As with the run-up to any election, the forces on either side of the debate about establishing a regional assembly are intensifying their assaults upon the public.

The referendum during the autumn is steadily seeping into our consciousness at every level and making us question closely the need for an assembly, its viability and its cost.

At the heart of the Government's thinking is a stated desire to empower the people to take their own decisions about local issues that affect them. With the UK recognised as one of the most centralised states in the world, this is a laudable aim. But can we trust a government that has been so long on promises and so short on delivery, particularly in the provision of public services, or the Civil Service to make devolution work for our benefit rather than for its own?

It is not difficult to use cynical phraseology - an expensive and toothless talking shop; a £25m boost to the quangocrats, for which we will have to pay; a further marginalisation of rural areas; and the exclusion from the proposals of powers with which it would be natural for a regional assembly to be endowed, such as education, law and order, transport and social security.

The overall objective of the proposal is to drive GDP per capita and create jobs in an increasingly global market place where regional identities are being ever more clearly asserted. With economic development, strategic planning, housing, public health and environment, as well as those "softer" elements of arts, tourism and culture under our direct control, there is a great deal potentially to excite us.

The softer elements may actually add some of the greatest value. Currently not well organised, tourism promises economic benefit that a regional assembly could well enhance, providing focus and investment which it lacks.

Sir John Hall, a leading proponent of the "Yes" campaign, is a vocal advocate for a regional television station to market our appeal and bring in investment from outside. This, too, has attraction.

We endorse the overall inclination of the business community to support an elected assembly, but only if its value and relevance are validated by a considerable strengthening of powers.

It does seem nonsense that if the main thrust is to add economic value, skills and training are not included and transport has only been added in as a partial afterthought.

In principle, we favour devolution, but unless an elected assembly with a tough and energetic membership really does bring in more plcs and jobs, and visibly helps to restore real wealth to this region, cutting out red tape and facilitating speedy responses to global market developments, we remain unconvinced that it will be anything but an unwieldy extra layer of government.

Agnosticism presumes lack of belief; but it still implies open-mindedness about conversion to the true faith. Perhaps our position of considered reserve is best summed up in the old Persian proverb, "Trust in God but remember to tie up the camel".

* Andrew Martell is a director of Wise Speke.