.The Wessex Regionalists have submitted the following response to the Boundaries Commision's consultation on the proposed changes to parliamentary constituency boundaries:
We support the campaign by Cornish organisations against the proposed "Devonwall constituency", which violates the territorial integrity of both Wessex and Cornwall. We also object to your description of it as a "cross-county" constituency, rather than one which crosses a national boundary.
On the subject of cross-county constituencies, we note with regret the creation of a Warminster and Shaftesbury constituency, half of which would be in Wiltshire with the other half in Dorset. Whilst not quite as severe as the erosion of the Tamar boundary, we do believe that the counties of Wessex are venerable institutions whose boundaries should be respected.
Our President, Colin Bex, has also submitted his own personal response, which you can read here.
4.00 am on Friday 24th June was a moment in European history when democracy in action put the 'Great' back into Britain - and Wessex.
It was the time it became clear that a critical mass of the disenchanted and marginalised, came together and rose up in sufficient numbers to say, not - 'enough was enough', but - 'more than enough is too much', and it must cease forthwith.
Those in Wessex and Cornwall who saw the sense and had the courage to act to extricate themselves from domination by the Europe administration have set the opportunity if not laid the groundwork for instituting the first regional parliaments in both territories, and hopefully for other regions of England - and Europe if it is to survive.
It was the first significant success for Britain in this second decade of the first century of the third millennium - whose dawn was so infamously destroyed with such appalling abuse by nation state governments including Britain's through illegal invasions and violent repression against the rise in demands for democracy around the world.
That the system for voting in the referendum and the choice it provided was designed to ensure the electorate would be riven in two - was the standard device for divide and rule undemocratically whatever the result, and it demonstrates beyond doubt that it is long overdue to change our voting system and our means of implementing it.
Now it is the turn of the establishment, the inequitably 'rich', and the abusively powerful to have to contend with feeling if not of much pain - at least of anger and disbelief which hitherto and for far too long from on high it has visited on the poor, deprived and disposessed who finally have risen up against them.
The more intelligent of these 'losers' to-day, will take time to reflect and to realise it's game over for the neo-imperial, sadist model of top-down diktat by aloof nation-state government politicians, corporate institutions and irredeemably corrupt and fatally flawed finance systems throughout the world.
Now is the time, also long-overdue that this must be rooted out and replaced with bottom-up democracy managed in suitably scaled regional and urban parliaments in Britain (and Europe if it it wants to survive) and whose members will be answerable via proportional representation to sovereign power vested in the parishes and villages in country, town and city. Also - a stable and equitable finance system must be designed and implemented.
Any attempt by the Tusk-Junker administration to impede or frustrate a measured and gradual withdrawal from its dominion, will serve principally to encourage - not to intimidate others, who may do likewise in the sad demise of the Europe project which otherwise could be saved by the solutions the Wessex Regionalists have been advocating for more than forty years.
It is urged they get on with it without further delay.
Colin Bex, President
In raising some key considerations toward deciding how to vote in this referendum a few weeks ago (Wessex Citizen No. 2), led me to favour supporting the vote to rearrange the British government's relationship with the European adminstration.
At the time, I was mindful of which option would be more likely to further our principal aim of securing a Wessex assembly as soon as possible, bearing in mind that whilst British sovereignty has been compromised in having been supborned into the hands of the undemocratic Brussels bureaucracy (see 'The EU: A Corporatist Racket......' below), nonetheless, Wessex citizens have not relinquished their citizen sovereignty and would never do so, thus would be able to assert it by way of the bottom-up democratic model we envision.
Also I was appalled at the prospect of including Turkey within the already over-burgeoning membership from a managable seven states into the motley and clearly unmanageable twenty seven states now joined, some already struggling to pay impossible debt commitments imposd on them by the IMF and the massively quantatively eased currency of the European central bank, and others now having returned with an extreme right, neo-fascist tendency to make things worse.
Since then, despite and because of all the hot air and the fact the public campaign has degenerated into a lamentable level of inaccuracy, inuendo, insult and insignificance, those initial inclinations for participating in the referendum have been reinforced, and I have become aware of perhaps its principal functions which as usual are to divide the nation as a prelude to the next round of centrist diktat, thus motivating me to call Cameron's bluff and seize this so-called 'opportunity of a lifetime' to vote for a new arrangement with the administration of the European mainland.
That decision was further reinforced by the hyperbole uttered by Cameron to-day that this referendum was a once in a lifetime irreversible decision which would condemn Britain's children to a lifetime of poverty and misery - a last desperate attempt to try to intimidate the electorate away from voting him and his tentatively ensconced administration to come back from Europe and attend to repairing the damage he has caused at home in making the poor pay for the latest breakdown of the capitalist finance system, rather than to be allowed to continue to fund junkets for the rich, riding first class on the Eurocrat gravy train.
So, instead of taking too much notice of any of it, I rely on data prepared in a series of lucid papers produced by Executive Director and Principal of Europe Economics, Andrew Lilico http://www.europe-economics.com/search/0/search.htm who in paper No.95 takes a line which argues that in economic terms the UK has gained much from EU membership in particular by way of building influence via the treaties and the workings of the European Commission, and he believes Britain 'has converted its continental partners to an economic philosophy based around free trade, market liberalisation, privatisation, limits on state aid, competition, and the interests of small and medium-sized enterprises.'
Also he notes:
'Following Brexit, the EU would work better and grow faster to the UK's benefit. In a dynamic world, the UK could take better advantage of its ability to reverse policy errors, allowing for more policy experimentation and innovation. In respect of trade, Britain can gain as much from new trade deals with non-EU countries as the modest losses it is likely to make in EU trade.
These longer-term gains will not come for free. In the short term, Brexit is likely to bring two or three years of somewhat slower growth. But by 2030 I would expect the UK to be more or less back to balance. It might even gain' and he concludes:
'The UK has done a good job in converting its friends to converge in the British direction. Progress has been sufficient for Brexit's economic costs to be low. Voters need only to believe the economic costs of leaving will not be too high.
UNCONTROLLED IMMIGRATION - CONTEXT
Wesseaxens and inhabitants of other regions within England should beware and remember that the history of invasion, civil war and other horrors experienced by generations of conflict-hardened European mainlanders have taken their tolls at a much greater scale if not intensity than such mayhem as plots and skirmishes throughout evolutionary small-scale, 'off-shore' Britain.
Quite simply our island is neither of a size nor of a scale - nor is it equipped to accommodate millions of rich - or poor unfortunates from a world catchment of potentionally billions of people who believe life here is a panacea to their problems for which serial decisions by this country's governments are susbstantially responsible - both at home and abroad.
The nature of life on an island - and in an archipelago such as Greece should proceed on both at a smaller, slower pace as determined by the climate, its scale and its inhabitants who should be able to offer seasonal accommodation to visitors at prices they can afford in numbers which do not overwhelm their populations rather than to allow themselves to be dragooned let alone betrayed by their governments into totalitarian corporate commercial competition, global financial and political shenanigans or illegal invasions and computer wars on remote nations' territory.
That is why it would constitute flagrant dereliction of duty and responsibility to resile from taking measures based on scientific evidence and biological criteria to prevent the damaging consequences of uncontrolled open door global migratory activity in order to protect already ailing and overcrowded indigent settlement areas in a Britain whose provision of adequate low cost residential accommodation has decreased over the decades to a point where waiting lists are prohibitive and, in failing to consider and to take into account the potential for disproportionate numbers from around the world let alone those from the Europeanmainland, joining the fashion however misguided, in wishing to join our small island.
That such migration is directly due to illegal interventions within other countries by successive Tory, Labour, ConDem and now a conspicuous 'Grand Coalition' administration who, as part of a crumbling anachronism is increasingly bereft of honesty, integrity and credibility and increasingly is seen by a majority of British citizens to represent almost no one but themselves and their illicit self-voted privileges.
One of the most sinister features of the current legislature is that whereby way of cul-de-sac of purported finality, it sets-in-stone the consequences of policies and contracts protected under the auspices of Draconian damages clauses endorsed by the parties.
Currently, no better example of this exsists than that of the shady bi-lateral deliberations toward the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) proceeding behind closed doors between the EU and American administrations - all under covert oversight of a self-appointed cabal of unelected operators from a shadow world government.
Amongst impacts on British people as a consequence include threats to the NHS; food and environmental safety; banking regulations; privacy; 'jobs'; and of course further attacks against the wellspring for democracy surging around the world.
Moreover, there are some 500 similar cases of businesses versus nations going on around the world at the moment and they are all taking place before ‘arbitration tribunals’ made up of corporate lawyers appointed on an ad hoc basis, which according to War on Want’s John Hilary, are “little more than kangaroo courts” with a vested interest in ruling in favour of the shibboleth of coporate business. http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/what-is-ttip-and-six-reasons-why-the-answer-should-scare-you-9779688.html
A SUPERSTATE EUROPEAN ARMY?
Generals fight for Brexit: Our forces would be stronger outside 'not fit for purpose' EU, says a dozen former top brass http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3607761/Generals-fight-Brexit-forces-stronger-outside-not-fit-purpose-EU-says-dozen-former-brass.html
A report by Larisa Brown, Political Correspondent For The Daily Mail Published: 24 May 2016, Updated: 17:07, 25 May 2016
highlights a scathing attack against Europe by Former military top brass who say the EU has become 'intrusive' and 'out of control' and not fit for purpose, and they reject the idea Brexit would have a negative impact on the UK's defence. Also, one of Britain's most respected generals - Sir Michael Rose who commanded UN troops in Bosnia from 1994 to 1995 and was in charge of the SAS siege of the Iranian embassy in 1980 - claims EU law has seriously undermined the country's combat effectiveness and says British forces would be stronger outside the EU
His comments will humiliate the Prime Minister because Sir Michael's name was 'mistakenly' added to a letter orchestrated by Downing Street earlier this year which promoted the EU.
In an individual statement, Sir Michael says: 'Sovereignty and defence are indivisible. European law, in my view, has already seriously undermined UK's combat effectiveness as a result of the intrusion of European law into national law. And today, our servicemen and women are in danger of becoming no more than civilians in uniform.'
The retired senior military officers are backing Veterans for Britain, a campaign for a Leave vote in the EU referendum aimed at serving and former military personnel.
For reasons beyond my control on account of the government's malicious austerity measures, and coming as it does at the fifty-ninth second of the fifty-ninth minute of the eleventh hour before closure of the polls, I am under no delusion that the timing of this modest contribution will go any way to sway the result.
The best to be hoped however is that it may be noted by a handful who may read it and in a small way find some of it helpful as part of the large body of evidence to influence positive outcomes of any negotiations which will take place at the highest levels after 10 .00 pm tomorrow the 23 June - whatever the result of this referendum and however we may learn later it will have been rigged.
Unless and until ALL nation state illegal war criminals and genocide suspects are brought before the international court of justice in the Hague at least to answer for their crimes, there will be no peace on this planet for any adult - let alone any children.......
High on the list of suspects outstanding include current and previous government administrations of America, Israel, Britain and Russia.
Of those who should be found guilty - especially those who wish to anchor Britain's sovereignty within Europe in perpetuity - if found guilty (Chillcot is insufficient), nonetheless should it be the wish voluntarily of the families and friends of their victims to spare them incarceration in the spirit of truth and reconciliation on the basis of undertakings that they perform some alternative compensatory commitments - so be it.
If not they must be prepared to face the punishments they have seen fit be visited on their opposite numbers who have been convicted for crimes committed against people in other parts of the world.
Whatever the final outcome of the referendum (my guess exists in a sealed envelope lodged with a friend not be opened until the final result is declared), almost certainly the official numbers published will be massaged to convey a false impression in favour of remain - as occurred for 'No' in the Scots referendum for independence when inclusion of the disenfranchised who have suffered the same consequences of the rigged vote as have the polsters who supported it, reduced the margin of difference between the contendents closer to 5% than the c.10% published
Whatever the result of the referendum this time, however it may have been reached, the governments of Britain and Europe must immediately initialise a demand for a new international treaty to be drawn up expeditiously by way of reinforcing the laws of war - in the form of a codicil perhaps to those enshrined in the Kellog Briand (Paris) pact.
The new or so-amended treaty must be agreed and signed by all government administrations around the world on the orders of all people around the world who demand it, the huge majority of which requires to be able to live their lives wholesomely and peacefully and without fear or favour of anyone else who by an accident of biology shares the planet with them - especially those serial and compulsive belligerents ruling the now anachronistic nation states of America, Britain, Israel, Palestine, North Korea, China, Japan, India, Pakistan, Russia, Africa and many more.
Further - in respect for the families and victims of all 67 British and European nationals murdered in controlled demolitions of the three trade centre buildings in New York in 2011 - the British and European administrations must demand that, without further delay Obama orders an immediate re-investigation of the circumstances leading to, during and after that flagrant international crime and to name and arraign the people responsible.
Fourteen anniversaries of the event have taken place to date, and yet the American government has refused point blank to heed persistent and increasing calls world-wide by campaigns including America's Architects and Engineers for 911Truth, Britain's Re-investigate 911 and many others who continue to demand further investigation to establish the truth and provide the victims families and friends the compensation and closure to which they are lawfully entitled and so richly deserve.
Recent publicity revealing the criminal acts committed by the British police against the public at Hillsborough - twenty-eight years ago - is an example of establishment bureaucratic treason against the sovereing rights of the victims and their families and friends of such monumental scale which clearly demonstrates why increasingly people are waking up to realise the pandemic of illegal inhuman rot which lies at the heart of undemocratic Nation State establishments around the world.
If Obama wishes part of his time to be remembered as a worthy legacy, he will not allow Hillsborough to be used as a model against the victims of 911 New York.
If these actions are not executed without further delay, there will be no secure peace on this planet for any adult - let alone their children living now and continuing to be born in the future.......
Colin Bex, President 22vi16
Pictured above Count Nicolai Tolstoy and wife supporting Party President Colin Bex and a Wessex Region at a rally in Witney on Sunday 12 June to greet two Brexiteer Tory MP's from Mercia who had come down to Cameron's constituency to make their point he should support 'Leave' in the EU
The murder of Labour M.P Jo Cox by a far right fanatic has rightly brought condemnation from across many political divides. The Wessex Regionalists in paying their respects stated lessons need to be learned in this tragic death. This is particularly the case in what is often inaccurate headlines in a number of newspapers and the words and statements of right leaning politicians.
It cannot be ignored language used in the headlines of the Tory supporting press and of parties such as UKIP fuels hatred. This contributes to tipping the mentally imbalanced among far right supporters over the edge and towards acts of severe violence. 'Rogue reporting' and statements by politicians such as Nigel Farage fuel tensions in communities feeding those who look for scapegoats in society. The vile poster recently launched by UKIP portraying queues of alleged migrants and asylum seekers trying to enter Britain has echoes of the anti-Semitic sentiments used by fascists during the 1930's.
Comparisons can easily be drawn between the killers of Lee Rigby, who were radicalised by Islamic preachers of hate and the killer of Jo Cox, radicalised by far right preachers of hate. The only difference being the flames of hatred that led to Jo's death were actually fanned by headlines in the Tory press. Scanning the social media pages of hate groups such as Britain First sees promotion of such headlines, which the far right see as justification for their actions.
The Wessex Regionalists call upon the media to think before publishing inflammatory and often inaccurate headlines which can inflame the mentally unstable and fuel campaigns of the politicians of hate.
The Wessex Regionalists - the party for Wessex, send their condolences the family, firens and political colleagues of murdered Labour M.P Jo Cox. Although our party, being based in the south and south west of England, never crossed paths with Jo, we pay tribute to someone who was a sincere, caring politician who worked hard for her constituents, for fairness and social justice. We hope the lessons of Jo's tragic death will be learned and that justice and respect will prevail.
There is no doubt, UKIP and the hard right of the Tory Party will be crowing if Britain votes to leave the European Union on June 23rd. What will follow is a likelihood of a leadership contest within the Conservative Party, leading to a Thatcherite leader who will lead Britain's exit strategy.
The Tory supporting gutter press will also be crowing, with headlines proclaiming draconian legislation to to tackle immigration and the rights of immigrants already in Britain. Meanwhile, quietly being swept in under the carpet will likely be an erosion of workers rights.
One such piece of EU legislation likely to go will be the EU Working Time Directive. This legislation states:
To protect workers’ health and safety, working hours must meet minimum standards applicable throughout the EU.
The EU’s Working Time Directive (2003/88/EC) requires EU countries to guarantee the following rights for all workers:
If as we strongly suspect such legislation is abolished under the Tory exit strategy, cheered on by UKIP, this will have a serious impact on working people in Britain. With such rights taken away, unscrupulous employers will demand workers accept contracts of virtually unlimited hours, have little holiday entitlement and few rest breaks.
Leaving the EU and the loss of such entitlements will be a major step back towards the days of our radical Wessex forefathers in the Tolpuddle Martyrs, who long ago fought for their rights. They, and others who followed them, did not struggle for us to surrender our rights on June 23rd 2016.
The Wessex Regionalists are proud of the fact Wessex is a diverse, multi-cultural region where people from all ethnic backgrounds live happily side by side. The new Wessex we wish to build under a progressive and democratically elected regional assembly would embrace this diversity. However despite this approach, the party has suffered postings on its facebook page from those of a far right and racist persuasion who have tried to hijack the wyvern flag of Wessex and impose a racial form of regionalism. They have entered into arguments and abused members and supporters. The perpetrators have since been removed from the group.
The far right view Wessex as a symbol of old, Anglo-Saxon England and the wyvern flag as an emblem of this. Such views are far from those of the modern Wessex we wish to build. The far right stand for an isolated Wessex and an isolated Britain, whilst we stand for an internationalist Wessex, as part of a reformed EU of 100 flags and a sustainable world economy. The far right oppose immigration on grounds of ethnicity, whilst we recognise the benefits of sustainable immigration yet have concerns about a growing global population. The far right oppose religious slaughter purely based on racism and not animal welfare (a fact enforced by the convictions of some far right activists for holding dog fights). They look upon religious slaughter as another reason to demonise and attack the Islamic faith, whilst we oppose the fact it imposes unnecessary suffering on the animal. We also support Muslims wishing to modernise their faith.
The fact the far right have latched on to regionalism is similar to how a parasite saps blood and infects its host. We will not let this happen. Regionalism is progressive and not regressive, which is why we need to make this statement condemning those who wish to damage its good name. The Wessex Regionalists are a modern, inclusive and internationalist party and therefore those with far right, racist views will not be welcome.
With the clock ticking away towards possibly the most important vote in the history of the United Kingdom, the case for Wessex and regionalism throughout the country can be largely overlooked. Many will view regionalism as something which is totally irrelevant to the European Union, yet it is something which should be at the heart of much needed reforms within its structure.
At its 2016 Annual General assembly in Weston Super Mare, Wessex Regionalists voted overwhelmingly in favour of Britain remaining part of the European Union and supporting the European Free Alliance grouping of parties, which consists of a number of regionalists on the continent, including Mebyon Kernow and Yorkshire First here in the UK. We are of the belief another Europe is possible if we fight alongside our allies for massive reform. Such reforms would bring about a different Europe, one which is decentralised with the right to self determination, direct democracy and bringing power closer to the people.
Economically the arguments in favour of the European Union have been well documented, with the vast majority of trade within Wessex (estimated at being worth around £10 billion in exports) is carried out with the European Union. Major employers such as Airbus in Bristol, fear leaving the EU will damage trade and cause job losses, fears that are backed up with figures from leading financial experts. In addition to this, the region’s coastal and fishing communities are set to benefit from tens of millions in European funding within the next few years.
Economically, to leave would no doubt hit damage the economy in the short term at least. When the economy is hit, the asset strippers of global corporations will move in, thus placing even more ownership of our industry out of our hands. In addition to this, under the Tory exit strategy, nothing would be done to support workers who lose their jobs. This would increase poverty, social unrest and have tragic consequences. When the likes of Boris Johnson say ‘We can save all this money if we leave the EU’, the actual social cost is not taken into account. Besides, the lost time a Conservative government had a windfall in the 1980’s from North Sea oil revenue, they did not invest it in jobs, the NHS or education – all of which suffered. They chose to invest it in tax cuts for the rich and in doing so increased the greed in society. Based on the track record of the Conservative Party, and UKIP to whom many on the Tory right have fled, further tax cuts for the wealthy and high earners will take precedence over investment in job creation, education, the NHS or fighting climate change.
Despite our argument for reform and greater self determination within the EU, Wessex Regionalists also recognise tackling some of the most important issues of the 21st century involves co-operation and legislation created with our European partners. For example, as a party for environmental protection, the Wessex Regionalists see climate change as such an issue which can only be tackled by countries and regions working together and putting the planet before national interests.
Workers rights is another area where the Wessex Regionalists fear withdrawal from the European Union will see such rights being eroded under a Conservative Party exit strategy. We are a party which wishes to see continuous improvements in workers rights and living standards across Europe. Those on the right of the political spectrum supporting the ‘Leave’ campaign have continuously highlighted migration as a reason for the UK to withdraw from the EU, with some using language which is both divisive and bordering on racism. Migration (under free movement of labour) allows people to improve their standard of living as well as experiencing living and working in a different country. Through co-operation and fair distribution of funding as part of mass reform within the EU, there could be vast improvements in living standards in poorer areas, thus reducing the need for economic migration. In fact raising living standards may even see increased numbers of people from Wessex wishing to live and work overseas – something the nationalist and racist elements of the ‘Leave’ campaign wish to ignore.
We have highlighted the different Europe we envisage as part of mass reforms within the EU, all of which is possible through the election of progressive politicians to the European and national parliaments. However we also recognise differences in the ‘Leave’ camp. Those on the right of the political spectrum have based their exit strategy more or less on immigration and nationalistic issues and in doing so stirred up the most repulsive elements of non-progressive patriotism. Whilst they claim they wish to trade with the rest of the world (which we still do anyway) some would like to see greater ties with the United States (and therefore support a UK –US form of the TTIP agreement) or even for the ‘good ship Britannia’ to sail alone on an almost segregationist path which would lead to long term economic ruin. For many in the ‘Leave’ camp, a narrow minded, little-Englander mentality exists where breaking ties with ‘Johnny Foreigner’ outweighs all else.
The left exit campaign (Lexit) is largely built on greater internationalism as well as self determination. However this will not form any part of an exit strategy which will be dictated by an anti-socialist, anti internationalist Conservative government. Therefore ‘Lexit’ does not really exist, apart from within the pages of the far left press and minds of people such as Arthur Scargill. There are others very much on the hard left, who would like to see a ‘Socialist Sates of Europe’, possibly with increased centralisation reminiscent of the worst planning aspects of the former USSR.
Many people have, quite rightly, condemned the scaremongering by both sides in the EU debate. Yet there is one fact which is very true. The only people that will take us out of the European Union is the very far right of the Conservative Party. Their record is one that does not care about workers rights, human rights, the environment, the NHS, the unemployed or others dependent on a welfare state they are ideologically opposed to. Can we honestly trust such a party to do have the final say on what is the possibly the most important decision this country has ever had to make?
The ‘Driverless car’ jibe of Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn in response to government proposals detailed in the Queen’s speech, is probably not that far off the mark. One thing is for certain, it is a driverless car that has followed a route avoiding the long established, traditional regions of England and any consideration of listening to the case for devolution to these regions.
The route of the Tories driverless car clearly follows one of austerity and increased privatisation of public services. In education, as well as plans to force more schools to become academies (despite recently backtracking on this socially divisive policy), there is also the possibility of uncapping university tuition fees. We may also see the scrapping of the Human Rights Act which will have a detrimental effect on our civil liberties, whilst prisons will continue to remain overcrowded and in many circumstances ineffective as a result of failing to address the long term causes of crime in the community. By and large if this speech was a driverless car it is one that has failed its MOT owned by a government that is taking the country to the breakers yard.
There was some bright light. Our Portsmouth & co-organiser for Hampshire, Cliff Jones, uncovered amongst the austerity wrapped speech the ‘Bus Services Bill’. Cliff said, ‘The Bus Services Bill promises to give councils new powers to better plan and manage bus services. We'll be campaigning to make sure that it delivers better buses for all of us – and that funding cuts don't leave passengers stranded before the Bill has a chance to take effect’.
Being a party for the community, the Wessex Regionalists, recognise public transport is very important in building thriving local communities. But what the Tories give with one hand (the Bus Services Bill) they take away with the other, in the form of funding. How many local bus services has Wessex lost – and how many are in the pipeline to be axed. As Cliff pointed out, the Wessex Regionalists will fight for funding as well as preserving and even increasing bus routes.
Our vision is clearly different from the austerity driven, ‘Big is Wonderful’, centralised diktat of David Cameron and others in the Westminster village. What is spouted from the mouths of those sat on the green benches is not always policies of a driverless car, but hot air which could fill a thousand balloons. The Queen’s Speech, as always was a one size fits all approach to government. We believe this is an upside down approach, and what is required is grassroots democracy, listening to communities, ensuring adequate public services for those communities and a future for all in those communities.
Pictured left the Portsmouth & Hampshire co-organiser of the Wessex Regionalists, Cliff Jones, has stressed the party will be active in campaigning for better public transport in the light of the Bus Services Bill being introduced in the Queen's speech.
Joining the Wessex Regionalists costs just £5 as a 'Supporter'
or £10 as a 'Full Member'. Click on the image above to find out how to join us,
Do you share the same values as the Wessex Regionalists? Click on the image above to take our short survey and find out.