We are told that regional devolution is the key to the UK’s growth and prosperity (Burnham sets out vision to transform Britain and fix ‘broken’ system, 29 June). But what are “regions”? Like nations, they have an objective reality (generated by geography, communications and economic activity) while also acquiring subjective allegiances (the inhabitants’ sense of belonging). In both cases, those allegiances can serve positive, progressive causes, or they can be exploited for narrow political advantage. George Orwell contrasted wholesome patriotism with chauvinist nationalism.
Similarly, “regionalism” can connote enlightened programmes of reform and regeneration (eg Liverpool), or it can serve the interests of political opportunists and their cronies (eg Teesside). Either way, regionalism cannot buck basic socioeconomic trends that sweep across the whole country, affecting some parts more than others: deindustrialisation, low investment and productivity, and inadequate public services (notably health and education).
