|
|
|
|
#101 |
|
BANNED
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 952
|
So because people do not want to be part of his model he wants to force them to!
That would do wonders for local democracy wouldn't it! |
|
|
|
|
|
#102 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 226
|
Destiny calling?
I think the BBC of all people have latched onto the city region .. have you looked at the map they show on the BBC Liverpool homepage
http://news.bbc.co.uk/local/liverpool/hi/ It would be a miss of the new West Cheshire and Chester authority to state that it would agree to being part of a new Liverpool City Region but one can't help but see that the fact that this authority and its sister East Cheshire exist in the first place is to facilitate a carve up of the old county under Liverpool and Manchester sub-regions... The fact that the quote in today's Chester Chronicle indicates that they are willing to work with a Liverpool City Region on issues in common is possibly the most interesting comment. |
|
|
|
|
|
#103 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Not quite sure?
Posts: 9,229
|
It's the area of coverage of BBC Merseyside. That's all. Remember that there's no BBC Cheshire.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#104 |
|
on komea ja älykäs
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Liverpool
Posts: 6,786
|
And the reason there's no BBC Cheshire is because 'Cheshire' has not made any practical sense, for administrative purposes, for a long time. It was going to be carved up in the 70s, till the Government got cold feet about altering the traditional counties too much.
The fact is, western & northern Cheshire is clearly associated with Liverpool & North Wales. Eastern Cheshire associates with Greater Manchester and the south of the area is more Midlands/Potteries in feel. This is replicated by the BBC's local radio regions. It's a shame the TV regions aren't similar. The replacment of the county council and the six districts with two unitary authorities clearly took into no account the area's possible role in either Liverpool or Manchester's city regions. Both authorities are huge, in terms of both area & population, weirdly shaped and awkwardly named. Ellesmere Port is as Scouse as anywhere. Chester is not, but clearly has relations, sort of like Southport. Vale Royal, in itself, was a mixed bag of small mid-Cheshire towns and that authority was never going to fit perfectly with any other one. The eastern authority is worse. It forms a weird reverse L-shape. Macclesfield is clearly related to Greater Manchester, whereas Crewe most certainly isn't (and I'm not sure about Congleton). The whole situation' stupid, but there's not a lot we can do about it. Let's just hope when Lancashire gets the same treatment, they apply a bit more common sense. Remember, the last time they looked at Lancashire, they considered putting Skelmersdale in Wigan & Greater Manchester and cutting Ormskirk in half, with the right also going to Wigan & Greater Mancheser and the left going to Sefton. Just shows what sort of people are responsible for these decisions.
__________________
Je suis un vampire! Pourtant, tu es français. J'ai peur! |
|
|
|
|
|
#105 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 194
|
![]() If you want to see the way 'Cheshire' is going politically, pick up a copy of Cheshire Life. Ninety percent of the advertisements and the editorial content is concentrated on southern Manchester (Alderly Edge, Altrincham, Hale Barns etc). There is a little coverage of Chester and east Cheshire, but Crewe is non-existent, although Nantwich is featured on a regular basis. Ellesmere Port and Neston - not a chance, and every twelve months there's a Wirral special feature. As far as the Manc based print media is concerned it's no longer Cheshire it's Mancheshire. |
|
|
|
|
|
#106 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 2,349
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|