I have always been in favour of increased regionalism (I wrote my dissertation at University about it), because I would like to see decentralization away from Westminster because it is a rotten cesspit. I'd like to see Northern regions start to plan as a region and maybe develop some kind of regional identity. Real democracy has always seemed much more possible on a smaller scale.
Such potential fascinates me, but I firmly believe that it can be even more of a dangerous cesspit if certain things are not put in place first.
I think its vital that genuine transparency and accountability are enshrined in the local thing from the get-go, because the corrupting imbalances of power and lack of accountability can be easier for people to harness locally.
Examples include the unfair influence of rich locals, people well-connected locally, people who can slip decisions through in a corrupt way, and in extreme cases people who can put enough muscle on the streets (either in overtly dodgy ways or via the 'local sheriff') or engage in other forms of intimidation. Also people or family dynasties that become entrenched over long periods and come to view their position within the local corridors of power as a given. Not to mention the side-effects of economic over-reliance on a few industries/companies in the area.
Devolving power to the county level can also cause issues, especially if there is disparity between different parts of the county. Here in Warwickshire there is something of a north-south divide for example, with the leafy Warwick decision-making centre often out of touch with the large population & high deprivation levels of some of Warwickshires northern towns.
Having said all that, I share your favouritism of the power of local decisions. But not as something that we simply evolve towards without a lot of other changes to our society and its structures coming into play at the same time. At a minimum, you absolutely have to get a sizeable proportion of the local populace in all areas to engage with the decision making process, which can be a challenge due to the mundane nature of much daily local business. And we would absolutely have to have a much more effective local press, that relies on proper investigative journalism and not simply rewording of press releases that come from local government, police, businesses etc.
Much of this ties into my interest in the long-term potential of the internet. Without careful attention to these and other related issues such as local organised crime, the people's democratic network of streets (
) is going to feel like a bit of a stifling prison from very early on. Right now, from the relative safety of my bedroom, it is actually far easier for me to study and be vigilant about both historical and contemporary events on the national and international level than the local level. Information on the local level is often stunningly poor.
To put it another way, there are some 'accepted universal human rights' on a global level which help enshrine peoples safety and freedom in their daily, local lives. So we aren't just looking at having to put safeguards in place locally, but the entire way humans manage everything on every level, from the hyper-local to the global, and crucially the manner in which these levels interconnect. Decent foundations must be built on all these scales of human order for the local stuff to thrive.
Go on, one more.
I think that's only the 3rd bet I've ever placed in my life.
)) or the odds. 
