Bishop of Durham's support for the North East in Europe

Dateline: 21st January 2002

Dear Bishop,

Thank you for your letter of 19th December 2001 is response to my criticism of your Chairmanship of the North East Constitutional Convention and your active involvement with North East in Europe. As it happens I was on Radio Newcastle with one of your fellow activists on Sunday but I decided not to publicly criticise the political involvement of the Church at this stage, in the hope and expectation that you (and the other 4 Bishops of the Church of England in other parts of the country) will withdraw from that involvement. You can read about the disgraceful, anti-democratic proceedings of the South West Constitutional Convention, chaired by the Bishop of Exeter, in Appendix 3 of my book Fascist Europe Rising.

Both the organisations you support are not just blatantly political but extremely controversial. Your statement that you believe "the welfare of the vast majority of the people in the North East will be served better by political devolution" is a controversial political statement in itself but you have chosen to support that one form of devolution (i.e. regional government) which will:
1. be tailor-made for government by the European Union (as the presence of European Commission officials at some of these conventions testifies) and not by our sovereign Parliament in Westminster.
2. undermine and ultimately be incompatible with our traditional county and district systems.

I note that in your letter to me you do not deny the "European" dimension, you merely seek to underplay it. I note that no guarantees on Point 2 are forthcoming. Indeed the Counties are already losing many of their planning powers.

You say that the "devolution process" in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland is making for "a stronger nation". But there is no regional government within Wales and within Scotland and the Northern Ireland devolution was part of the 1922 settlement and has in fact been completely removed. It is the European Union's map of Britain which has excluded England and found that Scotland and Wales are "regions", knowing full well they are in fact no such thing (each consisting of at least two or three logical regions).

If you would look at the history of imperial conquest in Europe you will see that the "regional principle" has always been the method used to undermine and destroy the (non-racial) nation states like Switzerland, Yugoslavia and the United Kingdom. The European Union's intentions are the same and you are aiding, probably unwittingly, their plans.

You say that the North East has "benefited" from "massive grants and incoming business from members of the European Union". In fact Britain receives no net financial contribution from the European Union and the vast majority of the inward investment in the Northeast came before we were even members of the EEC. The funds used to subsidise those foreign investments (in branch factories with relatively low skills) come 95% from regional British taxpayers and the British companies with whom these massively subsidised in-comers then unfairly compete.

You say you "object to the strong centralising tendencies of the present government" but the massive and anti-democratic centralisation over the last 30 years has been to the European Union, not Westminster - the latter having lost 80% of its democratic accountability to bureaucratic dictate from Brussels. The process at play in all the above and in your own involvement with these unelected corporate bodies is in fact corporatism. Instead of the democratic principles of individuals voting for their representatives on the basis of publicly discussed policies, who sit in assemblies to make our laws, we have returned to the system prevalent in the corporatist/fascist 1930s and 1940s. That is, Government seeks to involve "bodies" (which it chooses) to "represent" people in general and claims democratic legitimacy for their conclusions. No elections or democratic involvement are present in the process (most people in the regions have never heard of the "Regional Constitutional Conventions" and were not invited to them).

Needless to say most people are not even interested in never mind represented by trade unions (a minority of workers) the churches (a small minority of the population are active) "women's groups" (no men allowed and few women interested) etc. etc. The only way in which all the people are involved is as individual voters in district, county and national elections. But so corporatist has our political class become that only 59% of the British people now vote for the "Mother of Parliaments".

In your case for instance I, as a practising Anglican, look to you for the word of God, Christian values, the defence of the family, urging help for the needy and above all for general moral guidance based on the teachings of Christianity. Members of the Church of England do not elect you and I do not object to that, so long as you do not speak as a Bishop in my Church for Church members on political matters. Recently on Radio 4 a leading Muslim Cleric condemned other Muslims for using their positions within their faith to promote their political opinions - how most Anglicans and I agreed with him!
If I disagree with a politician I can 1. deselect him or 2. vote against him or 3. leave his party. I cannot do 1. or 2. with you and why should devout Christians and Anglicans leave their Church and their fundamental beliefs just because of your political activities?

Of course Anglicans like you and I cannot be expected to agree on political matters and of course on any political utterance you will find support from within the Church - as I would for my politics. But I do not wish to politicise the Church and you should not alienate so many Anglicans by turning your appointed role as Bishop of Christ into the platform of an aspiring political spokesman. But that is precisely what your letter to me does when you express controversial support for:
- the European Union
- State subsidies for industry
- Regional government

In fact it is precisely such policies which have destroyed the North east since 1934 when regional assistance was introduced as a "temporary measure"! The wealth and population of the Northeast derived from free enterprise, international trade and the opportunities industrial employment gave to poor rural labour. That wealth arose without politician's subsidies, without any European union and without regional government.

But now I am getting political and if you wish to be a politician then I suggest you become one and stand for election, as I have done, speaking only for myself and drawing voluntary support from thousands of free individuals. In the meantime I will not distribute my leaflets in Durham Cathedral if you will cease purporting to speak for Anglicans in blatantly political forums like North East in Europe and the Regional Constitutional Conventions. If you do not then I can only see thousands of withdrawals from the Church.

Yours sincerely
Rodney E.B. Atkinson