|
|
Post by 🏴☠️ Neath West 🏴☠️ on Aug 21, 2020 21:28:39 GMT
High Peak does not fit in with anywhere else in Derbyshire, as a prime example. If Derbyshire splits into two unitary authorities (it is too large and incoherent for just one), it should merge with Cheshire East. High Peak doesn't fit with itself. There are bits of it that should be in Sheffield. |
|
|
|
Post by Wisconsin on Aug 21, 2020 21:34:00 GMT
Parts of High Peak would fit well in Stockport IMO.
|
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,917
Member is Online
|
Post by YL on Aug 22, 2020 7:47:37 GMT
Parts of High Peak would fit well in Stockport IMO. I think that's a better solution than merging with Cheshire East, though the Hope Valley in a Greater Manchester Borough feels like a strange concept. (And an area like that in any Met Borough could see some monstrous wards.) If it weren't for the reported 300,000 lower limit, I'd say the obvious unitarisation is (a) South Derbyshire + Amber Valley + Erewash (b) NE Derbyshire + Chesterfield + Bolsover (c) High Peak + Derbyshire Dales, but (c) is well short of 300,000 and (b) is not quite there either. So I suspect there might be pressure to combine (b) and (c) into a big North Derbyshire, but does it really make sense for a single tier "local" authority to cover both Hadfield and Shirebrook? What would they think in the Local Shop? |
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 14,843 
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Aug 22, 2020 9:03:08 GMT
High Peak does not fit in with anywhere else in Derbyshire, as a prime example. If Derbyshire splits into two unitary authorities (it is too large and incoherent for just one), it should merge with Cheshire East. High Peak should be split in two along the watershed. Castleton and Hope Valley are nothing to do with the outskirts of Manchester. |
|
|
|
Post by Defenestrated Fipplebox on Aug 22, 2020 21:24:11 GMT
High Peak does not fit in with anywhere else in Derbyshire, as a prime example. If Derbyshire splits into two unitary authorities (it is too large and incoherent for just one), it should merge with Cheshire East. High Peak should be split in two along the watershed. Castleton and Hope Valley are nothing to do with the outskirts of Manchester. Still waiting for the constituency of Hallam, Hope and Hathersage. |
|
middyman
Conservative
"The problem with socialism is that, sooner or later, you run out of other people's money."
Posts: 8,050
|
Post by middyman on Aug 22, 2020 21:32:11 GMT
In Suffolk, the lower tier authorities have merged to form “East Suffolk”, in the west to form “West Suffolk”. It is only because of an inconvenient referendum result that Babergh and Mid Suffolk have not formally merged. They have in all but name and I expect Central Suffolk to emerge at some point.
|
|
|
|
Post by Penddu on Aug 23, 2020 5:39:46 GMT
Move it in with the proposed East Lancashire. Like Pendle it is on the Pennine ridge. Good example of the confusion you get when naming local authorities after geographical features. Ribble Valley is "on the Pennine ridge"? I didn't think that was geographically possible. I remember a Scottish friend asking me what the hills north of Cardiff were called - he looked confused when i told him 'The Valleys' |
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 14,843
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Aug 23, 2020 12:07:06 GMT
In Suffolk, the lower tier authorities have merged to form “East Suffolk”, in the west to form “West Suffolk”. It is only because of an inconvenient referendum result that Babergh and Mid Suffolk have not formally merged. They have in all but name and I expect Central Suffolk to emerge at some point. How long before the government "suggests" that all three merge together? West Sussex is 170,000 population, well below the Government's desired 300,000. |
|
middyman
Conservative
"The problem with socialism is that, sooner or later, you run out of other people's money."
Posts: 8,050
|
Post by middyman on Aug 23, 2020 12:09:26 GMT
In Suffolk, the lower tier authorities have merged to form “East Suffolk”, in the west to form “West Suffolk”. It is only because of an inconvenient referendum result that Babergh and Mid Suffolk have not formally merged. They have in all but name and I expect Central Suffolk to emerge at some point. How long before the government "suggests" that all three merge together? West Sussex is 170,000 population, well below the Government's desired 300,000. There is also Ipswich which resented losing its CBC status and would like to be a unitary body again. |
|
|
|
Post by John Chanin on Aug 23, 2020 12:18:37 GMT
The idea of two unitaries for Suffolk was explored under the Labour government. This was basically Ipswich + Felixstowe on one hand, and everything else on the other. The Cameron government stopped the process. Suffolk is really too small for 3 unitaries, even under my preferred size of c250,000. So West Suffolk would presumably link with Babergh and Mid Suffolk, while Ipswich would join East Suffolk. Obviously there’s a case for moving the Ipswich commuter villages in mid Suffolk and Babergh, but we know that won’t happen.
|
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 14,843
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Aug 23, 2020 12:29:10 GMT
The idea of two unitaries for Suffolk was explored under the Labour government. This was basically Ipswich + Felixstowe on one hand, and everything else on the other. The Cameron government stopped the process. Suffolk is really too small for 3 unitaries, even under my preferred size of c250,000. So West Suffolk would presumably link with Babergh and Mid Suffolk, while Ipswich would join East Suffolk. Obviously there’s a case for moving the Ipswich commuter villages in mid Suffolk and Babergh, but we know that won’t happen. Ipswich is so tightly drawn that great chunks of Ipswich aren't in Ipswich. |
|
neilm
Non-Aligned
Posts: 25,023
|
Post by neilm on Aug 23, 2020 12:38:15 GMT
I'd like to see RDCs and UDCs emerge, along with elected school boards.
But that is for a thread entitled 'New councils you would like to see emerge.'
|
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 14,843
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Aug 23, 2020 12:45:50 GMT
I'd like to see RDCs and UDCs emerge, along with elected school boards. But that is for a thread entitled 'New councils you would like to see emerge.' North Yorkshire County Council's presentation on its unitary bid does seem to suggest elevating town councils to Urban District Councils in all but name: www.northyorks.gov.uk/parish-and-town-council-seminar (90mins) |
|
|
|
Post by kvasir on Aug 23, 2020 13:00:47 GMT
I'd like to see RDCs and UDCs emerge, along with elected school boards. But that is for a thread entitled 'New councils you would like to see emerge.' Ew. Elected school boards sound like a horrific idea to me. |
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Aug 23, 2020 13:23:40 GMT
We had them from 1870-1904 (and a brief revival in Inner London in 1986-90).
|
|
|
|
Post by greenhert on Aug 23, 2020 19:11:06 GMT
Parts of High Peak would fit well in Stockport IMO. I think that's a better solution than merging with Cheshire East, though the Hope Valley in a Greater Manchester Borough feels like a strange concept. (And an area like that in any Met Borough could see some monstrous wards.) If it weren't for the reported 300,000 lower limit, I'd say the obvious unitarisation is (a) South Derbyshire + Amber Valley + Erewash (b) NE Derbyshire + Chesterfield + Bolsover (c) High Peak + Derbyshire Dales, but (c) is well short of 300,000 and (b) is not quite there either. So I suspect there might be pressure to combine (b) and (c) into a big North Derbyshire, but does it really make sense for a single tier "local" authority to cover both Hadfield and Shirebrook? What would they think in the Local Shop? An exemption from that desired 300,000 lower limit should be made for a "Peakside" authority because of geographical issues and to protect the Peak District. British geography and history means that these arbitrary criteria need to be dropped, or at least only be recommendations than requirements. |
|
|
|
Post by Devil Wincarnate on Aug 23, 2020 19:15:18 GMT
It should be noted that parts of the Peak District do sit outside the High Peak district. Quite a sizeable section is in Cheshire East.
|
|
|
|
Post by Devil Wincarnate on Aug 23, 2020 19:23:11 GMT
Parts of High Peak would fit well in Stockport IMO. I would agree. In fact, Disley had a referendum about 15 years ago on whether to stay in Cheshire East, join High Peak, or join Stockport MBC. |
|
|
|
Post by John Chanin on Aug 23, 2020 19:24:49 GMT
The idea of two unitaries for Suffolk was explored under the Labour government. This was basically Ipswich + Felixstowe on one hand, and everything else on the other. The Cameron government stopped the process. Suffolk is really too small for 3 unitaries, even under my preferred size of c250,000. So West Suffolk would presumably link with Babergh and Mid Suffolk, while Ipswich would join East Suffolk. Obviously there’s a case for moving the Ipswich commuter villages in mid Suffolk and Babergh, but we know that won’t happen. Ipswich is so tightly drawn that great chunks of Ipswich aren't in Ipswich. There’s only a little of the built up area in Babergh. Kesgrave is the main exclusion and it’s in East Suffolk. Commuter villages are another issue entirely, and one that has a much wider importance than just Ipswich. |
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 14,843
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Aug 23, 2020 19:36:34 GMT
It should be noted that parts of the Peak District do sit outside the High Peak district. Quite a sizeable section is in Cheshire East. And a huge chunk is in Sheffield. Well over 1/3 of Sheffield is in the Peak District. |
|
