Talk:Politics of Cornwall

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cornwall, an attempt to improve and expand Wikipedia coverage of Cornwall and all things Cornish. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project member page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.	Cornwall Portal
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.
See drop-down box for suggested article edit guidelines: Shortcut: WP:Cornwall Articles are written using a standard set of headings (see suggestions for article structure here). This is to maintain consistency between Cornwall articles and to improve the quality of entries through a constant style of writing. These headings are, however, plastic and in a state of flux and although we welcome suggestions or improvements, we would appreciate discussion before any major changes to the layout yourself. Be bold - if you know something about Cornwall then put it in! We value your contributions and don't be afraid if your spelling isn't great as there are plenty of spelling and grammar experts on clean-up duty! At WikiProject Cornwall we subscribe to the policies laid down by Wikipedia - particularly civility and consensus building. We are aware that the wording on Cornish entries can sometimes be a contentious topic, especially those concerning geography. You don't have to agree with everything but there is no excuse for rudeness and these things are best solved through consensus building and compromise. For more information see WP:CornwallGuideline. These pages are not platforms for political discussion. Issues relating to Cornish politics should be restricted to those pages that directly deal with these issues (such as Constitutional status of Cornwall, Cornish self-government movement, etc) and should not overflow into other articles. Most of all have fun editing - that's the reason we all do this, right?!

I'm sorry but I find this unacceptable for a general Cornwall politics article in an encyclopedia. This is nationalist overkill. Of the six narrative sections five are primarily about nationalism, and nationalism conceived in terms of constitutionality and identity. I think if you ask the man in Market Jew Street what matters to him Cornwall's constitutional status and ethnicity will be low on his list: try health service, affordable housing,jobs, water bills...

Dear god, even the communist party (the what? who? where?) gets a mention because it apparently backs an assembly for Cornwall. But then a by-election for Camborne town council figured in a Cornwall politics article previously.

I am minded to rewrite the narrative completely. Of course there might be a case for a separate article dedicated to nationalist politics and groups and websites in Cornwall.

Sorry if this sounds cross, but, oh dear... Crococolana 21:17, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Indeed, this article was very poorly written and structured, and ommited some very important areas while going indepth into issues which already have plenty of space on more specific articles. There is no need for a separate article about the nationalist politics, there are already several.

I've had a go are restructuring the article, cutting the crap that doesn't belong here, starting sections on local representation and administration, history, and other issues. Perhaps somebody could expand it with more on social issues, etc. The article needs a lot more in the way of citing sources though, and remember that anything you add should be referenced. Social issues should preferably be backed up with statistics, surveys, etc, and where possible should be comparative, both with other parts of the UK, and with historical situations. Joe D (t) 00:19, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

The nationalist stuff should stay, however, your point sticks. There should be more things on the non-nationalist side. --MacRusgail 10:38, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

"Cornwall is a county in South West England whose politics is influenced by a number of issues that make it distinct from the general political scene in the wider UK, and the political trends of neighbouring counties."

This is patently untrue. Other counties have small single interest groups on their county, district, town and parish councils. The fact that the Cornish ones claim some vague nationalist leanings does not make politics any more distinct from any other locality in the UK. Should Bootle be given this "distinct from the general political scene" tribute as it once has a "monster raving looney" councillor?Serpren 00:05, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Despite attempts to label MK the loonies, their electoral success - when one looks at the figures was much better than the much trumpeted UKIP. MK doesn't even get a look in with a TV broadcast, and it can't, because there aren't enough seats in Cornwall, for the Brits to give them one. --MacRusgail 16:15, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

"Two of the main influencing factors in Cornish politics is the disputed position of Cornwall as separate constitutional entity within the UK and the rights of the Cornish people as a minority"

Totally incorect! If this was a "main influencing factor", then Mebyon Kernow would have got more than the 1.4% of votes in the seats in which it put up candidates for Westminster in 2005. As the UKIP got 5% of the vote it would be more correct to say that independence from Europe is a "main influencing factor" in Cornish politics. Even at district level Mebyon Kernow only managed to get (their highest ever total) 7 out of 249 seats (2.8% of seats)

As things stand "nationalism" is very much a minority interest, one which is overblown by those trying to make it into something it is not. 00:05, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

For starters, MK is actually there. However, the campaign for a Cornish assembly has far wider support (much higher than Devonwall), and there are many manifestations of a kind of Cornish patriotism, such as the flying of the flag, the re-emergence of the language in various places etc. --MacRusgail 10:38, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Well, as stated, MK get betweem 1.4% and 2.8 % of votes at election, and therefore deserve recognition here along the percentage of votes they acrue.

As for the "assembly" that is a different kettle of fish, one that has been hotly debated elswhere, and should be kept its own Wiki page, not re-raised here. People do not come to encyclopedias looking for the wishes and dreams of others, they come looking for actuality, fact, and reason. Serpren 00:05, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes, and the fact is that MK have more councillors in Cornwall, than UKIP. The Monster RLP do not stand for self-determination for Bootle (!), and there is no historical precendence for that, let alone an indigenous population which traditionally considers itself non-English. MRLP stand/stood throughout the UK anyway. Not a valid comparison, if only because they are meant as consciously comedy candidates. --MacRusgail 17:27, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Why were the election results for 2005 and 2007, which I inserted to give a sense of proportion, removed? Serpren 00:05, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Why do you not sign your contributions? --MacRusgail 19:48, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

I was unaware of the need to sign contributions, how do I do it, and why is this necesary?Serpren 00:05, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Just add ~~~~ after your comment and a name and date will be generated automatically. This is common practice throughout wikipedia, and is used in order to make discussions easier to follow, especially where they involve more than two parties (as here) or where a discussion is reignited after months, as often happens. The signed comments then stand as an indelible record of what has been said before, and by whom, and also allow what has already been decided in terms of consensus on an article's structure to be more easily seen. Hope this helps Mammal4 13:04, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Serpren, I have dropped a welcome pack on your user discussion page which has links to useful things and explains the rules under which Wikipedia works. Take care Mammal4 13:09, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Many thanks, I will endevour to play by the rules. Serpren 00:03, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Contents 1 UKIP claims 2 New Shadow Minister for Cornwall 3 Cornish nationalism 4 Politicians

[edit] UKIP claims

I believe that UKIP got fewer councillors throughout the UK, than MK did in Cornwall. UKIP got one in Cornwall, which is a fraction of MK's seven or so.--MacRusgail 10:08, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New Shadow Minister for Cornwall

On 26 July 2007 the Conservative party appointed Mark Prisk as Shadow Minister for Cornwall. This was to put the Duchy's concerns "at the heart of Conservative thinking", according to a party statement. Conservative Party leader David Cameron said he wholeheartedly endorsed the appointment and it would ensure that the voice of Cornwall is heard, possibly paving the way for a future Cornish Assembly. [1]

Surely this "possibly paving the way for a future Cornish Assembly" is pure hopeful speculation on behalf of the nationalists? Does it have any place here? The "youtube" video it links to has no mention of Prisk's selection having anything to do with "and\ assembly" I shall delete that part of the quote should no one object.Serpren 12:04, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

I wouldn't call it "hopeful speculation", so much as recognition, and a very positive step. I think you forget that Wales once had to scramble for such recognition - look where it is now. --MacRusgail 16:10, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

It may be "recognition", but there is NOTHING to support this fantasy that Prisk's becoming "shadow minister for Cornwall" has anything to do with "a future Cornish assembly" and unless this fact changes the supposition should be removed.Serpren 10:50, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cornish nationalism

Hang about here?

Two of the main influencing factors in Cornish politics is the disputed position of Cornwall as separate constitutional entity within the UK and the rights of the Cornish people as a minority [2].

Anyone following the link above will come to a poorly supported online poll about the 2011 census.

"I will refuse to fill out the 2011 UK census unless there is a Cornish ethnicity tick box option but only if 1,000 other people will do the same." Deadline to sign up by: 1st January 2011

429 people have signed up, 571 more needed

Can anyone tell me how this is supposed to be substantiative evidence of; "the main influencing factors in Cornish politics is the disputed position of Cornwall as separate constitutional entity within the UK and the rights of the Cornish people as a minority " ???

The link should be removed, and / or real substantiative evidence put in its place. Failing that the point should be deleted. Serpren 12:29, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Politicians

Removed;

Dick Cole: Why is only one county councillor worthy of mention? Shouldn't we have all or none?

Dr James Whetter: Why is one minor party leader, who has never been elected to a postition, given and none other? Does he really qualify as a politician?

David Penhaligon: Why only this one deceased politician? Why not all dead Cornish politicians?

Serpren 12:43, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Dick Cole - only party leader on the council; Whetter - less notable, but fairly well known in the Duchy as a publisher of political material; Penhaligon - extremely notable Cornish politician who was seen in his time as being "up and coming", and probably destined for much greater things (Liberal leadership?) if he had survived. --MacRusgail 16:13, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

What the hell does Dick's being "the only party leader" on the council have to do with anything?

There are equally well known Cornsish politicians as Penhaliagan, who did more than aspire to be "up and coming".

Whetter is unknown outside of the nationalist circles.

This whole page smacks of desperation and is nothing more than an ill supported minority agenda.Serpren 10:53, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Speak for yourself. Penhaligon was extremely well known in his time. Perhaps you should add politicians from the "major" parties to the list. Oh wait, didn't you remove the Lib Dems, Tories and Labour people from it? --MacRusgail 20:47, 15 October 2007 (UTC)