E F SHOWELL (You Say, June 26) once more appears to suggest that the idea of regional governments in the UK is a Machiavellian scheme, deliberately devised by the EU and intended to be to the detriment of the UK. What nonsense!

Scotland, Wales and the Six Counties are separate nations and naturally expect devolution.

Furthermore, there had always been an administration authority which defined "London" until Baroness Thatcher scrapped it, simply to spite Ken Livingstone.

Historically the "English" are descended from disparate tribes. A sense of regionalism permeates England.

This is most apparent in Cornwall, with its strong Welsh affinities, East Anglia and the North-East, home of the "Geordies".

Many Geordies feel more akin to the Scots than the English. As a matter of interest, Berwick Rangers FC play in the Scottish League, while Newcastle United have been known to field a team composed entirely of Scots.

On a more sombre note, when the Jarrow marchers of the 1930s set out for London, they declared themselves to be going to "the place where the power lies."

They probably wished that so much power did not lie in that "place". A regional government might have served Jarrow better.

The concept of regional government is entirely consistent with the best democratic principles.

It would not mean an "extra layer of bureaucracy" because with the advent of regional government, county councils would be phased out.

The present "district" councils are feeble affairs, with little real power.

Under a regional system, the City of Worcester, former county borough, would probably absorb 12 adjoining areas and become a strong unitary authority.

D E MARGRETT,

Worcester.