On Wed, 31 Mar 2010, Mizter T wrote:

On Mar 31, 9:54*pm, Tom Anderson wrote:

On Wed, 31 Mar 2010, Mizter T wrote:

On Mar 31, 12:53*pm, Ian Jelf wrote:

In message , Neil Williams
writes
[snip]
I never quite worked out why the responsibility for these schemes had
to be devolved. *It makes no sense to me.

No, nor to me.

Eh?! It's what devolution is *all about* - devolving the decisions for
a wide range of activities to the national bodies in Scotland and
Wales. It makes for better government.

Why, and could you supply examples?

Devolution seems completely daft to me. Make the right decision, and
make it once.

You serious? That's a pretty technocratic

No, it's *entirely* technocratic.

and rather unwordly way of looking at things, if I may say. By extension
you'd have a single European or even world government.

Yup, seems sensible.

Also, do you disapprove of any local governance, such as the GLSA
arranegements?

Local government - at any level, from village to continent - is a useful
optimisation, if there are decisions that need to be made that are purely
local. But i don't see the point in taking decisions which could be made
at a higher level and arbitrarily splitting them up to be decided locally.

Apart from anything else, devolution in Scotland had pretty much
become a political necessity - the clamour for it had grown so strong
over the preceding years.

Yup. People love it. Doesn't mean it's a good idea.

And in Northern Ireland, whilst the story is very different, again it's
pretty much a political necessity to have devolution arrangements in
order for any progress to be made. The picture in Wales is like as clear
cut.nothing like as clear cut.

Ditto.

tom

--
Damn the Solar System. Bad light; planets too distant; pestered with
comets; feeble contrivance; could make a better myself. -- Francis Jeffery