Pour la promotion des institutions Cornouaillaises

Message reçu aujourd'hui.

Invité a écrit:

The Cornish are an ethnic group and historic nation of the southwest of Great Britain. We have our own lesser used Celtic language, related to Breton and Welsh, along with indigenous sports, festivals, cuisine, music and dance. These cultural phenomena are all bound up together with a perception of ourselves as being other than English, as being Celtic Cornish Britons.



Over the last 3 centuries Cornwall has gone from being on the leading edge of the industrial revolution to being one of the poorest regions of Europe receiving objective one funding from the EU as a result. In the October 2001 Business Age Magazine Kevin Cahill, an author and investigative journalist for the Sunday Times, wrote about the economy of Cornwall. In the Killing of Cornwall, he notes that the London Treasury extracts £1.95 billion in taxes out of Cornwall's GDP of £3.6 billion. The Treasury returns less than £1.65 billion, so there is a net loss to Cornwall of 300 million pounds, where the total earnings figure is 24% below the national average. Today little has changed with Cornwall still qualifying for convergence funding, the new name for Objective one. Low wages, unskilled Mac Jobs, poverty, social problems, and rocketing housing prices are the often hidden face of the optimistically named “English” Rivera. Coupled with this we have seen the centralisation of services, institutions and government (followed by the skilled jobs they entail) out of the Duchy much to the benefit of various undemocratic and faceless ‘South West of England’ quangos.



To begin to address the above problems many in Cornwall, including Cornish nationalists like the political party Mebyon Kernow, have called for much greater decision making powers to be given to a Cornish body of governance. Cornwall Council's Feb 2003 MORI Poll showed 55% in favor of a democratically-elected, fully-devolved regional assembly for Cornwall, (this was an increase from 46% in favor in a 2002 poll). In 2000 The Cornish Constitutional Convention launched a campaign that resulted in a petition signed by 50,000 people calling for a fully devolved Cornish assembly. The campaign generated support from across the political spectrum in Cornwall and to date has been the largest expression of popular support for devolution in the whole of the United Kingdom. So far the UK government has ignored all requests for greater Cornish homerule.



The website for the Cornish Constitutional Convention can be found here: http://www.cornishassembly.org/



The ethnic data from the 2007 Cornish schools survey showed that 27% of children consider themselves to be Cornish rather than British or English. The results from the 2001 UK population census show over 37,000 people hold a Cornish identity instead of English or British. On this census, to claim to be Cornish, you had to deny being British, by crossing out the British option and then write ‘Cornish’ in the “other” box. This does not represent a mere clerical error or poorly thought through wording. This represents a denial of the right of the Cornish to describe themselves in terms of their identity. It might seem trite to complain about something that happened six years ago, but the 2001 census will remain relevant until the next one (in 2011). How many more people would have described themselves as Cornish if they did not have to deny being British or if there had been a specific Cornish tick box? How many people knew that writing 'Cornish' in the “other” box was an option? (This was extremely poorly publicised). How many ticked British but feel themselves to be Cornish British?



Over the last few years various Cornish groups and individuals have been campaigning for the Cornish to be recognised for protection under the Council of Europe’s (CoE) Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities (FCNM). Such recognition would be a powerful tool to ensure correct treatment and protection of the Cornish national minority and its culture. The UK’s Commission for Racial Equality (CRE) in its shadow report on the FCNM produced on the 30th of March 2007 advised the government that the treaty could be extended to protect Cornish culture and also raised concerns about the lack of legal equality for minorities in the UK. Recently the Council of Europe has also suggested that the FCNM could be extended to include the Cornish.



This officially sanctioned silence on the existence of a Cornish identity must stop. Why will the government not ask the Office of National Statistics to include a Cornish tick box on the 2011 census? The 'Life in the United Kingdom' handbook, required reading for all who wish to immigrate to the UK, quotes the census heavily when describing the regions and ethnic diversity of the UK. Why are the Cornish not mentioned once? Why has UK government so far blocked all attempts at ensuring the Cornish are recognised under the FCNM and ignored the advice of the CRE and CoE?



Some have decided that enough is enough and are now in the process of collecting funds for a court action to challenge the governments decission to exclude the Cornish from the FCNM. The purpose of the fund is to pay much of the costs involved in pursuing a legal action against the UK Government. The action is necessary after government’s constant, dogmatic and wholly irrational, refusal to include the Cornish within an international treaty designed to, among other things, introduce educational pluralism in their traditional homeland and thus bring to an end the forced assimilation of the Cornish people. That treaty is the Council of Europe Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities. Please study this short summary of the situation and help us take the steps necessary to secure, among other things, equal educational opportunity for all pupils in Cornish schools.



The website for the fun can be found here: http://www.cornishfightingfund.org/index.php



So it must be asked why the government is being so stubborn when it comes to giving the Cornish any form of devolution or recognition? Perhaps the answer lies in out constitutional subsoil.



Even if the government, current Duchy of Cornwall authority and history curriculum in our schools are loathed to touch the subject, Cornwall does in fact have a distinct constitutional history as a Duchy with an autonomous parliamentary and legal system known as the Stannaries. If you ask about the constitutional nature of the Duchy, if you aren’t ignored, then they will tell you that the Duchy is “a well-managed private estate which funds the public, charitable and private activities of The Prince of Wales and his family. The Duchy consists of around 54,648 hectares of land in 23 counties, mostly in the South West of England”. However this seems to fly in the face of the 19th century the legal arguments of Duchy officials, which defeated the UK Crown's aspirations of sovereignty over the Cornish foreshore. The Duchy of Cornwall at that time argued that the Duke had sovereignty of Cornwall and not the Crown.. On behalf of the Duchy in its successful action against the Crown, which resulted in the Cornwall Submarine Mines Act of 1858, Sir George Harrison (Attorney General for Cornwall) made this submission:

That Cornwall, like Wales, was at the time of the Conquest, and was subsequently treated in many respects as distinct from England.

That it was held by the Earls of Cornwall with the rights and prerogative of a County Palatine, as far as regarded the Seignory or territorial dominion.

That the Dukes of Cornwall have from the creation of the Duchy enjoyed the rights and prerogatives of a County Palatine, as far as regarded seignory or territorial dominion, and that to a great extent by Earls.

That when the Earldom was augmented into a Duchy, the circumstances attending to it's creation, as well as the language of the Duchy Charter, not only support and confirm natural presumption, that the new and higher title was to be accompanied with at least as great dignity, power, and prerogative as the Earls enjoyed, but also afforded evidence that the Duchy was to be invested with still more extensive rights and privileges.

The Duchy Charters have always been construed and treated, not merely by the Courts of Judicature, but also by the Legislature of the Country, as having vested in the Dukes of Cornwall the whole territorial interest and dominion of the Crown in and over the entire County of Cornwall.



It seems no coherent description of the Duchy is available. In the book "The Cornish Question" by Mark Sandford that was published by the Constitutional Unit, School of Public Policy, University College London in 2002 it states that - "The existence of the Duchy of Cornwall was once of constitutional significance, but is now essentially a commercial organization". Considering that this commercial organization is the largest landowner in Cornwall and claims to be nothing but a private estate and company, you would think it reasonable to expect there to be an official date of change-over from an official body of constitutional significance into a purely private commercial organization.


The Cornish Stannaries are claimed as the property of the Duke of Cornwall by the Duchy charters. The first of 1337 was published in 1978 as Statutes in Force, Constitutional law. The second and third Duchy of Cornwall charters of 1337 and 1338 give the Duke the powers of: “The King’s Writ and Summons of Exchequer” throughout Cornwall. These powers of the Duke of Cornwall represent the powers of government and they are certainly not what you would expect from a simple private landed estate something the Duchy often claims to be. By the Cornwall Submarine Mines Act 1858, the foreshore of Cornwall was awarded to the Duke as “part of the soil and territorial possessions of the Duchy of Cornwall”. Please note that territorial possessions can not be private possessions as again the Duchy often likes to claim. Research reveals that the public spirited Crown Estate provides cultural support and housing for the public everywhere in the U.K. except Cornwall. The Duchy of Cornwall is the analogous body in Cornwall but, in a departure from its historical role, it now claims to be a private estate with exemption from the Freedom of Information Act 2000, unlike the Crown Estate. A stratagem designed to deter investigation into Duchy history and Cornish history?



In the Cornwall Submarine Mines Act 1858 it states that the Duchy of Cornwall is a 'territorial possession' of Britain. So, sometime between 1858 and the present day, a territory of Britain transformed into a private commercial organisation, when, if at all, did this happen? A court case in 1828, A trial at Bar (Rowe v. Brenton) it was affirmed that everything connected with the Duchy is "of public interest", and "all the Kingdom should take notice". Quite rightly so considering the Duchy of Cornwall is a territory of Britain. Yet when Cornish MP Andrew George raised questions on the 16th June 1997 about the affairs of the Duchy he was told that there is an injunction in the House of Commons that prevents such questions being raised, how can this be? In The Annual Accounts of the Duchy of Cornwall 1998, it states that `- "Accounts are prepared in accordance with instructions issued by H.M. Treasury. The Duchy's primary function is to provide an income for present and future Dukes of Cornwall. The Duke is only entitled to the net income" This means the Treasury deals with the Duchy as if it were a government department. So how can the Duke of Cornwall be the owner of a private estate?



In my opinion these are questions that should be deemed important enough to be answered by someone in authority, whether that authority is a Government office or the Duchy of Cornwall, after all, claiming a national territory and making it your own private business is no small affair - on a par with opening the newspaper this morning to find out that Richard Branson suddenly owns Gibraltar as a private business concern - and then reading that it was once a UK protectorate but now it belongs to Virgin - as the only official explanation for the change over. An attempt has been made to separate the Duchy of Cornwall, which is not subject to English tax legislation, from the territory of Cornwall, the argument being that the Duchy has a separate existence to the geographical area of Cornwall and holds property outside the area. The argument is spurious and flies in the face of the Duchy case of 1856.



The Duchy of Cornwall Human Rights Association website explores these Cornish constitutional issues: http://duchyofcornwall.eu/



Why has our sovereignty and constitutional status been gerrymandered and our mineral assets used just so that the English tax payer did not have to pay for the upkeep of the heir to the throne? In present day Cornwall it is easier to self-deceive than absorb the fact that the authorities have systematically lied and cheated in order to articulate circumstances which create the impression that the Cornish nation has only ever been an insignificant sub-division of some awe-inspiring, all-powerful, fully homogenous, fixed and eternal England. With the English education system encouraging English nationalism in Cornwall at the expense of the indigenous Cornish identity, the exploitation of Cornwall has been acceptable to the state while the absence from English law of the international right to an enforceable equality before the law has protected the Duchy authority from an effective legal challenge. The result is that the Duke of Cornwall’s fortune from Cornish assets continues to relieve England from paying, through taxation, for having an heir to the throne. Surely it is time the Duke and Duchy of Cornwall be made subject to equality before the law and the UK begin, after over six centuries, to pay for the maintenance of the heir to the throne. When the UK government and Duchy authority finally decide to be honest about the autonomous position of the Duchy of Cornwall within the UK legal system then an open debate about Cornish devolution and our future governance can begin.

Oll an gwella

Philip Hosking

Ne gomprenan ket ar langaj-se

Mmh, je ne sais pas si le message était adressé aux admins et modos, ou si tout le monde l'a reçu, auquel cas c'est un spam, bon bin vous voila prévenu, on est déjà connus des deux côtés de la manche.

Salut deoc'h. Fulup eo ma anv. Gannet on bet e kerne-veur.

C'est moi qui t'ai envoyé cet email. Voici quelque chose en français a lire.

Citation :

La Cornouaille, désireuse d'obtenir au moins les mêmes droits que leurs voisins gallois (ou que les écossais) ont entamé une collecte de fonds destinée à poursuivre en justice le gouvernement britannique.

Les revendications de Cornouailles se rapprochent de celles des bretons à savoir droits culturels et éducatifs (pour l'apprentissage du cornique, langue qui a ressuscitée). Cette action s'appuie sur les traités internationaux et européens signés par le Royaume-Uni. Ces lanceurs d'alertes estiment que la négation de la Cornouailles entraîne une assimilation qui contraste singulièrement avec la diversité culturelle.

Cornish Fighting Funds

Eurominority: http://www.eurominority.org/version/eng/reports-detail.asp?id_actualite=1364

Citation :

Les Cornouaillais défendent leur identité face à l'attitude assimilatrice des Anglais
[09/10/2008]

Le Cornish Fighting Fund qui défend les intérêts linguistiques et culturels des Cornouaillais insulaires vient de lancer une campagne pour collecter des fonds. En effet, ce parti souhaite poursuivre en justice le gouvernement du Royaume-Uni pour la négation de l'identité cornouaillaise.

Les Gallois et les Écossais ont obtenu, ces dernières années, des droits leurs permettant de décider de leur destin avec plus de sérénité, sinon de manière autonome.

Les Cornouaillais estiment que l'attitude du Royaume-Uni à leur égard correspond à une assimilation forcée risquant d'aboutir à la perte totale de leur identité. Il faut rappeler que la langue cornique est aujourd'hui vivante grâce aux efforts d'une poignée de militants. Elle est aujourd'hui parlée par quelques milliers de personnes.

je pense que nous pouvons qu'etre solidaires avec la cornouaille

Oups, C'est bien ce que je pensais avoir compris !
Personnellement, je suis solidaire sans pour autant désirer intervenir financièrement !
Nous avons en Bretagne suffisemment de problèmes (financiers) à règler ... La Cornouaille existe aussi en Bretagne Armoricaine et un soutien ne serait-ce que psychologique aux Cornouailles d'outre-chanel n'est pas à refuser. D'autant que, souvenez vous, avant le Gwen-Ha-Du, c'était le drapeau Cornique qui flottait sur notre région !

Bienvenue à toi dans ce cas.

Même si comme l'a dit Budoc, soutenir financièrement n'est pas forcément à la porté de tous, la solidarité ne coûte en revanche rien. Au moins le message est passé.

exact

Je t'ai fait un lien ici: Cornwall 24

Thanks a lot. When I've got the time, I'll contribut on your own website. Si mon anglais me le permet

Great stuff. I can help if you want.

Here is a summary of the action.

Peter Tatchell kicked of the fun with his fantastic article- Self-rule for Cornwall. Once again a hundred thanks Peter for helping to raise awareness of the Cornish question: Peter Tatchell: Self-rule for Cornwall | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk

This was responded to with a terribly sensible piece from Cornish MP Mathew Taylor- Cornwall needs a revolution, not a divorce: Matthew Taylor: Cornwall doesn't need a separate parliament, just genuine local autonomy and fair funding | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk

Undoubtedly we need a revolution in our governmental arrangements but why ignore the national minority status issue Mr. Taylor? Do the Cornish not have a right to recognition? A revolution yes but are our Liberal Democrat MPs and LD controlled local government actually doing ANYTHING to bring this about? Last time I looked they had reneged on their promise to campaign for a Cornish assembly and where trying to push an unwanted Unitary authority on to Cornwall. On the same track Dick Coles response on his blog is very illuminating: Cllr Dick Cole: Commenting on Matthew Taylor's views

Finally a synthesis of the above two articles appeared on the Our Kingdom blog under the title - The Case for Cornwall. Only really interesting for the comments it attracted from English nationalists and regionalists: The case for Cornwall | open Democracy News Analysis

Just a bit of info on how to vote for greater Cornish self rule with the new British Library -Taking Liberties- interactive website.

The homepage for the site is here: Taking Liberties :: home

To vote however you must visit the interactive section here: British Library - Taking Liberties

Wait for the flashy intro to pass and then click on the 'UNITED KINGDOM?' option at the top of the page. You will then be given the option of 'Cornish Independence' amongst others. Click on this and you will have some presentations as well as some opinions to vote for. The English devolution option is also worth a look as are many other issues in other sections.

PLEASE COME AND VOTE.

If you missed the live debate on the Laurence Reed show Radio Cornwall you can listen to it here: CFF Cornish Nationalism debate - Radio Cornwall Fri 12th Dec

The two hour debate included guests John Angarrack, Historian, author and Director of Cornwall 2000; Dick Cole leader of Mebyon Kernow and Phillip Payton from the Institute of Cornish studies.

Many Cornish issues were covered including The Duchy, The Cornish Fighting Fund, Cornish recognition, getting Cornish History and language into schools and the Cornish Assembly question.

The radio Cornwall team had been out on the streets of Cornwall asking the public about Cornish identity and whether Cornish history and language should be taught in Cornish schools - the results were very positive.

Callers were then invited to phone in. Nigel Hicks called and spoke on behalf of the Cornish Stannary Parliament, Graham Hart urged people to pledge to the CFF and talked about how he first found out that he was Cornish not English. Other callers included Mike Paynter the deputy Grand Bard of the Gorseth.

I particularly liked the metaphor used by one caller of a large extended family to describe national affinities. For example you can be born into a family (nation) but equally you can be adopted. Additionally the debate between Philip Payton and Dick Cole concerning the Unitary Authority was an interesting start but really needs to be thrashed out. Is the Unitary a solid basis on which to build an assembly or is it a step in the other direction?

KERNOW - 'FRAMEWORK CONVENTION' FIGHT GOES ON

The failure of a 'fighting fund' to reach its financial target, created
to take the British Government to court, has not deterred Cornish
campaigners from continuing in pursuit of their goal.

The Cornish Fighting Fund was launched in May 2008 with the aim of
reaching a £100000 target to take the British Government to court
over their refusal to include the Cornish under the terms of the Framework
Convention for the Protection of National Minorities (FCPNM). However
the fund closed last month having only raised just over £40000, but
organisers of the fund said that this amount was remarkable in itself
"…given the traditional low pay of Cornwall coupled with the lack
of publicity and the credit crunch". The organisers went on to argue
on their website that:

"It should also be said that no other minority cultural group has
matched this amount of community support - as in all other cases legal
recognition and rights have been acquired through legal action brought
about via direct or indirect government funding. Only the Cornish
have been left to fund their own case."

Despite a distinct lack of media attention about Cornwall's 'fighting
fund', several comments and reports about the campaign reached the
London based media and was written about in a positive way, including
in a widely read article in the Guardian newspaper by human rights
campaigner Peter Tatchell. Now the fighting fund campaigners have
been invited to meet with the Equalities and Human Rights Commission
(EHRC) tomorrow in London to discuss matters further. Even though
the meeting has been arranged ahead of the draft publication of the
3rd UK Compliance report to the Council of Europe to explain what
the UK Government has done to meet its obligations under the FCPNM,
campaigners don't expect much to come out of the meeting. One of the
Cornish campaigners who will be at the meeting, told the League:

"It's a positive step, but we are not optimistic."

Campaigners have resigned themselves to the fact that for the Cornish
to gain any official legal status and recognition for their cultural
and national identity within the UK, they are going to have to continue
fighting every step of the way.

The Celtic League has written to the EHRC ahead of the meeting tomorrow
to request its support in recommending the UK Government that the
Cornish are included under the terms of the FCPNM. The full text of
the letter can be found below:

"Regional Manager
Equality and Human Rights Commission

09/02/09

Dear Sir

Inclusion of the Cornish under the Framework Convention for the Protection
of National Minorities (FCPNM)

I am writing to you on behalf of the Celtic League and ahead of your
meeting tomorrow with campaigners from Cornwall about the inclusion
of the Cornish under the Framework Convention for the Protection of
National Minorities.

We are aware that the UK Government is due to publish its 3rd compliance
report to the Council of Europe over the next few months about the
progress that has been made under the terms of the FCPNM. As an international
human rights organisation, the Celtic League would like to urge you,
to seriously consider the case for recommending to the UK Government
that the Cornish national minority be included under the terms of
the Convention.

We realise that the Commission for Racial Equality - with whom the
League and our members communicated with on this very topic on numerous
occasions - argued that for the Cornish to be included or officially
'recognised' under the terms of the Convention, a case in UK civil
law needed to have been won successfully. However we now know that
this is false, because a number of ethnic groups that are protected
by the Convention have never brought a civil case to court. We therefore
hope that the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), in its
new role, will be able to look more objectively at the Cornish case
and realise that the argument to include the Cornish national minority
under the FCPNM has a justified and solid basis.

As you will know, a 'Cornish Fighting Fund' was set up in May 2009,
in an attempt to raise £100 000 to take the UK Government to court
for dismissing the Cornish case for national minority status. Even
though only £40 000 was raised by the fund by its close in January
2009, it nevertheless demonstrates a massive commitment and strength
of feeling on the part of the Cornish community, to have their cultural
and ethnic identity officially recognised.

The Celtic League has stated (and restated) its commitment to the
recognition of the Cornish as a national minority at its annual general
meetings over the past few years and has unanimously agreed to resolutions
on this very topic. Enough time has lapsed since the UK Government
ratified the FCPNM without the recognition of the Cornish national
minority. We believe that with the support of the EHRC, we can rectify
this.

cc. Council of Europe, Directorate General of Human Rights and Legal
Affairs (DG-HL) Secretariat of the, Framework Convention for the Protection
of National Minorities

Related link on Celtic News at:

Yahoo! Groups

The Celtic League has branches in the six Celtic Countries. It works
to promote cooperation between these countries and campaigns on a
broad range of political, cultural and environmental matters. It highlights
human rights abuse, monitors all military activity and focuses on
socio-economic issues.

Celtic League Homepage

celtic_league : Celtic League mailing list

A couple of interesting links here on the Cornish question.

The first from OurKingdom which seems to suggest the Cornish paradox is a tale of two sovereigns: Cornish Law | open Democracy News Analysis

Looks like our MPs and other independent experts are taking an interest in Cornwalls de jure constitutional position.

The second is a campaign for Cornish Devolution on a New Labour website: Campaign | Cornish Devolution

Cornwall Forward! an article on the UK democracy blog OurKingdom: Cornwall Forward | open Democracy News Analysis

All comments welcome.

One comment.Hold on!!!

Dommage que la France ne soit pas un état fédéral, on n'aurait pu obtenir les mêmes revendications que les écossais et gallois! En tout cas je pense que les revendications des gallois sont légitimes et j'espère qu'ils gagneront leur procès par rapport aux Britanniques!

Details of the campaign to protect Cornwall's territorial integrity can be found here: The Cornish Republican: Keep Cornwall Whole!

No to Devonwall! The only region for Cornwall is Cornwall!