
This section of the 1994 report looked at the need for a regional level of government for Cornwall and explored the issues relating to the dispersed settlement pattern which leads to strong local community identities. The danger of parochialism was explored. These are issues which are relevant today.
“However, to reject the idea of only one level of government in Cornwall as too remote, insufficiently open and potentially undemocratic is neither to reject change not to accept the status quo. On the contrary, in order to be effective, the best government for Cornwall should reflect its underlying social, cultural and economic structure. This has two dimensions relevant to government reform. First, Cornwall is a distinct historic region. Second Cornwall is a land of dispersed relatively small communities, unlike virtually all English counties it has no obvious ‘central place’ or dominating county town.
The submission to the Local Government Commission by Cornwall County Council went out of its way to emphasise the “ unique sense of identity” and the need for a government structure that reflects that sense of identity and yet looks forward to the future {CCC, 1994, pp.15-16]. We have no wish to repeat the argument here but would emphasise that this identity, as the County Council suggest, is a lot more than a mere county identity. It’s much more complex, based partly on feelings of ethnicity, partly on a Celtic history and partly on Cornwall’s central role in the industrial revolution of the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. For some people the Cornish identity is akin to a national identity and Cornwall’s claims to be a European region in its own right are very strong…...
But at the same time, people identify strongly with their local town or parish. Cornwall has never been a ‘city-region’. Instead there are twenty or more smallish towns spread ten to fifteen miles apart across the land, each having its own special characteristics and its own local loyalty. At best this produces dynamic and vibrant communities that can act as both centres of identity, providing people with their sense of roots and as catalysts for locally based and generated economic development. In this way communities can be a source of great strength, complementing and enriching the Cornish regional identity.
However, at worst community identity is expressed only through a defensive small town mentality which fosters parochialism. This reinforces the wider parochialism all too evident in Cornish society in recent years. For example, the business sector in Cornwall is dominated by small companies, most of whom employ fewer than 25 workers. Because businesses are small and few operate on a Cornwall-wide scale, the organisations that represent business tend towards parochialism. Similarly, elected representatives in Cornwall, even at County Council level, have been described as adopting an ambassadorial role, solely representing the interests of 'their' communities in Truro. This clearly makes strategic responses difficult and helps explain both the inconsistency and the lack of political will that we have already noted above.
Parochialism thrives in the absence of an acknowledged central place or of strong Cornwall-wide institutions. We have already seen how Cornwall’s history has produced a dispersed settlement pattern. However, its history has also produced a Cornish popular identity which has been a counterweight to parochialism, bringing divergent interests together and helping to channel energies into wider projects. But this sense of Cornwall-wide responsibility is limited as it depends on the existence of institutions through which it can be articulated. We return to then to our earlier point. An essential condition for developing a sense of broader Cornish citizenship that can offset the baleful effects of parochialism has got to be the emergence of strong political and economic institutions that treat Cornwall as a single unit.
But this alone is still not enough. It is also particularly important to encourage the positive aspects of community spirit, especially at a time when massive demographic change in Cornwall and the increasing reliance on market forces are creating growing uncertainties. The challenge must be to avoid institutionalising parochialism when a strategic response is required.
To this end the government review must harness the potential strengths of both Cornwall’s regional sense of identity and of Cornish community loyalties. None of the options being discussed in the Local Government Review do this.
The status quo fails to provide for strong, cohesive, strategic policy-making or a clear response to the growth of Devon based institutions that are undermining Cornwall’s economic potential. …… [Ref to District Councils]. The single unitary option goes some way to recognising the need for a strong Cornwall-wide authority, but it neglects the potential role of communities and would have to overcome the difficulty of perceived remoteness and Truro-rule."
Cornish Social and Economic Research Group, (1994), ‘Empowering Cornwall – the best government for the region and its communities’. [p.17-18].
Comments