The Tories' Justine Greening has said it is up to the young to reverse Brexit. These are the ones who never knew an England before the EEC and have been brainwashed into thinking that it was a horrible, benighted and impoverished place - the sort of place to which Brexit has ensured that we return. Just wait for the old ignorant racist little Englanders to die off and the starry eyed young can then return us to the democratic wonderland that is the EU ( not!). Brexit like every other referendum in the EU can be reversed, they think. Interestingly, Switzerland is to hold a referendum to stop the free movement of peoples from the EU as she is swamped by immigrants.

    On another note, one of the saddest recent events was the death of the United Nations High Commissioner for migration and arch-globalist, Peter Sullivan whose great aim was to destroy the homogeneity of European nations and turn Europe into another United States - presumably eventually with a white minority also. Some have termed him a white genocidalist. And a recent piece on Breitbart had commentators lining up wanting to desecrate his grave. One said that he hoped that he met up with the victims of Jihadi terrorism in Europe which his policies have brought about but then added that they would be in heaven whilst he would be rotting in hell. No surprise perhaps that was another one with links to Goldman Sachs. Even the priest at his funeral mass commented that Peter seemed to be oblivious to the disadvantages of globalism/globalisation.

    Breitbart coupled this with a piece on my hero, Viktor Orban who has accused the EU of wishing to creaete a United States of Europe which is post nationalist and post Christian. He could have added, post-European, culturally and ethnically.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sorry, I thought I had done this. The person who texted me the news about Peter referred to him as Peter Sullivan. Perhaps this was because the gentleman was Irish and thoughts also turned to horse racing. He was of course, Peter Sutherland, having Scottish blood. My apologies to Peter's family and admirers but it does not alter my view of him and that of many others as a white genocidalist.

      Delete
  3. Abolish the Local Government Act (1972) as it gives these people almost unlimited power to abuse us.

    Seems to me that the remainiacs are ingraining themselves into rotton boroughs in order to stay in power.

    Francis

    ReplyDelete
  4. Devolution for Scotland = self-government. For Wales, ditto and when they're not too busy squabbling amongst themselves, the same goes for Northern Ireland. In England, we have had county councils, city and town councils and parish councils since time immemorial. These were never billed as "devolution". At least, not until the Scots etc got it. Now, glorified county councils ("City-Regions" with their "Metro-Mayors") are equated to what the Scots et-al enjoy. Codswallop! Devolution for England can mean only one thing - self-government for England.
    Clive.
    Weston-super-Mare.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Thank you Robin for this excellent article.Your analysis of Globalist Labour and their local territorial STRATEGIC consolidation games is spot on.
    Having received a BA in International (GLOBALISM)Politics and STRATEGIC STUDIES in 1996 at Aberystwyth University,we could reasonably assume that Dan Jarvis is fully aware and in total agreement with the NWO/Globalists and their long term plans for Europe UK/England via the EU.
    It was around the early 1990s,that World Wide Socialism-Labour agreed to merge their Internationalism with the Multi- Nationalism of the Global Corporatists. The big banks in particular.
    This seemingly unlikely merger was made possible by one overriding aim for both parties-Mass Immigration and the total destruction of Traditional Values-Family-Christianity and last but not least Nationalism as the protector and guarantor of the same.
    Mr Dan Jarvis is a Labour Globalist carrying out the sneaky agenda of his Globalist Masters and their agenda to undermine England at every turn.Not least the Traditional English Counties.
    Says Bill from Harold Hill.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Well this Yorkshire & Humber is an artificial EU concept as a Yellerbelly can tell you the Humber bit is us lot in Northern Lincolnshire bolted on to the post 1972 Yorkshire a totally artificial concoction no idea why Labour party are pushing this as a Lab voter. Its a nonsense but a dangerous nonsense as I said interested parties and I presume the English Democrats are one, have to propose the legitimate alternative decentralisation within England which is a 40 County Sovereignty Committee. Speak with the Association of British Counties, Campaign for an English Parliament & get a return to pre 1972 in English Local Governance in post Brexit UK.
    Harold

    ReplyDelete