unrepentantfool
Socialist
Politically homeless but not politically inactive :D
Posts: 917
|
Post by unrepentantfool on Aug 1, 2020 12:49:57 GMT
OK, give me an example of where a 2 tier system works well? Cheshire worked pretty well. Certainly better than the current set-up. That's not saying much, is it? The main factor in that is there should have been 4 unitaries (Halton + Warrington,Ellesmere Port and Neston + Chester,Crewe +Vale Royal and Congleton+Macclesfield). But there's also another issue. The boundaries of Cheshire are stupid. Neston and perhaps Ellesmere Port should be in Wirral MBC. Why Warrington was put into Cheshire, I'll never know! |
|
neilm
Non-Aligned
Posts: 17,710
|
Post by neilm on Aug 1, 2020 21:49:25 GMT
That's why I've proposed a differential rural/urban template for Lancashire.Mostly rural unitaries should have a lower population requirement than a mostly urbanised unitary. And, a quick question,if I may? What do you propose instead? Whole county unitaries for anything bigger than Shropshire would be hideous and the District/County structure cannot continue with the new arrangements instituted by successive Conservative-led governments. Rubbish. A two-tier system can work perfectly well and certainly better than massively oversized unitaries everywhere. Sometimes two-tier councils do perform poorly but that's an issue with the council, not a defect in the system. I disagree, having done some private consultancy on process improvement. Sometimes they're just too small (like North Dorset) and would do better linked up with another district. I like three tier but physical size, tax base etc are an issue. These are very much a system defect. |
|
greenhert
Green
Posts: 4,310
Member is Online
|
Post by greenhert on Aug 1, 2020 22:19:34 GMT
Cheshire worked pretty well. Certainly better than the current set-up. That's not saying much, is it? The main factor in that is there should have been 4 unitaries (Halton + Warrington,Ellesmere Port and Neston + Chester,Crewe +Vale Royal and Congleton+Macclesfield). But there's also another issue. The boundaries of Cheshire are stupid. Neston and perhaps Ellesmere Port should be in Wirral MBC. Why Warrington was put into Cheshire, I'll never know! The southern parts of the Warrington district were in Cheshire; Lymm (now in Warrington South) was in the Runcorn constituency until 1983. It was based on the idea of unifying rivers and estuaries, which was based on a fundamental and serious misunderstanding of history; English rivers in fact helped define county boundaries (and still do) and are not unifying points at all. This is what led to the daft creations of the now-defunct Avon and Humberside, in addition to those Cheshire boundaries. |
|
unrepentantfool
Socialist
Politically homeless but not politically inactive :D
Posts: 917
|
Post by unrepentantfool on Aug 1, 2020 22:32:56 GMT
That's not saying much, is it? The main factor in that is there should have been 4 unitaries (Halton + Warrington,Ellesmere Port and Neston + Chester,Crewe +Vale Royal and Congleton+Macclesfield). But there's also another issue. The boundaries of Cheshire are stupid. Neston and perhaps Ellesmere Port should be in Wirral MBC. Why Warrington was put into Cheshire, I'll never know! The southern parts of the Warrington district were in Cheshire; Lymm (now in Warrington South) was in the Runcorn constituency until 1983. It was based on the idea of unifying rivers and estuaries, which was based on a fundamental and serious misunderstanding of history; English rivers in fact helped define county boundaries (and still do) and are not unifying points at all. This is what led to the daft creations of the now-defunct Avon and Humberside, in addition to those Cheshire boundaries. I get places like Thelwall being in Warrington because of the urban corridor all the way to the city centre. But places like Lymm should be taken out of Warrington and put into Cheshire East, it's blatantly ridiculous. Humberside is a really stupid idea, but the river runs through the middle of Bristol, you couldn't really split it and the rest of the areas included in Avon were mostly part of the Bristol urban area.I live in a town that is the wrong side of the river from most of the county (Caversham in Reading),but the whole town of Reading wasn't shifted into Oxfordshire when Caversham was added! |
|
European Lefty
Labour
I am autistic, so If I'm rude or inappropriate it's probably by accident. If not, you'll know it!
Posts: 1,964 
|
Post by European Lefty on Aug 1, 2020 22:38:23 GMT
The southern parts of the Warrington district were in Cheshire; Lymm (now in Warrington South) was in the Runcorn constituency until 1983. It was based on the idea of unifying rivers and estuaries, which was based on a fundamental and serious misunderstanding of history; English rivers in fact helped define county boundaries (and still do) and are not unifying points at all. This is what led to the daft creations of the now-defunct Avon and Humberside, in addition to those Cheshire boundaries. I get places like Thelwall being in Warrington because of the urban corridor all the way to the city centre. But places like Lymm should be taken out of Warrington and put into Cheshire East, it's blatantly ridiculous. Humberside is a really stupid idea, but the river runs through the middle of Bristol, you couldn't really split it and the rest of the areas included in Avon were mostly part of the Bristol urban area.I live in a town that is the wrong side of the river from most of the county (Caversham in Reading),but the whole town of Reading wasn't shifted into Oxfordshire when Caversham was added! We have been through this before. Your understanding of the West Country is lacking, at best. Those areas might be near Bristol, and might have ties to Bristol but the vast majority is not part of the Bristol urban area, and if you suggest that in Thornbury or Yate you will met with confusion, and if you try it in Weston or Bath, you will probably be shot. |
|
unrepentantfool
Socialist
Politically homeless but not politically inactive :D
Posts: 917
|
Post by unrepentantfool on Aug 1, 2020 22:46:51 GMT
I get places like Thelwall being in Warrington because of the urban corridor all the way to the city centre. But places like Lymm should be taken out of Warrington and put into Cheshire East, it's blatantly ridiculous. Humberside is a really stupid idea, but the river runs through the middle of Bristol, you couldn't really split it and the rest of the areas included in Avon were mostly part of the Bristol urban area.I live in a town that is the wrong side of the river from most of the county (Caversham in Reading),but the whole town of Reading wasn't shifted into Oxfordshire when Caversham was added! We have been through this before. Your understanding of the West Country is lacking, at best. Those areas might be near Bristol, and might have ties to Bristol but the vast majority is not part of the Bristol urban area, and if you suggest that in Thornbury or Yate you will met with confusion, and if you try it in Weston or Bath, you will probably be shot. Look, if was designing such a county, I wouldn't put the majority of North Somerset,BaNES and South Gloucs in it,but the rest of the former Avon area is in denial about the strength of its connection to Bristol. Bath may like to think it's all independent but they are very heavily connected. |
|
neilm
Non-Aligned
Posts: 17,710
|
Post by neilm on Aug 2, 2020 12:29:06 GMT
Yeah, no one outside of Bath doesn't think they're basically part of the same area.
|
|
unrepentantfool
Socialist
Politically homeless but not politically inactive :D
Posts: 917
|
Post by unrepentantfool on Aug 2, 2020 16:22:01 GMT
Yeah, no one outside of Bath doesn't think they're basically part of the same area. And you're from the West Country,aren't you? |
|
neilm
Non-Aligned
Posts: 17,710
|
Post by neilm on Aug 2, 2020 16:54:24 GMT
Yeah, no one outside of Bath doesn't think they're basically part of the same area. And you're from the West Country,aren't you? I am indeed. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2020 4:18:47 GMT
I suspect the proposals will be realised sharpish, because Geoff Driver (leader of Lancs CC) is getting snippy about local authority parochialism and people don't tend to survive getting Geoff Driver angry. Whether the elections can be organised in time I'm less certain over.
|
|
doktorb
Independent
40yo office monkey from Preston
Posts: 70
Member is Online
|
Post by doktorb on Jan 13, 2021 17:23:36 GMT
|
|
unrepentantfool
Socialist
Politically homeless but not politically inactive :D
Posts: 917
|
Post by unrepentantfool on Jan 15, 2021 3:04:11 GMT
Great idea, although I note they propose to abolish parish councils within the new unitary. This seems very counter intuitive in such a large mostly rural authority and I wonder if that was a mistake. |
|
|
|
Post by tonygreaves on Jan 17, 2021 23:00:29 GMT
Yes, being going around a while. But the government seem hung up on existing county boundaries. |
|
|
|
Post by tonygreaves on Jan 17, 2021 23:01:12 GMT
Great idea, although I note they propose to abolish parish councils within the new unitary. This seems very counter intuitive in such a large mostly rural authority and I wonder if that was a mistake. Utterly stupid idea. They should be creating them everywhere. |
|
unrepentantfool
Socialist
Politically homeless but not politically inactive :D
Posts: 917
|
Post by unrepentantfool on Jan 18, 2021 16:31:15 GMT
Great idea, although I note they propose to abolish parish councils within the new unitary. This seems very counter intuitive in such a large mostly rural authority and I wonder if that was a mistake. Utterly stupid idea. They should be creating them everywhere. I entirely agree, I am in favour of unitaries like the Morecambe Bay unitary, but you need that very local form of governance to provide that community voice that sometimes wouldn't reach district or county councils e.g Henley-on -Thames town council stands up for their residents quite often because Oxon County Council doesn't care much for most of the places that far away from Oxford. |
|
maxque
Non-Aligned
Posts: 6,149
|
Post by maxque on Jan 18, 2021 17:01:39 GMT
Great idea, although I note they propose to abolish parish councils within the new unitary. This seems very counter intuitive in such a large mostly rural authority and I wonder if that was a mistake. Where do you see that? I'm not reading that at all in their proposal. |
|
unrepentantfool
Socialist
Politically homeless but not politically inactive :D
Posts: 917
|
Post by unrepentantfool on Jan 19, 2021 1:06:51 GMT
Great idea, although I note they propose to abolish parish councils within the new unitary. This seems very counter intuitive in such a large mostly rural authority and I wonder if that was a mistake. Where do you see that? I'm not reading that at all in their proposal. Under the "What is a unitary council?" question - "A unitary council means a single local authority responsible for providing ALL local government services. Currently, residents here are governed by a two-tier system, where local services are provided by ourselves and the county council. In our district there are also Town or Parish Councils in rural areas. Unitary status would bring all the different services currently offered by all these organisations under ‘one roof’." Maybe just a misreading, but a really dumb mistake if true. |
|
European Lefty
Labour
I am autistic, so If I'm rude or inappropriate it's probably by accident. If not, you'll know it!
Posts: 1,964
|
Post by European Lefty on Jan 19, 2021 10:39:17 GMT
Where do you see that? I'm not reading that at all in their proposal. Under the "What is a unitary council?" question - "A unitary council means a single local authority responsible for providing ALL local government services. Currently, residents here are governed by a two-tier system, where local services are provided by ourselves and the county council. In our district there are also Town or Parish Councils in rural areas. Unitary status would bring all the different services currently offered by all these organisations under ‘one roof’." Maybe just a misreading, but a really dumb mistake if true. That does sound exactly like they would be eliminating parish councils. It also sounds like they mean to say that would be common practice in all unitary authorities, which is completely untrue (in fact I think very few are completely unparished, although there are a few that only have parishes in part of the area) |
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 26,745
Member is Online
|
Post by The Bishop on Jan 19, 2021 12:56:00 GMT
Or, quite conceivably, the person writing that blurb simply forgot about their existence.....
|
|
|
|
Post by greenchristian on Jan 19, 2021 17:55:27 GMT
Under the "What is a unitary council?" question - "A unitary council means a single local authority responsible for providing ALL local government services. Currently, residents here are governed by a two-tier system, where local services are provided by ourselves and the county council. In our district there are also Town or Parish Councils in rural areas. Unitary status would bring all the different services currently offered by all these organisations under ‘one roof’." Maybe just a misreading, but a really dumb mistake if true. That does sound exactly like they would be eliminating parish councils. It also sounds like they mean to say that would be common practice in all unitary authorities, which is completely untrue (in fact I think very few are completely unparished, although there are a few that only have parishes in part of the area) If you're counting the Metopolitan and London Boroughs as unitaries then it's probably majority of unitaries that are at least partially unparished. |
|
