What sort of federalism would you like for the UK?

Yes, as regards England, over the years mainly Tory Westminster has concentrated far too much power on itself - police and education come to mind - and watered down the role of the big metropolitan local authorities. On the other hand things like social care and aspects of the benefit system have been delegated. This has led to much fragmentation and a lack of consistency, so I would start the process of reversing all this. I agree that the House of Lords (how I hate that patronising title!) should become a regionally elected upper house for the whole UK, with most of its present constitutional responsibilities continuing, but totally excluding hereditary and religious appointments. I would also dissestablish the Anglican Church. Basically, the UK needs a proper, written constitution.

I agree all round Lilygran. This would be a great opportunity for changing from a none elected second house. My only problem with electing members of the house of Lords is that they would be Lord, Lady, etc. That doesn't conjure up a representative to me - but it's a small point at this stage.

I forgot about them, so we have six layers of government where I live.

I was not suggesting we keep the Lords in its present state and function but that we have an elected, upper house to act as the federal body. I believe Thatcher destroyed the metropolitan councils because they were challenging the Tory party then in power.

the "extra layer" tactic was used to scare voters in previous assembly elections. I understand why, as the current political parties certainly the two largest, will not want a devolved system. They would have to work much harder to bring together groups and would be much less able to steam-roller bills, that no one has ever voted on, through the(UK) Parliament.

I suspect that is very true - they're not the most truthful lot are they! It will have a lot to do with losing much of their power and influence as well (which wouldn't be a bad thing - opportunities could then go to those who will do a good job of it rather than to their cronies who only seem to have an eye for profit).

Well, we certainly have 5 layers where I live and it is costing a lot of money.

I think I said earlier that I do not see the need for an additional layer.

You do not need the Lords as your second chamber if you have a UK Parliament as that becomes your second house and, as constituency work would be done by the Assemblies (they would probably be called something else, even Councils as they would be building on that) you do not need as many UK MPs as we currently have MPs in the Commons. Those running Assemblies could subsume the constituency work of the English MPs and do the county or city council work.

I don't have all the ins and outs worked out rosequartz, that is for cleverer people than me to suggest, but the "extra layer" tactic was used to scare voters in previous assembly elections. I understand why, as the current political parties certainly the two largest, will not want a devolved system. They would have to work much harder to bring together groups and would be much less able to steam-roller bills, that no one has ever voted on, through the(UK) Parliament.

Changes in general in the public sector.

I do not think it is necessary to have five layers of government.

I'm not sure if you are referring to quangos or a more federalised system of government rosequartz.

Precisely, Holly.

Because the bridges are run by a private firm.

Gracesgran the thing is, with more reorganisation the costs go up again - redundancies paid out then the same people come back under a slightly different job title in a rejigged department. Or they return as 'consultants' on huge daily rates in effect doing the same thing as before.

I know there are tolls on continental motorways, but the bridge toll is £19.20 for a distance of approximately 2 miles and is discriminating against Welsh businesses.

The point I was trying to make is that if motorists are paying road tax, why are they also paying tolls?

I think you would find that if you got rid of "quangos", rosequartz which are in many cases, government departments put at arms length in a effort to make them more efficient, many if not all would go back to being government departments.

I worked for one at one stage and the people with the specific knowledge for the area we were in had been changed many times. They had all worked together before, and then not as the areas were separated out, and then back together. Usually there is a small group with the core knowledge and very few others in the country that have that knowledge. You might redistribute them and save by getting rid of a few highly paid CEOs but they would no doubt come under a highly paid someone else. These people are usually very good at knowing how government works but can milk their positions. So, you may, in the end, get rid of a few highly paid people, who would be replaced by one or two fewer highly paid people with the savings being off-set by the costs of change.

I thought there was less, not more centralisation. We now have five layers of government in our part of the country, counting the european parliament, all with their representatives, staff and requiring more and better premises - whilst services get worse.

I know there are tolls on continental motorways, but the bridge toll is £19.20 for a distance of approximately 2 miles and is discriminating against Welsh businesses.

I remember the Local Government reorganisation in about 1972, Gracesgran and remember being astonished at how the boss's salaries suddenly escalated (whereas ours did not)..
Jobs for the boys, too much management, creaming off resources from vital services - reorganisation never seems to be for the better.

We could start by getting rid of the quangos.

In answer to the OP though, I would say none.

That's interesting Rosequartz. There was a reminder in the Guardian today of how things used to be.

"Until 1986, the main English conurbations had their own regional tier of government through the Greater London council and the metropolitan county councils covering the West Midlands, Greater Manchester, Merseyside, South Yorkshire, West Yorkshire and Tyne and Wear. These were abolished by Margaret Thatcher and their powers either taken over by Whitehall or devolved to district councils."

I must admit that I do not think this centralisation of power has worked. I feel it has left many people feeling disenfranchised. Obviously you are happy with it but I will look forward to any suggestions to decentralise once again.

Why would it mean another layer of government? Surely it would mean the same number as now? It would just mean that your MP would spend more time in their constituencies than in London - less travelling expenses, no need for hotel stays, no need for second homes. In fact, given technology, why do they need to travel to London so much anyway?

^one of the first, and simplest, moves would be to remove the tolls from the Severn crossings - tolls on bridges have been removed in Scotland. The cost is a scandal and does nothing to promote Welsh businesses.
It costs £19.20 for a lorry to cross the bridge (due to go up again in January).^

Spain has no road tax at all but does charge motorists a toll for using the motorways (A roads and all others have no toll charges though). Might be an idea to ask them how they manage it!

UKIP - traitors. Take EU Parliament seats and then do damn all for our interests..

Despicable.

Why should it be worse to be called a Jock than to be called a Geordie?

In answer to the OP though, I would say none.

My Scottish friend and colleague was known as 'Jimmy' by some work colleagues (as in 'see yew Jimmy') although that is not his name. He has a sense of humour and didn't take offence.

Jolly good.

I'm not an idiot. But I will be voting UKIP. So will my Dentist and Hairdresser.

I got one of Gransnet HQ's famous snotty emails because I called the French frogs, so we'd better watch it with the "jocks".

I Wasn't actually trying to help! (What with anyway?)