Whilst i have nothing against Leeds. I have been many times and know of the urban splendour contrasted with the beautiful countryside that exists within the huge city boundaries. I particularly like the various developments springing up alongside the canal. The people are very down to earth and welcoming.

I just feel that with the limited forthcoming city regions about to be chosen, places like Liverpool and Manchester deserve the status more so, as the local government shake up in 1974 didnt do them justice.

The following is what i posted on both the Liverpool and Manchester forums.

Why is Liverpool so tiny (42 square miles!) when the its conurbation spreads far and wide!

Its boundary has virtually remained unchanged since Speke was the last settlement to be added in 1931. This despite the local government shake up in 1974 when many new councils were created/enlarged nationally.

To give you some idea on how big Liverpool once was. Consider these facts. At the start of the 20th century Liverpool was the 2nd city of the UK (closely followed by Glasgow). Before the second world war its population peaked at 878,000 (despite mass emigration and higher than average infant mortality rates ). This didnt include the county borough of Bootle (then 75,000), and the urban districts of Huyton-with-Roby, Litherland, Seaforth and Crosby which were well under way to being settled by Liverpool speaking people.

After the war there was a real need to re-house people and Liverpool suffered a real hefty loss in that respect. Virtually the whole of what is now Knowsley (200,000 people on its creation in 1974) were in effect Liverpool overspill people. eg. the estates of Kirkby, Huyton, Halewood, Cantril Farm, Whiston, etc. At the same time a mass middle class house building program gathered pace (in what is now mainly Sefton Borough) i.e. places like Aintree, Maghull, Lydiate, Crosby, Formby, etc swelled in size.

But Liverpool suffered where no other city did in terms of population loss in that it had not one, not two , not three but a whopping great four designated newtowns well away from the city to swallow yet more of its overspill. No other city had this amount. Newcastle/Sunderland had Washington. Birmingham had Telford. London had Basildon and Milton keynes. But Liverpool had Skelmersdale (1963 onwards), Runcorn (1967 onwards), Winsford (mid 1960s) and Warrington (1968 onwards). It is reckoned that as many as 100,000 scousers (mainly from within the city boundary but some from the outskirts) were shipped en-masse to these new town estates.

So when the local government act created Merseyside in 1974. A real kick in solar plexes was dealt to Liverpool. Instead of Liverpool being enlarged to say as far north as Formby and Lydiate, Kirkby in the north-east, Prescot and Whiston in the east and Halewood in the south-east, its boundaries remained unchanged. Instead these new suburbs were merged into two new mind-bonglingly needless creations of Sefton (all the Liverpool overspill areas merging with the former Southport county borough - i fail to see the logic in this!) and Knowsley (one gigantic Liverpool overspill area!)

I could go further and argue that Rainhill, Billinge and Rainford (in St. Helens metropolitan borough) are largely settled by scousers. Hough Green and the western half of Widnes being another example. The list is endless really. Face it Liverpudlians get everywhere! (A recent visit to Perth, Western Australia comfirmed this!) But the line has to be drawn somewhere as to where the Liverpool city boundary should now lie as to reflect the mass Liverpudlian settlements that have taken place over the last 70 years.

The same fate and unjustice awaited Manchester (which amazingly enough is virtually the same size in area as Liverpool). Its boundaries remained virtually unchanged, in the shake up of local government, despite pocessing an even bigger conurbation than Liverpools. But at least it was compensated with a new found county of Greater Manchester of 2.5 millions people (though what some of the outlying parts of Bolton, Wigan, Rochdale and a few other towns have to do with Manchester is debatable).

Compare Liverpool and Manchester with other cities who didnt do too bad out of it and it begins to hit home why neither city can now even make the top 5 English cities!

Leeds swallowed up many surrounding towns (and vast countryside) such as Morley, Rothwell, Pudsey and even the market town of Wetherby (some 15 miles away!), increasing its size 5 fold and is now a whopping great 220 square miles (Liverpool could fit into it more than 5 times!)

Sheffield tripled in size (much of it areas of the peak district)and is reckoned to be a huge 125 square miles.

Bradford gobbled up many towns such as Bingley, Keighley, Shipley, etc to attain a similar sized city to that of Sheffield. All three cities are now so vast in size and outstrip Liverpool in population despite Liverpool's conurbation having a much larger population.

I was wondering if any other members of the forum have considered these facts. I for one hate the way there are just so many needless councils in one city. Each one now building new housing trying to poach people from the their neighbours when we should all live under the one council name. i.e. Liverpool!

Yeah, but whatcha gonna do?

Should we interpret these remarks as yet another example of scouse whingeing? ;)


...even the market town of Wetherby (some 15 miles away!)

The surrounding towns and villages are linked to the centre by arterial roads, the people in them pay their council tax to Leeds (I should know, I used to live in a semi-rural village 10 miles from the centre of Leeds and very close to Wetherby). Yes, including Morley and Wetherby within the city boundaries is pushing it, but i do think semi-rural villages such as Wike, East Keswick, Boston Spa, etc should be included because they rely on the city for so many essential services. :blahblah:

...and anyone who thinks Rothwell and Pudsey are not part of Leeds is clearly delusional.

Most of the land included in Sheffield's boundary is green belt and not populated but excluded suburbs in the the conurbation including Dronfield, Killamarsh (c.50,000)etc. which are in Derbyshire. Rotherham(250,000) runs into Sheffield but is considered a town in its own right and Chesterfield(100,000), ten miles from Sheffield city centre is also not classed as Sheffield.

Wetherby must only 15 miles away if you measure right to the city centre because Harrogate is only 13 miles away.

Leeds doesn't have an official city region (no city does really except maybe Greater London); the area defined at the moment is just a metropolitan district. When people refer to the city region (which is a loosely used term) it generally refers to all of West Yorkshire, Harrogate, York, Selby and sometimes Barnsley and Skipton.

York, Barnsley, Selby, Skipton, Harrogate and the whole of West Yorkshire are in Leeds' city region? :weird: That's news to me.

You've never heard that before? I don't believe you haven't; if that isn't Leeds City Region anyway, what is? Manchester? Exactly

You've never heard that before? I don't believe you haven't; if that isn't Leeds City Region anyway, what is? Manchester? Exactly

The thing is though, the current Leeds 'city' boundaries are pretty much the equivalent of Greater Manchester.

If Leeds takes in York as part of it's city region, Manchester can take Blackburn.

Here we go again...lol

Never said it couldn't...

Never said it couldn't...

I never said you said it couldn't. The point was; Manchester taking Blackburn would be ridiculous. IMO, Leeds taking York is also as silly.

York, Barnsley, Selby, Skipton, Harrogate and the whole of West Yorkshire are in Leeds' city region? :weird: That's news to me.

No.1's right. But this is a recent strategy put forward by the government.

That'd be quite ridiculous for them to be considered Leeds. Christ, it's cheeky enough we claim Wigan, but that's far more tangible than York, Barnsley and sodding Harrogate.

Well most those places are under 25km from Leeds...

Isn't there a bit of confusion going on here? The city region concept is all about areas of influence, where people work, transport links, etc, etc. So, of course it's right that York and Harrogate should be considered part of the Leeds city region, given that so many people living in those towns work in Leeds. That doesn't mean, however, that they are going to be incorporated within the city boundaries. If that were the case, what would the people of Barnsley do since they are in two city regions (Leeds and Sheffield)?

Well most those places are under 25km from Leeds...
In which case, Leeds has a less than 25km influence ;)

It could be argued that Harrogate, York and North Leeds mark the points of the property 'golden triangle', which could be seen as a more obvious socio-economic region than confusing overlaps between West and North Yorkshire.

No.1 might be pleased to know, Harrogate nearly became part of Leeds in the 1974 shake-up, and I would imagine it's still a long-term goal of the council to seize the spa town for its own twisted and nefarious purposes!

Phil Willis said that he wanted to encourage Harrogate and Leeds to become closer with a City Region allowing Harrogate to share in the success of Leeds although he was keen to stress that Harrogate should keep its identity as Harrogate rather than of a district of Leeds. I suppose it would be similar for other towns/cities that they want to be part of the economic side of Leeds but not to become part of Leeds.

No.1 might be pleased to know, Harrogate nearly became part of Leeds in the 1974 shake-up, and I would imagine it's still a long-term goal of the council to seize the spa town for its own twisted and nefarious purposes!


Yes, but it wanted to be in North Yorkshire rather than West Yorkshire. Better cache to fit in with its posher image. :)

Yes, but it wanted to be in North Yorkshire rather than West Yorkshire. Better cache to fit in with its posher image. :)

That should have read cachet !

The question that seems to be raised in this thread is at what point do you draw a line between a region and a city region.

The city region, as it is known at the moment, has nothing to do with any boundaries. Harrogate might be 'posh' but I don't really think North Yorkshire means posh- to me North Yorkshire means the sticks. And I never would really think of saying Harrogate is in North Yorkshire when I describe it to people. I usually say Harrogate, near Leeds. It's surpsing though, how many people send letters to us with Harrogate, West Yorkshire. Is North Yorkshire really posher than West Yorkshire? Leeds is quite high class for a city of its size.

Most of my friends from Richmond and Harrogate don't consider themselves to have any allegiance whatsoever to Leeds. You'll probably think this is me being a Manc idiot, but really, it's quite frankly preposterous to consider Harrogate any part of Leeds full stop. You're in the same county, Yorkshire, but that's really it. Somebody may say something about work catchment, people in Harrogate coming to Leeds to work. Again, that's a ridiculous way of measuring things. There are a few thousand Scousers who travel to Manchester to work every day and vice versa, should Manchester and Liverpool therefore become one body under this City Region bollocks?

It's ludicrous. I'm all for Leeds bettering itself, but let's get some bloody perspective here.

North Yorkshire (from my view) isn't posh, but it's full of rich people who look down on us city types. And ooh Lordy, the racism especially in the Richmond/Darlington corridor is fucking scary. It appears to me very much a case of "your type aren't welcome round here" unless you're white middle/upper class. And Christ, you should hear the 2 girls I live with who're from North Yorkshire. Meeting them alone would give anybody a sense of hatred to to that part of North Yorky.

^^ Yeah, I've got friends from Harrogate who would have a shit-fit if you suggested they were in any shape or form, connected with Leeds.
They don't even claim to be from 'near Leeds'.
Harrogate, North Yorks is where they hail from. :)

Most people say near Leeds before saying north yorks. I don't really like most of North Yorkshire anyway; and I don't think most people look down on city people, it's not like I or any of them have never lived in a city.

You realise this isn't a sense of pride for the nearest big city though? It's a common way of letting somebody know where the bloody buggery you're from. We have the same with people from around the Manchester outside area. People from North Derbyshire saying "New Mills, near Manchester" and the like. People in Knutsford and Warrington and Congleton associating themselves with Manchester. In reality, they're not Mancs. Same as anybody saying "Harrogate/Weatherby/Richmond, near Leeds". They're simply giving a local known place as a reference point.

It bugs me when people from Chester claim to be from Manc. Chester! It's ridiculous. Just because accents transcend boundaries, people just assume all sorts of shite. It's nonsense.

I don't think that City Regions are a very helpful concept in Yorkshire. Leeds isn't so much bigger than Bradford, nor so integrated that it is obviously its focus of gravity, nor Huddersfield, Halifax or Wakefield. It's more their rich big brother than their father. Obviously there are places around Manc and Liv that are similarly semi-related (Chester, Wigan, Warrington) but would be considered a part of any Liv/Man CR. However on the whole the model works better west of the Pennines (e.g. Manc, Traff, Salf, Old, Stock are entirely conurbated in a way that nothing is with Leeds) and so these are minor inconsistencies.

Its disppointing for Leeds from point of pride, but it could be beneficial for Yorkshire to adopt a different system as it could allow development to spread to towns and improve the lot of all.

Doesn't Yorkshire sound better as a cluster of rich towns and cities, each with specialities and internationally competetive expertise rather than a Greater Leeds as a second/third rank sprawl sucking the life from its environs?

I hate saying North Yorkshire coz then everyone thinks farms and the sticks. But Chester is alot further from Manchester than Harrogate is from Leeds; it only takes 20 minutes to go from Harrogate-Leeds; on a good day 10 between Pannal and Alwoodley Gates. Richmond? Where did that come from... it's too far away... Wetherby is in Leeds as it is, so whatever happens it's still gonna be in Leeds City Region.

Leeds No. 1 you may live in Harrogate, but you appear to lead a sheltered life.
I live in Leeds but just ten miles from Harroigate. Most inhabitants of Harrogate do not associate with Leeds - hence their wish to be included in the posher and more rural North Yorks rather than the industrial West Yorks - this in spite of the very many commuters from Harrogate to Leeds, by car, train and bus (incidentally the Leeds-Harrogate 36 bus service is the best in Leeds).

As someone who was brought up in Alwoodley, I would consider North Leeds to be a much more expensive and desirable location than Harrogate. But that's beside the point. The region as it stands is Yorkshire & Humberside and this is reflected in the regional development agency moniker 'Yorkshire Forward'. Any other regional classification is of little consequence.

As for the wearying allegations of racism in North Yorkshire. That's not and never has been my experience of the county.

York, Barnsley, Selby, Skipton, Harrogate and the whole of West Yorkshire are in Leeds' city region? :weird: That's news to me.


There is a world of difference between a city, it’s conurbation and the city region. They are 3 different classifications for an urban area and the surrounding region. For those that are unsure what a city region is check out:

http://www.thenorthernway.co.uk/cityregions.html

You will see from this that the Leeds city region extends far beyond West Yorkshire and has little to do with either MDC or CC boundaries which are after all juts arbitary lines on a map. Likewise Manchester’s city region extends deep into Lancashire and Cheshire. This doesn’t mean towns like Harrogate are part of Leeds or Knutsford part of Manchester. It means that the primary centre dominates this region in aspects such as economic and cultural aspects.

The city region for Leeds exists as it does for all cities whether or not there is an elected body or some form of quango running the region formally. Over the last decade neighbouring areas have realised that working together rather than competing directly with one another can reap more benefits for the whole area and the Northern Way is an example of this in action. Whether or not elected bodies running a city region are required is a moot point, personally I see it as just another layer of local government with the cost ultimately falling upon the tax-payer.

As for the OP saying Leeds was granted it's city region in 1974 simply because of the large MDC area, this guys grasp of the principles of urban-geography seem to be somewhat lacking!

I want to support what Simon22 is saying. The whole philosophy behind city regions is about economics and regional development, and the driving force behind the English city regions agenda is the Office for the Deputy Prime Minister. The Northern Way Growth Strategy is part of that agenda, with the recognition that the north has suffered most acutely as a result of the industrial restructuring that has taken place over the last 40 years.

If you read the latest summary from the ODPM (City Regions Summary (http://www.odpm.gov.uk/pub/606/AFrameworkforCityRegionsSummaryNo20PDF1018Kb_id1163606.pdf)), you'll see that they're suggesting the Manchester/Leeds axis be used as a pilot:

"Leeds/Manchester, for example, would be an obvious northern ‘pathfinder’ given that both cities have shown significant potential for growth and there have been recent moves towards exploring the scope for cross-district collaboration in both City-Regions. Together, they have considerable potential to perform a similar role, in the north, to that played by London within southern England’s ‘super-region’."

That's an incredibly ambitious target but it demonstrates that cities and districts need to work together to maximise their economic clout. All this postcode snobbery is completely irrelevant to the discussion, however enjoyable for the participants.

Erm, I think North Leeds/City Centre is posher than Harrogate and Leeds isn't really known for industry; more commerce/shopping these days. Not many people go into Harrogate for shopping, mostly Leeds and sometimes York and about 1/2 the people I know work in Leeds. They realise that Harrogate is in the city region- there's no choice over that, unless suddenly everyone gave up their jobs in Leeds. I don't think it's that they don't want to be associated with Leeds, they just don't think of surrounding towns when they describe places.

I have to say that I agree that this is an economic theory and not one of who has the biggest population etc. I would imagine the government has looked at other cities across Europe (Germany especially) to see how cities have grown through working together and have benefitted economically from this.

I do not think the population of Harrogate would worry about this concept if they see jobs and additional tourism (plus potential savings at a local procurement level) through having a working association with Leeds (and the rest of West Yorkshire for the matter). I believe this is is why Barnsley council seem keen.

Ego's and perceptions of areas being better than other areas will not benefit anyone in the longer term. We should move away from simply seeing the Mancs or scousers as competition. We are in an era of intense globalisation and as such should be looking at the threat of cities across the world taking business and therefore jobs from the UK.

Working together is the future, some academics believe the whole of the M62 corridor from Liverpool to Hull should market itself as one giant economic region to rival the South-east in an attempt to try and halt the constant influx of investment, jobs and people towards London and the surrounding area. I doubt a northern ‘M62 Megalopolis’ could ever rival London but if working together improves the economic and cultural well-being of the north then it should be grasped with both hands by all parties involved.

I do believe a 'M62 Megalopolis' as you describe it, could rival London but I doubt it will ever get organised enough to do that. It seems people want another major economic region but no-one in governmetn seems keen to put it into action.

I doubt whether branch-plant cities will ever be able to rival one of the worlds biggest financial capitals. The dominance/subordination thing will always work in favour of London, and this has knock-on effects for everything.

I agree with di Livio it could never seriously rival London which is one of the main financial world centres along with NY and Tokyo. London will always dominate the UK to an extent much out of proportion to it's size. That said a M62 Megalopolis with the main cities working together may help stop some, however small, investment, jobs and migration of people gravitating to the south-east.

From YEP :

Leeds at heart of bid to create 150,000 jobs
BY NIGEL SCOTT
BUSINESS EDITOR
LEEDS was today taking centre stage in a bid to create more than 150,000 new jobs across Yorkshire.
Eleven local authorities across the county have joined forces to back the Leeds City Region Development Programme which aims to give a £22bn boost to the regional economy.
A £4.5bn, congestion-busting transport shake-up will form a crucial part of the plan. It would include:
The introduction of trams to serve major new regeneration areas;
Further electrification of local rail routes;
New and upgraded road links;
Hi-tech rapid bus services and park and ride schemes.
Leeds, Wakefield, Bradford, Harrogate, Kirklees and Calderdale councils are all part of the partnership behind the action plan.
Together they form the Leeds "City Region" which stretches beyond the city and West Yorkshire and into the north, south and east.
It has a population of 2.8m and a £45bn economy supporting around 70,000 businesses and over 1.4m jobs. Its six universities produce more than 40,000 graduates each year.
The development programme unveiled today aims to boost that economy to £67bn and to create around 150,000 jobs over the next ten years.
Launched in Halifax to an audience of leaders from across local government, the business community and other partner organisations, the document will be presented to the Government later this month as part of a drive to regenerate the Northern regions.
Included in the programme are measures for improving housing and the skills of local workers.
The document also sets out the future funding that will be needed from the Government and others if its hopes are to be realised.
It proposes targeting investment on business sectors covering financial and business services – already recognised as a key strength within Leeds – electronics, bioscience, medical research and the digital and creative industries.
Today's launch was welcomed by Leeds City Council's deputy leader and executive member for development, Coun Andrew Carter.
He said: "In coming together to draw up this programme, the aim of the 11 local authority leaders has simply been to make the economy function better and to grow, for the benefit of all those who live and work in this area."
Director general of regional transport body Metro, Kieran Preston, who presented the transport brief at today's meeting, added: "The question we shall be putting to Ministers and civil servants is not 'Can you afford to make this happen?' but, 'How can you afford not to?'."
nigel.scott@ypn.co.uk

03 November 2006

Taken from Leeds post 7:
http://www.yorkshire-cancer-net.org.uk/graphics/ycnmap.jpg

Leeds and Bradford are the only two Yorkshire cities expected to exceed growth levels in the next few years. The 'city region' concept is about local authorities in close geographical proximity to each other, collaborating together to share ideas to think of ways in which to progress the wider region.

Collectively, cities can have a greater impact on the prosperity of regions than individually. Leeds, Bradford, Kirklees, Calderdale, Wakefield, Barnsley, Harrogate, York ect can help improve the region's competitiveness far more collectively.

..

NEW CITY REGION PARTNERSHIP MEETS FOR FIRST TIME The newly formed Leeds City Region Leaders’ Board will meet for the first time next week to drive forward an ambitious programme aimed at improving the city region’s economic growth and competitiveness. Leaders of all the 11 councils are forming a new unique city region partnership, and will hold their inaugural board meeting on Monday 2 April at the Leeds Civic Hall. Members of the board will consider a diverse agenda including:
• The outcome of a two recent meetings with Government ministers, Phil Woolas MP to discuss the city region’s economy, and a separate meeting with Malcolm Wicks MP to discuss the issue of a third science hub for England.
• To establish a number of theme-based panels to work on the City Region Development Programme’s key priorities, particularly around the transport and skills and labour market agendas.
• Proposals for the creation of a new Business Leadership Group to work closely with the Board to champion business interests and provide private sector input to developing economic policy across the city region.
• To consider proposals for taking forward the City Region Transport Vision, and accessing the £4.5billion of investment to improve transport infrastructure in the city region, which is needed to support economic growth and competitiveness.
• To consider the skills and employment issues affecting economic growth across the whole of the city region


Chair of the Leeds City Region Leaders’ Board, Councillor Robert Light, said: “The meeting on Monday will be an important occasion for all the members of the board and the city region. The city region is unique in that it requires strong partnership working and a shared vision and the meeting will be a significant step forward in the start of work to drive forward the city region development programme. “

..

Not at first - there are too many inflated senses of civic pride at stake - but eventually, I believe it will.....to a certain extent. I can't ever see York or Bradford happily complying with the city region idea.

Not at first - there are too many inflated senses of civic pride at stake - but eventually, I believe it will.....to a certain extent. I can't ever see York or Bradford happily complying with the city region idea.

Which is probably why Bradford is in such a state.:ohno:

..

Yes, but typically Bradford have voiced concern over cementing Leeds' position as Bradford's big brother. Pretty irrational really, given the fact that it is Bradford's big brother. Councillors from Keighley also voiced concern, although what they said escapes me....

..

Granted, but given the fact that York has a well established identity (which is known nationally), it wouldn't see the city region as a threat. Indeed, it would probably see the economic benefits of having a coherant centre of economic activity in terms of improved infrastructure and potential for inward investment. Probably.

The idea is a collaberation of the 11 local authorities, working together to drive forward economic growth in the region. It is named after Leeds because Leeds is the key economic driver of the region. However, it is a collaberation nothing else. Bradford district has similar population to Liverpool (which by the way has its' own city region), whilst York is the historic capital of YORKshire.

The idea is a collaberation of the 11 local authorities, working together to drive forward economic growth in the region. It is named after Leeds because Leeds is the key economic driver of the region. However, it is a collaberation nothing else. Bradford district has similar population to Liverpool (which by the way has its' own city region), whilst York is the historic capital of YORKshire.

Without being rude you need to get used to the fact that this is the way that it is going to work. Next you will be saying that Wigan can not be part of grater Manchester as it has a premiership football club! Or St. Helens can’t be part of Liverpool because it is home to the team that won the super league last year.
The idea will be that eventually the LCR will become Grater Leeds and we will have an elected regional mayor giving the region better authority to run the aria (similar to the Grater London mayor).
Comparing Bradford’s population to Liverpool’s is nothing. Liverpool has a much stronger economy than Bradford’s. Furthermore Leeds is the third biggest city in the UK so don’t start saying that its only called the LCR because we have the strongest economy (even though that is a factor. Just not the only one).


And Furthermore York will benefit form all of this! And will still have a huge history behind it. The big question is, if York becomes Part of Grater Leeds what will Yorkshire become? Or will it simply keep the name for historical purposes.

..

i find the whole thing a bit confussing to be honest.
You don't say

...so if the L.C.R goes ahead will selby no longer be known as selby, north yorkshire ?

No. And why are you and Liam talking about "Greater Leeds" and making absurd comparisons with Greater Manchester?

There is a Government website which explains exactly what the city region initiative is, and what it is intended to achieve. There is no need to speculate like this.

And anyway, BradfordLad has summed it up pretty accurately.

The idea will be that eventually the LCR will become Grater Leeds and we will have an elected regional mayor giving the region better authority to run the aria (similar to the Grater London mayor).

Jesus wept. What about all the areas which find themselves in two city regions? I suppose the people of Barnsley will be given some kind of dual-citizenship?

I think people are really overplaying what this city region thing is. It means very little, it is just another talking shop, it has no power and very little funding. The regional powerhouse, if there is one, is the regional development agency Yorkshire Forward, they're the organaisation with the pocket money for the Yorkshire/Humber Region (about £200m a year I think). The media have really overplayed this, just playing their usual little games stirring up trouble based on local pride and loyalties.

I have been informed that the long term aim is to develop ‘Grater Leeds’.
However the LCR will not confirm this fact. A few years after the LCR is up and going the plans will be introduced and all councils of the LCR will be asked.

I have been informed that the long term aim is to develop ‘Grater Leeds’.



Grater Leeds? That really grates !

I think the benefits to Bradford/York is that when promoting themselves as business destinations, they can use the Leeds name to boost their profile. However I'm sure none of York's tourist promotion will include the fact it is in the Leeds city region. Leeds however will benefit the other way in that it can promote the Leeds city region as including York, National Media museum etc.

..

..

i agree

I do too.