In November 2004 a referendum was held to determine whether the people of Newcastle-upon-Tyne and the historic counties of Durham and Northumberland, along with Middlesbrough, Redcar and Cleveland in North Yorkshire,wanted a regional assembly. Nearly 50% of the electorate voted decisively against the proposal by 3:1. The vote was somewhat enigmatic.To have nearly 50% concerned enough about the proposal to vote suggests some sort of regional engagement; the overwhelming majority against the proposal either suggests that there was no desire for regional devolution, or represents a reaction to the insultingly meagre degree of delegation offered – even less than London. Clearly, however, regional devolution in the North East had been on the agenda. The referendum was the climax of a decade-long campaign, during which the advocates for a regional assembly claimed,‘The north-east is different.The people of the region share a history and a culture which is unique.’

The idea that there is a unique history was the most frequently stated justification for regional government. Peter Hetherington opened a piece in The Guardian on 16 June 2003 entitled ‘Geordies look to saint for inspiration’ with the words,‘With a distinctive history, culture and musical heritage, it is a region set apart from the rest of England.’ Hetherington proceeded to quote amply from an unreferenced article by John Tomaney who invoked St Cuthbert as a symbol of the region's political and cultural identity and asserted a long record of self-determination going back to the middle ages. Peter Scott, vice-chancellor of Kingston University, singing from a slightly different hymn sheet for The Guardian on 2 April 2002, declared more cautiously that:

The supposed coherence of contemporary north-east regional identity is claimed on the basis of ‘mish-mash memories’. And those memories apparently run back for fourteen centuries.