This relates to England; for the remaining constituent elements of the U.K. there is less benefit for similar re-organisation. The current definition of English regions is outdated and contributes to a lack of enthusiasm for a regional tier of government. It also prevents the development of relevant, measurable and engaging regional policies.
Origin of the current system.
The regions generally follow the boundaries of the former standard regions established in the 1940s for statistical purposes. Eurostat also used them to demarcate first level Nomenclature of Territorial Units for Statistics (NUTS) regions within the E.U. which in 2021 were replaced by (seemingly identical) International Territorial Level (ITL) regions.
Criticisms of the current system.
1, Greater London has continued to sprawl, and modern work practices mean that what once were merely commuter towns are now effectively suburbs and as such should be rolled up into the capital’s statistics. The original N.U.T.S. demarcation was the thirty-two local authority districts and the City of London. This should now be extended to most of the area within the M25 and built-up areas such as Guildford, Woking and Windsor.
2, The south is particularly poorly defined; the distance from Penzance to Margate is 506 km (315 m) yet it encompasses just two regions. To compare, the distance from Southampton to Newcastle is 450 km (280 m); few people could be found to argue that such a distance would comprise just two regions.
3, The residents of rural Herefordshire have little in common with the denizens of Wolverhampton, but both are in the West Midlands. Similar could be said of the peoples of the Lake district and Manchester, (both North West) or the folk of Derby and Boston- bundled together in the East Midlands,
Conclusion.
An alternative regional structure is required, without adding an extra unpopular tier of elected officials. The MPs of the regions could convene and discuss priorities and strategies in conjunction with local leaders as a supplement to the recommendations Gordon Brown’s devolution report. The regional MP groupings could select a principal representative to liaise and co-operate with local entities and ministers.
Further other official operations could be re-drawn along similar lines in due course. The thirty-nine police forces in England, for example, could come to mirror the regions.
Draft proposal.
New regions could be easily created from the existing databases. All that is required is to allocate the data at I.T.L. (or even post code) level to a new set of regions.
Initially both sets of regional data could be published, this will help demonstrate the superior quality of the new system.
The regions would be based on population density mapping; viz the geographically smaller parliamentary constituencies would form urban regions and the larger ones, rural regions.
Thus, twelve new regions would emerge, broadly defined as such:
Greater London. M25 +
South East. Kent, East and West Sussex and Surrey.
South Central. I.O.W., Hampshire, Wiltshire and Berkshire.
South West. Cornwall, Devon, Somerset and Dorset.
Wessex Gloucestershire, Oxfordshire, Bucks, Herts and Beds.
West Country Herefordshire, Shropshire, Staffordshire and Worcestershire.
Industrial Heartland West midlands conurbation; The cities of Nottingham, Leicester, Stoke-on-Trent, Derby, and their urban environs.
East Midlands Northamptonshire, Rutland, Lincolnshire and rural Leics, Notts & Derbyshire.
East Anglia Essex, Norfolk, Suffolk and Cambridgeshire.
Northern Powerhouse. The near continuous built-up area of the Roses counties.
Lakes, Vales and Dales The rural north: Northumberland, Cumbria & North Yorkshire.
Bernicia. The north east coast conurbation, Newcastle, Sunderland, Middlesbrough, Durham & Darlington.
Proposed regions
Current regions
Impressive I.T. skills, huh?