As I've said all along!

Liverpool City Council!

Maybe a certain few Liverpool forum Members will now stop blamimg Manchester all the time!

Lets hope Liverpool City Council can sort itself out? For the good of the city?!


Taken from this weeks Property Week!

Too many cooks

Liverpool’s multitude of regeneration bodies means it is losing out to Manchester in the development stakes.


15.07.2005

By Daniel Thomas

Liverpool again stands accused of falling behind Manchester in its attempts at regeneration. Two weeks ago, Grosvenor, the developer behind the 42 acre (17 ha) Paradise Street mixed-use scheme, became the latest developer to criticise Liverpool City Council, adding to fears that too many organisations are causing confusion and competition in the city.

Grosvenor development director Rod Holmes says the council, a partner on the scheme, was holding up an agreement with a hotel operator.

The private and public sectors have not functioned as closely in Liverpool as in Manchester, and Grosvenor is the latest in a list of the local agencies’ critics, which includes industry bodies Business Liverpool and Downtown Liverpool, and developers TRB Estates and Maro Developments.

Frank McKenna, chairman of Downtown Liverpool, says developers in the city will ‘look elsewhere’ unless the city council ends the chaos surrounding its planning policy. Another senior development executive says: ‘The council needs to improve its approach to development and private sector developers. It should be going the extra mile, but often falls short.’

Manchester is seen as having fewer agencies and a more integrated approach to development. The council’s clear-cut approach gains praise from developers, as does mayor Howard Bernstein’s patriarchal approach to development. David Partridge, deputy chief executive of Argent, says that in Manchester, ‘the right people help at the right time’.

Perhaps the main problem for Liverpool is one of perception. The number of agencies causes confusion among outside investors and developers about who does what in the city.

There are two types of regeneration bodies in the north-west: those that plan strategy and those that carry out the work. The North West Development Agency (NWDA) presides over funding and strategy to the subregional strategic offices: Mersey Partnership in Liverpool’s case and, for Manchester, Manchester Enterprises and its offshoot, Midas.

Mersey mission

In Liverpool, the Mersey Partnership, which also includes representatives from councils and the NWDA, markets the area for investment. The Liverpool Land Development Company (LLDC) was also set up by the NWDA and controls land in four of the five areas of Liverpool outside the city centre. It encourages inward investment but largely leaves the marketing of Liverpool to the Mersey Partnership.

Then there is urban regeneration company Liverpool Vision, which covers regeneration of the city centre, but does not have the same powers as the LLDC. Ian McCarthy, Liverpool Vision’s programme director, says it could easily merge with the LLDC, but adds that Liverpool Vision’s narrow remit means it can focus on the challenge of the city centre.

Matters have not been helped by a dispute between the council’s Liberal Democrat leader Mike Storey and its chief executive Sir David Henshaw. Storey was accused of conspiring to oust Henshaw, who in turn called for Storey’s resignation. The row followed disagreements over the cancellation of a project to bring trams to the city centre and the chief executive’s pension arrangements. Sir Michael Lyons has stepped in to mediate.

LLDC chief executive David Waugh admits: ‘I work in the public sector and even I get confused. It is a problem. There is a constant stream of new organisations and initiatives, often overlapping and also leaving gaps.’

Others believe the confusion is overstated. Ian Ridgway, development director for Inspired Developments, says it is easy to say there are too many agencies in the north-west.

‘It can be a very complex and convoluted process to progress projects,’ he says.

More damaging, says one developer, is the level of competitiveness between the agencies, which can ‘be very cagey about sharing information and possessive about enquiries’.

Waugh says there can be a problem when several organisations chase the same money. ‘The way regeneration is set up in this country, with everyone wanting the same pot of European funding, makes the process quite competitive,’ he says.

Gerry Hughes, head of regeneration at GVA Grimley, blames a lack of cohesive thinking in central government. He says last month’s decision to pull out of funding the Merseytram project was taken in London on strictly transport grounds, rather than taking regeneration into account.

There are also problems caused by a multiplicity of strategies. ‘There are national, regional, local, housing, commercial, city growth and transport strategies and, of course, the Northern Way [the deputy prime minister’s programme to regenerate run-down housing areas in the north],’ says Hughes. ‘There is an issue about joining these strategies together.’

One regeneration agency department head also complains about having to go through ‘all the different levels [of government] for a decision, or for funding. It is not easy.’

Liverpool sources admit it would be hard to scrap any of the agencies, but say the system should be reviewed. Perhaps the city should look to Manchester, where public and private groups seem more happily aligned.

I can think of a few more reasons, but I won't slag it off and start some nonsense. :cry:

Edit - Leason to myself, don't upset the scousers after a couple of shandys.

As a neutral northwesterner, who despite popular opinion wants the best for both Manc and Liverpool (and Preston of course :D ), I find Liverpool City Council's attitude to development in Liverpool incredibly poor. As part of Liverpool's bid for Capital of Culture, it said that it would bring development to the city as much as it could. Developers are coming to the city and being given the finger. I think a few 'or elses' need to be thrown around.

Divide and rule, guys. Divide and rule.

Unfortunately for Liverpool... while their Council hinder the redevelopment of their city, Manchester is full steam ahead like a juganaught with no signs of stopping or even slowing down. I have to say....It warms the cockles a little bit :))

No Seriously..
It makes sense that its the council and their attitude to development that is making Liverpools progress so slow, it can't be the will of the people or lack of interest from developers so it must be some bureaucratic red tape nonsense. I can't believe how little Liverpool is promoting itself either, if I didn't come on here I wouldn't know about anything happening there, you just don't really hear about Liverpool much and considering this big HOO HAA about being Capital of Culture and all it was going to mean......I wish them all the best. I fear Liverpool will become a wasteland after 2008, its already lagging behind Manchester by a considerable number of years worth of growth and development, by the time they reach where we are now where will we be? It has to be a concern to Liverpool Council because Manchester Airport is already one of the busiest in europe, if you add that to our growth rate as a city...there isn't room in the Northwest for 2 large metropolis's, or at least not 2 the size Manchester is about to become anyway. Where will this leave Liverpool after the street cleaners have finished picking up the ribbons and balloons from the big 2008 party?

Liverpool council are failing to fulfill the major promises they made when bidding for the Capital of Culture, and then diverting attention away from it by doing smaller things like putting down special flagstones for buskers to perform on.

Ya right Accura, their plans seem quite short term compared to Manchester's, also the thing about Manchester's development is that it's about more than adding a bit of glitter to bring in tourists...some of Manchester City Councils plans are for way ahead in the future.. 15 year plans etc, I don't think Liverpool is looking beyond 2008, not the council anyway.

The worst thing about 2008 is that if they were not CoC 2008 is they would have a much much better chance of getting the trams sorted - at the moment the problem seems to be bridging a small gap, with no time.

In the long term, the trams will be much more benificial to Liverpool than CoC - another example of how the city is only concerned with the one event - and is not considering the whole picture of what is required to move the city forward.

Personally I agree with a lot of this - there are too many competing agencies in Liverpool, and too many self-serving and competitive interests. There is also clearly a problem with governance connected to big personalities, such as the City Council Chief Exec, which need to be sorted. Some opportunities have been squandered, and still are, and it needs sorting. But these things often go in cycles, and it is unlikely that such problems will always exist in Liverpool, or that Manchester won't itself, in time, go into a bad patch if for example if is unlucky in choice of new CEO or the elected council leader. Not wishing it on anyone, incidentally, but it happens.

However, some of the sensible points then degenerate into this kind of insanity:

...there isn't room in the Northwest for 2 large metropolis's, or at least not 2 the size Manchester is about to become anyway.

Well Liverpool isn't even in this "north west" according to many, it is regional centre of its own city region. But even if it was part of this "north west", why can't a region like the "north west" contain two or even more big cities? If you look at the Eastern seaboard of the US, or the North Rhineland regions, they are stuffed with big metropolitan regions and in places merge together. The L'pool city region has always had a smaller population than the Manc city region - a lot depends on where you draw boundaries (in the Northern Way Business Plan, Warrington is counted by both city regions and did indeed participate in planning for both of them), but it's been discussed before, with Manchester having anything from 2.5 - 3.0m, and Liverpool anything from 1.9 - 2.3m. So what? Does it make any difference at all that is important? I can't understand this obsession with the simple fact that different urban areas have different population levels. The population of neither city region is growing fast, so I don't know where this "the size Manchester is about to become" thing comes from.........the city region has a slow growing population, and its only in the decades old boundary haggles between Lpool and Manc city regions that either one can make a significant apparant growth in numbers.

Anyway, I wouldn't get too carried away. Manchester remains a city scarred by intense levels of deprivation, and while new blocks of flats in the centre are great, and tall blocks of flats look nice, there is little evidence that the social problems just a mile outside the centre are yet under control. Just look at how much regeneration money the Government has announced for Manchester this morning to tackle poverty, if you don't believe the scale of the problem. Liverpool has problems nearly as bad, it's not a competition, but that is the reality of both cities.

A lot of the economic fundamentals upon which Manchester wishes to base its future are uncertain: the airport is a now a major risk, given the explosive growth and even greater potential of rivals such as LJL. The whole "knowledge capital" strategy is so much piffle, and there is no evidence at all that the higher education and R&D setor in Manchester is pulling ahead from that in other regional centres, indeed they are all still under-performing relative to competitor cities in for exapmle the United States. Even the BBC move is in deep trouble, dependent upon a financial settlement that there is currently no sign the BBC will obtain.

This thread is a prime example of why a lot of people laugh at Manchester these days: arrogant, self-regarding, chip-on-the-shoulder, and ultimately parasitical - it can only frame its ambitions in terms of doing better than neighbours and doing them down, and trying to impose itself as "capital" of a region that a lot of people don't even believe in.

Liverpool has problems nearly as bad,



That'll be why Liverpool gets Objective 1 funding but Manchester doesn't then won't it.



airport is a now a major risk, given the explosive growth and even greater potential of rivals such as LJL



According to who, I have never seen a single professional opinion that think anything but MAN will continue to grow over the next few years - please provide a link to a professional source that quote MAN being under threat.



Previously, following the decision to scrap the Liverpool tram extensions who posted something along the lines of

'I hope that Liverpool goes quietly about reserecting the scheme, unlike how Manchester have gone about it since they were rejected. I hear that people that matter are very upset with the way Manchester have dealt with this'.


Do you stand by that? Since then, Liverpool is still cancelled, Manchester have been given £102m to upgrade what is currently there, and Rochdale is looking very very positive before the end of the year.



ultimately parasitical



Which city gets Objective one funding again?

This thread is a prime example of why a lot of people laugh at Manchester these days: arrogant, self-regarding, chip-on-the-shoulder, and ultimately parasitical - it can only frame its ambitions in terms of doing better than neighbours and doing them down, and trying to impose itself as "capital" of a region that a lot of people don't even believe in.
A 'lot of people' laughing at Manchester? Everywhere I look, nobody is laughing at Manchester. Everybody is looking to it with admiration.

not bad spiel liverpolition, bet u dont wear La Coste shell suits do ya :)

Manchester City Council was just as bad in the 80s, fook all happen then.
its all down to old Labour, lucky manc has some new thinkers. Liverpool has always had hardline almost communist leaders. and the trade unions thats another story.

Labour have finally realised that govt needs private section investment. they are your friends, not the enemy. Things can be done in twice the speed and half the cost in the private sector :)
Liverpool needs all the govt depts they can muster, imagine the unemployment figures if half the population wasnt working for the council :)

Sorry lads, i have nothing bad against Liverpool, appart from your accent - I feel physically sick when I hear it. and ur footie team.

Its a traditional city rivalry. LFC vs MU is on the same level as MU vs MC.

Anyway, I wouldn't get too carried away. Manchester remains a city scarred by intense levels of deprivation, and while new blocks of flats in the centre are great, and tall blocks of flats look nice, there is little evidence that the social problems just a mile outside the centre are yet under control. Just look at how much regeneration money the Government has announced for Manchester this morning to tackle poverty, if you don't believe the scale of the problem. Liverpool has problems nearly as bad, it's not a competition, but that is the reality of both cities.


These social problems are UK wide, and they can take generations to solve. Just throwing cash around isn't the answer.

A lot of the economic fundamentals upon which Manchester wishes to base its future are uncertain: the airport is a now a major risk, given the explosive growth and even greater potential of rivals such as LJL. The whole "knowledge capital" strategy is so much piffle, and there is no evidence at all that the higher education and R&D setor in Manchester is pulling ahead from that in other regional centres, indeed they are all still under-performing relative to competitor cities in for exapmle the United States. Even the BBC move is in deep trouble, dependent upon a financial settlement that there is currently no sign the BBC will obtain.

If only you had evidence to back these claims up!

We would probably take you more seriously then Neopolitan?

And to think, you started off so well!

Chasedwar,

I know what you mean mate. I find the Manc accent absolutely disgusting- I have never met a single person outside of Manc who has any affection for it. I on the other hand can testify that having a scouse twang can help a lot, especially with the ladies :cheers: There was a programme on the other night about neighbours who don't get along. There was a manc family on it and they were the most greedy, arrogant, morally-depraved people I have ever seen- the shite that lurks under Manchester's veneer of success is breath-taking- and I dare say, stomach turning.

Also, proper Mancs support Man City- not Man Utd- you plassy Manc!

It is frankly quite pathetic that you Mancs think you're so big and successful. Tell this to a Londoner and he'd probably choke. Everybody the world over is still laughing about the fact that you cat-shit infested morons tried to go for the Olympics. HA HA HA HA!!!!!!!

http://img170.echo.cx/img170/9481/wanker9kr.gif

Only a forum full of adolescent wankers (-thankyou for proving that point Kiddy) would start such a twatty thread. This forum is much like a microcosm of the place itself- full of nasty, vitriolic, "Shameless" types, who feel so inadequte they have to prove their worth to everybody.- But just end up looking like twats. Reminds me of Man Utd supporters.

Later, you spotty teenagers :)

Blabbernsmoke you HAVE got to be kidding. The Scouse accent is one of the most maligned accents in the UK. I have even heard it described as ''They sound like they've got a mouthful of phlegm''. Wether or not it deserves that is subjective of course, but I would say the Manc accent is generally considered less offensive.

And yeah, that program you were talking about, the people were morons. But that's what channel 4 wanted of course. Arguements. They wanted chalk and cheese people. So for the scummy side they got some Salford chav family. I'm sure plenty of families like this exist in Liverpool, and all over the UK.

''It is frankly quite pathetic that you Mancs think you're so big and successful.'' Er...it's called ambition mate. Maybe if Liverpool had some, it wouldn't be so far behind! And as if Liverpool could dream of bidding for the Olympics(nevermind coming 3rd) when it can't even get a tram system or a poxy little 4th grace built. Haha. Amusing post Blabbern. ;) :laugh:

So Bladder, great response to the Property week article that.

P.S. Manchester is red...

http://www.mipc.mmu.ac.uk//docs/SeasonTicketReport.pdf

It's funny has these scousers go on rants about Manchester being a laughing stock etc, how the airport is going to close.

Yet NEVER do they have any actual points to make that are backed up by hard evidence - not one of the seems to disagree with what is being said in the article, they seem only to want to say 'yer, but I don't like Manchester cos it's crap'.

Actually Caw, without wanting to sound conceited- a lot of the southern girls at my uni loved my accent. And the people I meet usually say, "oh I like Liverpool, the people are really friendly." And I can actually say this as a neutral observer as I am not from Liverpool- I acquired a twang from my parents and peers.

On the other hand, the Manc accent sounds like an ugly Yorskhire accent. You never hear people say Manc is a friendly place do you? The place is riddled with crime- and half the reason it can claim success now is becuase it started regenerating earlier than Liverpool- mainly due to the IRA bomb. What else do you have?- an over-subsidised airport (-the biggest welfare sponge in the UK!)

Perhpas we should see how tihngs are in 40 years time. After all, 40 years ago, scousers could have bragged about being wealthier than Manc. Nothing is ever permanent. You will learn that as you grow up and mature a bit. :)

So Bladder, great response to the Property week article that.

P.S. Manchester is red...

http://www.mipc.mmu.ac.uk//docs/SeasonTicketReport.pdf

I am shocked by these numbers. Only 7,800 Man U season ticketers in the M postcode? Flipping heck. That's pathetic.

Blabbern, the IRA attack only sped up the regeneration of one part of the city centre. Namely, the shambles, the arndale and exchange square. It had no bearing on Salford Quays, Piccadilly, Castlefield etc, and it came after massive projects such as the MEN Arena.

the thing is, that the manc accent isn't spoken thoughout the whole city, only in parts of salford, moss side etc. in liverpool, EVERYONE has that accent.

caw - how many city fans in the same area?

oh 6,600 - surely not, that would mean there are more United fans in Manchester than City???

WTF has accent got to do with the property week article?

Bladder, what is your response to the independent article?

I notice you have changed subject away from something written with no axe to grind, that makes it clear that business has an easier time in Manc than Liverpool.

please respond to that article, and don't change the subject.

caw - there are millions of Roman Catholics around the world - does this mean that there are none in Rome?

the thing is, that the manc accent isn't spoken thoughout the whole city, only in parts of salford, moss side etc. in liverpool, EVERYONE has that accent.

Ignorrance Kiddy, tut tut. There are many shades and strengths to the scouse accent that a knowledgable person can discern. You obviously think everybody speaks like Jennifer Ellison. Thankfully they don't. Compare her to John Lennon, Ringo Starr for example.

caw - how many city fans in the same area?

oh 6,600 - surely not, that would mean there are more United fans in Manchester than City???

I'm a red, which is why I am shocked. We've got tens of thousands more season ticket holders than City, yet only 1000 more in Manc.

WTF has accent got to do with the property week article?

Bladder, what is your response to the independent article?

I notice you have changed subject away from something written with no axe to grind, that makes it clear that business has an easier time in Manc than Liverpool.

please respond to that article, and don't change the subject.

Tranny,

An intentionally provocative, and shit, thread deserves an annoying and shit response. If you don't like it- sue me! I have answered the question already. Let's see how things are in 40 years. Things change. Enjoy your moment of glory in as crass a way as you like. It will only make us stamp on you all the more harder once we have ironed out our problems.

Only a forum full of adolescent wankers (-thankyou for proving that point Kiddy) would start such a twatty thread.

Blabbersmoke!

The reason I started this thread off, was to prove that Liverpools problems are not the fault of Manchester, but lie a lot closer to home than some of you will admit!

The article in Property Week has quotes from some serious players, who blame Liverpool City Council for your problems and not Manchester! If you took the time out to read the article properly, you will see these Experts are telling Liverpool to Copy Manchester!

That in itself says everything about how Liverpool is compared to Manchester!

If you need to vent your spleen so much, I suggest you go to the next Council meeting and ask your council leaders why Liverpool is so far behind Manchester and why it is falling further behind?!

WTF has accent got to do with the property week article?

Bladder, what is your response to the independent article?

I notice you have changed subject away from something written with no axe to grind, that makes it clear that business has an easier time in Manc than Liverpool.

please respond to that article, and don't change the subject.

The accent thing was orignally brought up by chasedwar, which was foolish considering the current climate of the forum(ie. any passing comment can spark rows that engulf a thread and ruin it). Please, no more accent talk from now on.

jrb - spot on, the article didn't say that Manchester, the government and the BBC are to blame for the current predicament that Liverpool finds itself in, that is most likely the reason they reacted in the way they did.

Boris was right - they love being the victims of someone elses actions, but never, ever, accept that the situation that the city has managed to get itself into over the years is actually anything to do with the locals.

The council needs to do what Manchester's does- actively promote and market the city as a good place to do business- to be unrelenting in their desire to bring business to the city. If taxes are lower than Manc, Leeds, Birmingham then Liverpool would become a big target IMO for business.

Why can't you be as honest on this forum/thread, as you are on the Liverpool one Blabbersmoke!?

jrb - spot on, the article didn't say that Manchester, the government and the BBC are to blame for the current predicament that Liverpool finds itself in, that is most likely the reason they reacted in the way they did.

Boris was right - they love being the victims of someone elses actions, but never, ever, accept that the situation that the city has managed to get itself into over the years is actually anything to do with the locals.

Trammy,what predicament are we in?
At the moment we are a city on the up,developments are taking place all around.
Maybe the council are not as up to speed as we would like but all in all, things are much better than they have been. :cheers:

Trammy,what predicament are we in?
At the moment we are a city on the up,developments are taking place all around.
Maybe the council are not as up to speed as we would like but all in all, things are much better than they have been. :cheers:
I agree. When I was in Liverpool on Sunday, there were cranes everywhere. Liverpool is most definately a city on the up.
However, that amount of development should be at least twice what it currently is, but it isnt thanks to Liverpool CC. I was so pleased when Liverpool won the capital of culture 2008, but now I'm wondering why I was pleased. There is currently nothing to show for it.

what the fuck is thread about this should be closed i see caw123 is involved again when he is supposed to be the moderator what a joke.

/\ obviously you don't understand the article.

It has been very recently that complaints about Liverpool CC's dealings with business have surfaced. The Militant days are a long time ago.

For the last several years, Liverpool has been receiving good publicity for its success in attracting inward investment and despite the collapse of the high-profile Fourth Grace plan, scale of development in Liverpool right now is greater than the city has experienced in fifty years, including some (Paradise Street, the Kings Dock area) that the council have been involved with. Liverpool Business Centre (the council's contact point for investment) was ranked in a global survey in 2003 as one of the best inward investment agencies world-wide.

Some at least of the (very recent) complaints will be businesses who have not had their developments approved by the council (maybe with good reason) or as quickly as they would like, and I have some doubts about the fairness and absolute integrity of the Downtown Liverpool in Business company (not to be confused with Tony Siebenthaler's Downtown) that seems to be stirring this current controversy.

DLIB is a private organisation that makes its money from subscriptions from its member companies, whose interests it lobbys for - those companies that have been in the news recently complaining about Liverpool CC's handling of their planning applics include several DLIB members and DLIB have been the main insitagators of the latest spate of articles in the press. Bringing the old 'enemy', Manchester into the argument is a good way to twist the knife, whether the comparison is valid or not.

It is probably true, however, that Liverpool CC leadership have lost their way very recently and a change of top management is needed. Chief Executive David Henshaw's time in charge has been a successful one on the whole, with the council now ranked as a good council by the Audit Office, the successful ECOC bid, a rapidly growing economy (someone mentioned Obj.1, Merseyside won't qualify for this next time, even before the addition of the new poorer east European countries, Liverpool wouldn't aleady), etc.

However a recent boardroom squabble at the top of Liverpool council's executive has lead to a situation where the top level management of the city seems to have become confused and, yes is now, probably not doing as good a job in its dealing with business as Manchester, a city whose success in attracting investment is worth of praise.

A change in leaderhip in Liverpool will come and come soon I expect. Whilst there are definately examples of good practice to be emulated in manchester, it is hardly as if Liverpool's record in the last 8 year isn't without success stories and so Liverpool does have good things to build in as well as the very recent difficulties.

Btw Trammy, you're being a prick again. Read Simon Heffer's (not Boris's actually) editorial in the Spectator, which blamed Liverpool fans for Hillborough (without getting the numbers of dead very wrong), pandered to hate-filled stereotypes of Liverpudlian self-pity in the wake of Bigley's murder while the reaction to Bigley's death in Liverpool, outside of his family was almost non-existant and whilst the man's body was barely cold and see if you want to retract you post 34. You should be fucking ashamed of yourself.

Or Trammy would you like to characterise the constant bleating and moaning from massed mancunians on this forum on the infrastructure spending in London in the light of the Metrolink extension funding problems as typical examples of Mancs "lov[ing] being the victims of someone elses actions, but never, ever, accept that the situation that the city has managed to get itself into over the years is actually anything to do with [them]"?

Didn't think so. However, contrast the frequent annoyance of London members of this forum with what they see Mancunians whinging, chip on the shoulder resentment for any spending that is directed at the capital with the Scouser's fairly mind-mannered response to the Govt's fucking up of Merseytram.

It would seem that your fuckwitted stereotyping of Scousers would characterise your city, rather than Liverpool if one wished to apply this bullshit to either of the two places. Myself, I wouldn't, however.

/\ obviously you don't understand the article.
i just dont think these threads are helpful or needed they only end one way already liverpool is starting to get slated and it will esclate into more hurtful remarks.

Unfortunately for Liverpool... while their Council hinder the redevelopment of their city, Manchester is full steam ahead like a juganaught with no signs of stopping or even slowing down. I have to say....It warms the cockles a little bit :))

No Seriously..
It makes sense that its the council and their attitude to development that is making Liverpools progress so slow, it can't be the will of the people or lack of interest from developers so it must be some bureaucratic red tape nonsense. I can't believe how little Liverpool is promoting itself either, if I didn't come on here I wouldn't know about anything happening there, you just don't really hear about Liverpool much and considering this big HOO HAA about being Capital of Culture and all it was going to mean......I wish them all the best. I fear Liverpool will become a wasteland after 2008, its already lagging behind Manchester by a considerable number of years worth of growth and development, by the time they reach where we are now where will we be? It has to be a concern to Liverpool Council because Manchester Airport is already one of the busiest in europe, if you add that to our growth rate as a city..., or at least not 2 the size Manchester is about to become anyway. Where will this leave Liverpool after the street cleaners have finished picking up the ribbons and balloons from the big 2008 party?

I am touched by your concern.

Whats all this about "there isn't room in the Northwest for 2 large metropolis's" business??? Whether you like it or not there is. Despite the best efforts of certains institutions to make it otherwise.

Liverpool Airport is forecast to double its passenger numbers to 6m within a couple of years. Who used to tell us we couldn't have an airport???
While the growth rate has been higher than the national average for several years.

The fact you hear so little about Liverpool and CoC probably says more about you then it does the city. There is plenty of positive news out there.

The council still has problems, but it has gone from complete anarchy under Labour to being officially rated a "good" council by the government since Liberal control began. There are things that still require attention, but the right course has been charted in the past, and so I am hopeful will be chartered in the future.

We have a massive 1m sq ft of retail coming online....plus an arena....plus a major new office development - all for 2008.

Your attempt to dress a series of digs up as worry is a nice try, but no banana. :banana:

what the fuck is thread about this should be closed i see caw123 is involved again when he is supposed to be the moderator what a joke.

Why should this thread be closed?

If it had been posted on the Liverpool forum, would you have said the same thing? No!

This thread disproves a common belief on the Liverpool forum, that Manchester is the cause of its problems! It is not! Face facts! The article in PW points to Liverpools Council as the main culprit!

I take it you don't want to hear that though?

Tommygun! If you've nothing to add to this valid thread, then don't post on it! It will survive without you!

what problems exactly and i have never heard anyone blame manchester for problems that liverpool has i think you are all paranoid.

what problems exactly and i have never heard anyone blame manchester for problems that liverpool has i think you are all paranoid.
I have actually heard many scousers on this forum suggest that their is some sort of government conspiracy with Manchester to restrict Liverpool's development so that Manchester can expand and can be the undisputed capital of the North West Region. This is of course untrue.

How many people have complained about the BBC coming to Manc and not Liverpool?

Prehaps it is because the BBC can do better business with Manc CC than Livepool CC.


How many times do we hear Manc airport gets preferential treatment over Liverpool airport?

Prehaps it is because the BBC can do better business with Manc CC than Livepool CC.



Liverpolitan does it all the time, he blames the northern Way, the BBC and central government for favouring Manc over Liverpool unfairly.

The whole point of the article (and thread) shows that this victim status is untrue - the causes are much closer to home - the reason the BBC are moving to Manc and not Liverpool is not due to the Northern way, or government or BBC bias, simply because organisations find it easier to deal with Manc than Liverpool.

Now, when people stop posting to crap they do on the Liverpool forums about such subjects, maybe articles like this would not generate the response they do.

you posted the same replies there trammy and liverpool airport is europes fastest growing airport so there doing something right.

How many people have complained about the BBC coming to Manc and not Liverpool?

Prehaps it is because the BBC can do better business with Manc CC than Livepool CC.

The reason the BBC are moving to Manc and not Liverpool is not due to the Northern way, or government or BBC bias, simply because organisations find it easier to deal with Manc than Liverpool.



Or perhaps it is decades of centrally decided government decisions which firstly thought it correct to base all BBC TV operations in one place, then ITV ones. As there are other factors to be considered here such as culture and representation "business" has nothing to do with it.

tommy - yes, no one desputes that.

No one in Manc has a problem with that, it is great for the region the cheap flights.

It is the people on the Liverpool forum who complain about things like runway 2 was a biased decision, and Livrepool has (previously) been left to rot, whilst Man was given favourable conditions.

pj - no, but the BBC needs to be able to do the move in am easy value for money way - reading that article it is apparent given the choice between the cities you'd choose Manc.

Why should this thread be closed?

If it had been posted on the Liverpool forum, would you have said the same thing? No!

This thread disproves a common belief on the Liverpool forum, that Manchester is the cause of its problems! It is not! Face facts! The article in PW points to Liverpools Council as the main culprit!

I take it you don't want to hear that though?

Tommygun! If you've nothing to add to this valid thread, then don't post on it! It will survive without you!

You're a star Jerb.

He's you bleating with "victim culture" self pity against London on this forum when you thought that the BBC were to cancel their move of BBC Sport to Manchester


What more do you want?

You got the Dome!
You got the 90000 seater Wembley!
You got the 80000 seater Stratford stadium!
You got the Olympics!
You got the lot!
You even got the streets paved with gold!
What fucking more do you want?
Don't tell me!
BBC SPORT!

London the cause of all your problems Jerby?

tommy - yes, no one desputes that.

No one in Manc has a problem with that, it is great for the region the cheap flights.

It is the people on the Liverpool forum who complain about things like runway 2 was a biased decision, and Livrepool has (previously) been left to rot, whilst Man was given favourable conditions.
well it is partly true due to fact that liverpool was so militant and manchester wasnt and the airport is another strange decision if you ask me it should of been a regional airport built on the old burtonwood airbase.

tommy - they are effectively private companies though aren't they, why on earth should Manc airport, when it has very high demand, be starngled and not allowed to expand?

I presume when Liverpool gets to a point it may need a second terminal you'll be arguing that a new airport should be built between it and Blackpool airport?

pj - Put yourself in the position of a BBC director - you need to make a huge change, moving 1800 staff, do you go to the place that will give you all the help in the worl during the change, or the place that puts obstacles in the way?

tommy - they are effectively private companies though aren't they, why on earth should Manc airport, when it has very high demand, be starngled and not allowed to expand?

I presume when Liverpool gets to a point it may need a second terminal you'll be arguing that a new airport should be built between it and Blackpool airport?

pj - Put yourself in the position of a BBC director - you need to make a huge change, moving 1800 staff, do you go to the place that will give you all the help in the worl during the change, or the place that puts obstacles in the way?
a lot of people i have talked too who know a lot about aviation always say that the ideal place for a large airport was burtonwood half way between liverpool and manchester m6 and m62 running right through it and large runways still there from its time as an airbase.

pj - no, but the BBC needs to be able to do the move in am easy value for money way - reading that article it is apparent given the choice between the cities you'd choose Manc.

You would choose Manchester simply because it has the existing skills and facilites now. It has these facilites though through decisions that were made decades ago, and which gave Liverpool precisly nothing at the time of television's advent.

It is exactly the same argument that used to be put for surpressing Liverpool Airport - it is the way things are, and thus is right.
Just because a state of affairs exists now does not mean there is something inherently correct about it.

Thats not whining, just pointing out obvious and blatant unfairness.

As they say, we woz robbed! :)

pj - Put yourself in the position of a BBC director - you need to make a huge change, moving 1800 staff, do you go to the place that will give you all the help in the worl during the change, or the place that puts obstacles in the way?

Show me the evidence that any obstacles were put in the way....or even that the BBC considered Liverpool for one second?

tommy - they are effectively private companies though aren't they, why on earth should Manc airport, when it has very high demand, be starngled and not allowed to expand?

I presume when Liverpool gets to a point it may need a second terminal you'll be arguing that a new airport should be built between it and Blackpool airport?

pj - Put yourself in the position of a BBC director - you need to make a huge change, moving 1800 staff, do you go to the place that will give you all the help in the worl during the change, or the place that puts obstacles in the way?

Trammy, please stop posting piffle. Which obstacles are being placed in the BBC's way by Liverpool?

The BBC is moving some staff to Manchester because they already have a large base there.

Oh, and the Burtonwood airfield plan would have given Manchester and Liverpool the chance to gain a real international hub (which Manchester is not). Manchester airport objected. Ho hum. May Mcr have continued success, and I believe it will. However, the airport does have constraints on it due to built up areas in its vicinity that a new airport in Burtonwood would not have had (and LJM does not have either).

Manchester Airport have objected to Liverpool's plans for expansion in the past, btw. Acting as a business will of course, trying to see off competition and create a (local) monopoly by unfair means if possible and if the tables were turned Liverpool airport would probably have done the same.

Hasn't worked of course though, both airport are, in their own ways, doing ok, which is good for both cities.

And respond to my earlier post please.

burtonwood is mile after mile of flat fields with nothing on there apart from some old runways and hangers ideal in every aspect.

See the article for the obstacles put in the way, there are too many organisations to deal with in Liverpool compared to Manchester which actively helps development.

Given this, it is hardly a surprise that organisations - such as the BBC choose Manchester ahead of Liverpool.


The airport, Manchester ran out of capacity, needed a new runway, built a new runway. Why on earth should it have moved to Burtonwood. If Liverpool needs expansion are you suggesting that it is moved there?

Manchester airport is a private company, I really don't understand why on earth it should have been forced to close, and move somewhere else, just because it ran out of capacity.



Have you lot actually read the property weekly article?

I presume you agree with it's findings as no one has tried to argue against them.

Now given that, why does it surprise you when organisations, such as the BBC, decide to move the Manchester - it is the logical conclusion of the article.

Have you lot actually read the property weekly article?

I presume you agree with it's findings as no one has tried to argue against them.



I have you blurt! Now respond to my post or I'll give you the bullying treatment you dished out to Leeds No.1 and repost the thing every two minutes until you repsond.

Ok, Tram No.1, here it is again:

It has been very recently that complaints about Liverpool CC's dealings with business have surfaced. The Militant days are a long time ago.

For the last several years, Liverpool has been receiving good publicity for its success in attracting inward investment and despite the collapse of the high-profile Fourth Grace plan, scale of development in Liverpool right now is greater than the city has experienced in fifty years, including some (Paradise Street, the Kings Dock area) that the council have been involved with. Liverpool Business Centre (the council's contact point for investment) was ranked in a global survey in 2003 as one of the best inward investment agencies world-wide.

Some at least of the (very recent) complaints will be businesses who have not had their developments approved by the council (maybe with good reason) or as quickly as they would like, and I have some doubts about the fairness and absolute integrity of the Downtown Liverpool in Business company (not to be confused with Tony Siebenthaler's Downtown) that seems to be stirring this current controversy.

DLIB is a private organisation that makes its money from subscriptions from its member companies, whose interests it lobbys for - those companies that have been in the news recently complaining about Liverpool CC's handling of their planning applics include several DLIB members and DLIB have been the main insitagators of the latest spate of articles in the press. Bringing the old 'enemy', Manchester into the argument is a good way to twist the knife, whether the comparison is valid or not.

It is probably true, however, that Liverpool CC leadership have lost their way very recently and a change of top management is needed. Chief Executive David Henshaw's time in charge has been a successful one on the whole, with the council now ranked as a good council by the Audit Office, the successful ECOC bid, a rapidly growing economy (someone mentioned Obj.1, Merseyside won't qualify for this next time, even before the addition of the new poorer east European countries, Liverpool wouldn't aleady), etc.

However a recent boardroom squabble at the top of Liverpool council's executive has lead to a situation where the top level management of the city seems to have become confused and, yes is now, probably not doing as good a job in its dealing with business as Manchester, a city whose success in attracting investment is worth of praise.

A change in leaderhip in Liverpool will come and come soon I expect. Whilst there are definately examples of good practice to be emulated in manchester, it is hardly as if Liverpool's record in the last 8 year isn't without success stories and so Liverpool does have good things to build in as well as the very recent difficulties.

Btw Trammy, you're being a prick again. Read Simon Heffer's (not Boris's actually) editorial in the Spectator, which blamed Liverpool fans for Hillborough (without getting the numbers of dead very wrong), pandered to hate-filled stereotypes of Liverpudlian self-pity in the wake of Bigley's murder while the reaction to Bigley's death in Liverpool, outside of his family was almost non-existant and whilst the man's body was barely cold and see if you want to retract you post 34. You should be fucking ashamed of yourself.

Or Trammy would you like to characterise the constant bleating and moaning from massed mancunians on this forum on the infrastructure spending in London in the light of the Metrolink extension funding problems as typical examples of Mancs "lov[ing] being the victims of someone elses actions, but never, ever, accept that the situation that the city has managed to get itself into over the years is actually anything to do with [them]"?

Didn't think so. However, contrast the frequent annoyance of London members of this forum with what they see Mancunians whinging, chip on the shoulder resentment for any spending that is directed at the capital with the Scouser's fairly mind-mannered response to the Govt's fucking up of Merseytram.

It would seem that your fuckwitted stereotyping of Scousers would characterise your city, rather than Liverpool if one wished to apply this bullshit to either of the two places. Myself, I wouldn't, however.

Why do some of the scousers refuse to accept that decisions like the airport, and the BBC are effectively free market decisions - Manc airport wanted to spend £130m on a new runway, they got planning permission and did so - if Liverpool airport wanted to spend the same amount on a new runway I'm sure they'd get planning permission.

Same with the BBC, they made a commercial decision.


There seems to be an attitude that all things need to be managed by government - i.e. government should force the airport to close and move up the road - despite it being a huge success.

The BBC should be forced not to follow the most effective and easy route up north, but forced to work with several different agencies that don't work together (see article).


You don't seem to get it, Liverpool needs to make itself attractive to outside organisations, at th moment (read article) other places are more attrcative - until this is sorted out, Liverpool will continue to play second fiddle to Manchester in the NW.

Liverpool airport applied for a £500m privately funded expansion at the same time, which was rejected in favour of Ringway's second runway. Was rejected in favour of Manchester Airport of course...

Why do some of the scousers refuse to accept that decisions like the airport, and the BBC are effectively free market decisions - Manc airport wanted to spend £130m on a new runway, they got planning permission and did so - if Liverpool airport wanted to spend the same amount on a new runway I'm sure they'd get planning permission.

Same with the BBC, they made a commercial decision.


There seems to be an attitude that all things need to be managed by government - i.e. government should force the airport to close and move up the road - despite it being a huge success.

The BBC should be forced not to follow the most effective and easy route up north, but forced to work with several different agencies that don't work together (see article).


You don't seem to get it, Liverpool needs to make itself attractive to outside organisations, at th moment (read article) other places are more attrcative - until this is sorted out, Liverpool will continue to play second fiddle to Manchester in the NW.

The BBC's is not a free market decision, you gimp. It's a public corporation that already had its largest north of england base in Manchester, this location having arisen from a Soviet-style command decision decades before, one with no commercial basis.

And Tram No.1 reply to my earlier post.

jrb - spot on, the article didn't say that Manchester, the government and the BBC are to blame for the current predicament that Liverpool finds itself in, that is most likely the reason they reacted in the way they did.

Boris was right - they love being the victims of someone elses actions, but never, ever, accept that the situation that the city has managed to get itself into over the years is actually anything to do with the locals.
fuck you trammy you have had your say know you should leave it you tosser.

Tommy, you are heading for a ban with insults like that.

Tommy, you are heading for a ban with insults like that.
oh here he is the man who stirs it all up and threatens to ban you what about trammy saying boris johnson was right incitng me he is going to be banned?

Tommy, don't be provoked - they are winding you up. Smile and disagree.

Blabbernsmoke you HAVE got to be kidding. The Scouse accent is one of the most maligned accents in the UK. I have even heard it described as ''They sound like they've got a mouthful of phlegm''. Wether or not it deserves that is subjective of course, but I would say the Manc accent is generally considered less offensive.

And yeah, that program you were talking about, the people were morons. But that's what channel 4 wanted of course. Arguements. They wanted chalk and cheese people. So for the scummy side they got some Salford chav family. I'm sure plenty of families like this exist in Liverpool, and all over the UK.

''It is frankly quite pathetic that you Mancs think you're so big and successful.'' Er...it's called ambition mate. Maybe if Liverpool had some, it wouldn't be so far behind! And as if Liverpool could dream of bidding for the Olympics(nevermind coming 3rd) when it can't even get a tram system or a poxy little 4th grace built. Haha. Amusing post Blabbern. ;) :laugh:


BLIMEY CAW...LOL..Don't hold back will ya.

Tommy, don't be provoked - they are winding you up. Smile and disagree.
i dont mind when they have a disscusion but they always seem to go personal that is what winds me up like mentioning boris johnson and calling the liverpool accent that has nothing to do with this thread and is just to try and wind you up then caw123 appears and threatens to ban you.

It's because he's a gobshite, that's all. :)

Can I just speak up for CAW for a moment? I think it's quite hard for him with these regular spats, and the less of them we had the less often he'd find himself torn between his loyalties to his city and his good work to moderate the Forum. He always puts the forum first, but that must be hard sometimes. Personally I am grateful to anyone who moderates this, especially the Mancheser forum given the "world domination manc" attitudes he has to deal with from some posters.

Give Earlybird the job I'd say!

He could quite easily rise above it Poli'. At the start of this thread it would've been very easy to say 'Oi! post it in the Liverpool section and stop stirring shit', and this wouldn't have blown up yet again. However, every time it happens he sticks his sly little oar in and starts making prissy threats to those that respond to his provocation.

Give Earlybird the job I'd say!

LOL, he would love it. The Liverpool board would be renamed "Manchester World City Western Fringe Area", and anyone who claimed its population was more than 185 people plus a cat and a dog would be banned for falsification.

oh god.

Why can't you be as honest on this forum/thread, as you are on the Liverpool one Blabbersmoke!?

I never once claimed that Manchester's local government does not perform well. In certain respects at least; the economy is doing well, but crime is high. I never once said that Liverpool's local government was superior to Manchester's, in many respects it is not. If only you took the time to read what people post!

However, I am optimistic that over time, with pressure from various social groups, e.g. the business community, Liverpool's local government will become more efficient.

Tranny,

All of this Boris Johnson talk really is naive and vitriolic to the core. Nobody on the Liverpool forum would disagree that the council there needs to improve in some respects.
The fact that you have this perverted notion of scousers blaiming Manchester for everything is a testament to your stupidity.

Although, Manchester Ringworm airport has received massive public subsidies that have warped the free market making life difficult for regional airports. FACT.

LOL, he would love it. The Liverpool board would be renamed "Manchester World City Western Fringe Area", and anyone who claimed its population was more than 185 people plus a cat and a dog would be banned for falsification.
:rofl: :laugh:

oh here he is the man who stirs it all up and threatens to ban you what about trammy saying boris johnson was right incitng me he is going to be banned?

It's for your own benefit that you don't go handing out insults like that. Trammy stated his opinion on something that Boris Johnson said, perhaps a little strong but not highly offensive or bannable. I've already told you the reason why any admin would be happy to ban you in 2nd. You've insulted trammy like that before, if it keeps happening, don't expect to last long, is all I'm trying to say. In the world forums you would be brigged for that, be thankful the UK forums are more lax.

LOL, he would love it. The Liverpool board would be renamed "Manchester World City Western Fringe Area", and anyone who claimed its population was more than 185 people plus a cat and a dog would be banned for falsification.

:laugh:

it wasnt so much the stuff trammy said you were very harse yourself that just wound me up more.

It's for your own benefit that you don't go handing out insults like that. Trammy stated his opinion on something that Boris Johnson said, perhaps a little strong but not highly offensive or bannable. I've already told you the reason why any admin would be happy to ban you in 2nd. You've insulted trammy like that before, if it keeps happening, don't expect to last long, is all I'm trying to say. In the world forums you would be brigged for that, be thankful the UK forums are more lax.

:laugh:

Looks like Caw is suffering from that personality defect, MMS. Manchester Megalomania Syndrome. Seems to be quite common round these parts. :)

Learn from Blabber tommy, add a bit of wit and humour into your insult and viola, you won't attract any attention. :laugh:

Though it should be called EB syndrome..........

I've just read this thread from start to finish. Why does this happen with such alarming regularity? I wouldn't have the energy

I'm off to look at Fleshbot.com

We all know Liverpool City Council is full of nimbies. It's nothing new.

Personally I think this thread should be locked. Im a bit ashamed of jrb for starting such a pointless and obviously provocative thread in the way we are used to seeing certain Liverpudlian (Liverpolitan?) forumers so behaving.

I will say one word on this airport business for Blabbersmoke. Take a read of this interesting post made by Martyn on the LJLA thread which goes a long way to explaining the relative position of Ringway and LJLA today I believe.

Yes, it was that sixteen year period that allowed Manchester to get the better of us. At the start of the Second World War, both Liverpool and Manchester were requisitioned for the war effort. Manchester City Council successfully resisted the requisition with the result that, on the termination of hostilities, they regained control of the airport whilst Liverpool had to wait till 1961.

Being run by civil servants meant that very little investment was carried out. If Liverpool had taken over their airport at the same time as Manchester, a decision would probably have been made to extend the old 08/26 runway on the Northern Airfield over Speke Boulevard - something that would have removed the need for the new 09/27 runway on the other side of Speke Hall. By 1961, the Ford (Jaguar) factory had been developed and a major runway extension was no longer practical.

Another reason was that the council failed to follow through the construction of 09/27 with that of a new terminal on the Southern Airfield. The southern terminal was not constructed until 1986, twenty years after the opening of the runway. The delay was probably due to the fact that Manchester had monopolised north west air travel by 1966 and the construction of 09/27 did not bring about the anticipated increase in air travel. In any event, we had twenty years of aircraft having to taxi some three miles from terminal to runway, which did not make the airport popular.

The current expansion of LJLA did not start with the arrival of EasyJet but with travel operator Direct Holidays setting up operations from Liverpool that broke the cartel of package tour operators using Manchester and forcing Liverpool holidaymakers to trek 35 miles up the M62.

It is still a fact that Ringworm has received a lot of public money and strategic support from various state agenices.

Boris was right - they love being the victims of someone elses actions, but never, ever, accept that the situation that the city has managed to get itself into over the years is actually anything to do with the locals.
Nice sweeping generalisation there. :sleepy:

Of course 1 million people visiting the Queen Mother's funeral in London is nothing compared to 300 people attending Ken Bigley's funeral service. I know NOBODY in Liverpool who was deeply affected by Ken Bigley's death other than friends and family. Self-pity and over-empathising is a HUMAN trait, not a scouse one. Stop falling into the Tory trap and shut your very own.

Most people I know hate the nimbyish nature of our council. Mike Storey is unpopular, David Henshaw even more so. Your comments are nothing but provocative bullshit and you know it.

It is still a fact that Ringworm has received a lot of public money and strategic support from various state agenices.

And why would that be something for Liverpudlian's to complain about given the relative status of LJLA?

http://forum.nwdnb.co.uk/images/smilies/shake.gif @ this thread.

Obviously, the topic in the first post is valid and deserves to be discussed, but not in here, these things should be stuck in the citytalk section.