daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > European Forums > UK & Ireland Architecture Forums > Projects and Construction > Manchester Metro Area

Manchester Metro Area For Manchester, Salford and the surrounding area.



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old November 26th, 2005, 06:00 PM   #21
highriser
Registered User
 
highriser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 4,311
Likes (Received): 26

Thats the whole point , Manchester should'nt have to ask ,i dont want the whole of them bourgh's to join Manchester ,just the rightful districts of them , such as Audenshaw, Droylesden and Denton in Tameside ,Old Trafford and Stretford of Trafford , Middleton from Rochdale , Preswich and Whitefield from Bury these SRE Manchester districts full stop
highriser no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
 
Old November 26th, 2005, 06:20 PM   #22
kebabmonster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bolton/Salford
Posts: 1,406
Likes (Received): 0

shouldn't have to ask? A tad undemocratic. Although such areas should be in Manchester.
kebabmonster no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 26th, 2005, 06:30 PM   #23
highriser
Registered User
 
highriser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 4,311
Likes (Received): 26

Yes exactly should'nt have to ask, they are Manchester suburb's and 99% of the people in these area's say they are in Manchester , anyway we've gone through this one thousand times before.
highriser no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 26th, 2005, 07:12 PM   #24
Gareth
Keltlandia
 
Gareth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Liverpool
Posts: 8,938
Likes (Received): 61

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheGrand
I was a supporter of the Regional Assembly but after thinking about it, couldnt bare to be associated with Scousers (old habits die hard).
We're all gutted mate.

Seriously though, of course there should be Greater Manchester Assembly. Liverpoo & Brum should have one too. However, it would only be viable and justified if the government was willing to grant it significant powers, at least along the lines of the Greater London Assembly. However, the GLA's powers include overseeing transport strategy, emergency services and culture (ie Arts Board). Unfortunately, the government has either merged or in the process of merging all of these up here. These renders a Greater Manchester mayor near to pointlessness and increases the justification of a regional administration. I think this is idea anyway, though I don't reckon people will start calling themselves North Westerners just because they happen to share an army regiment with their neighbours.

What's needed is some campaigning. I've heard that the GM boroughs have floated the idea of a city-wide administraton. Indeed, over here, a few of our MPs tried to get this going, though funnily enough, the councils and their respective councillors seemed less enthusiastic. It could be of mutual benefit if a campaing got going representing all the metropolitan cities. This may help the governement actually lsiten to what the people want for once. One for the 'Core Cities Initiative' maybe?
Gareth no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 20th, 2005, 10:48 PM   #25
SleepyOne
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,091
Likes (Received): 1

Two interesting article again showing the positive direction this debate is going within central government.

Quote:
Advisers call for city-region pilots

Ben Walker, Regeneration & Renewal - 16 December 2005

A Whitehall-commissioned report has advised ministers to set up city-region pilots and create a cabinet committee to focus investment on big city priorities ahead of a possible long-term move to formal metropolitan devolution.


The report was written for the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister by the Centre for Sustainable Urban and Regional Futures and the Centre for Urban Policy Studies. A copy has been obtained by Regeneration & Renewal ahead of its planned launch in the new year.

The details emerged as think-tank the New Local Government Network's inquiry into city-regions published its final report (see p3).

The report, called a Framework for City Regions, says that Whitehall is now convinced by the economic case for big conurbations. Recent economic output figures that show that the proposed major city-regions outperform their surrounding regions have bolstered the case for change.

The framework also confirms reports that the Government is working on a policy statement, provisionally called a New Deal for Cities and Regions, which will focus on major conurbations' economic role (R&R, 9 December, p13).

It recommends that so-called city-region pathfinders are created in a few conurbations. Leeds and Manchester are recommended because both have shown "significant potential for growth". If chosen, these city regions would be offered financial incentives, such as mainstream departmental cash being pooled into a city-regional pot.

A cabinet committee devoted to coordinating spending on city regions should be set up, the report says. It argues that the committee could coordinate central government spending decisions so they are made in the best interests of the city-region pathfinders.

The report largely rejects the case for immediate wholesale local government reorganisation in the big conurbations, as backed by planning academics such as Sir Peter Hall. But it leaves the door open to future reorganisation, saying this "should remain a long-term option depending on the experience with more immediate arrangements".
SleepyOne no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 20th, 2005, 10:49 PM   #26
SleepyOne
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,091
Likes (Received): 1

... and another.

Quote:
Experts back city-region creation

Ben Walker, Regeneration & Renewal - 16 December 2005

A federation of UK city-regions with revenue-raising powers should be formed to boost their competitiveness with European rivals, an influential group of city leaders, economists, development agencies and MPs said this week.


Think-tank the New Local Government Network's City-Regions Commission this week urged councils in England's big city conurbations to "blaze a trail" and form powerful city-regional bodies that could pool business rates and spend the cash on city-wide goals.

Its report calls on central government to offer financial incentives, including greater spending freedoms and decision-making powers, to persuade urban councils to create formal coalitions.

It hopes that local government minister David Miliband will become a champion of city-region bodies. The report recommends radical reform in Greater Liverpool, Manchester and Birmingham, and says there could be a case for city-regional bodies in Greater Sheffield, Newcastle and Bristol.

The commission contains Professor Tony Travers, Sheffield City Council chief executive Sir Bob Kerslake, Manchester City Council leader Richard Leese and historian Dr Tristram Hunt.

Leadership of the new "city states", as Dr Hunt calls them, should be via a senate of council chiefs or an elected city-regional mayor, the commission concluded. Some big city-regions, such as Manchester, Birmingham and Sheffield, have already submitted to government plans for a group of leaders made up of collaborating councils. In this model, all council leaders would be equals, the report says.

Some members of the commission want powers to be handed to city-regions from regional development agencies, the report reveals.

One group within the commission, led by Graham Stringer MP, would like to see RDAs dissolved in favour of city-region development agencies (R&R, 9 December, p1). Stringer has written an exclusive article for Regeneration & Renewal this week explaining the group's position (see Analysis p12).
SleepyOne no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 20th, 2005, 11:35 PM   #27
Accura4Matalan
Registered User
 
Accura4Matalan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 12,463
Likes (Received): 395

Amazing how much more positive the reception is to city region ideas rather than the now dead regional assemblies.
Accura4Matalan no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 20th, 2005, 11:55 PM   #28
TheGrand
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: The Republic
Posts: 1,956
Likes (Received): 17

Quote:
Originally Posted by Accura_Preston
Amazing how much more positive the reception is to city region ideas rather than the now dead regional assemblies.

Like I said, Old Habits die hard, Scousers and Mancs having a joint assembly

And Im sure they feel the same way
TheGrand no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 21st, 2005, 12:00 AM   #29
Sir Miles Platting
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,914
Likes (Received): 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by Accura_Preston
Amazing how much more positive the reception is to city region ideas rather than the now dead regional assemblies.
That's a no-brainer though innit Accy. I mean can you see the concerns of someone in Garstang having anything in common with someone in Salford?
Plus in the NW where would you put the HQ? Geographically Preston would be the obvious choice but everything seems to be centred round Gtr Manchester atm. When I say everything I'm referring to commerce/media/entertainment/higher education/population etc. You can't forget the opposition from Liverpool too, as they will never want to play second fiddle to Mcr even if all the current evidence proves that it's probably the de facto case at this moment in time.
Sir Miles Platting no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 21st, 2005, 03:36 AM   #30
Longsight M13
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 82
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by skymann
No one would be sucking in any areas that aren't already Manchester in every way other than in local govt. It's no more illogical for Salford, Prestwich, Denton or Stretford being under one Mcr city authority than it is for Headingly or Garforth to be under Leeds. Leeds and Sheffield include all their suburbs, it's just lunacy and bad govt that all Mcr's 1.3 million aren't under one. I'd never say include Bolton or Wigan wtc. in Mcr city itself, these are separate and definable in their own right - though as part of the city region/county of Gtr Mcr, Mcr city would still need to be partner's with its satellite towns on things like transport, police, fire svs, waste and other things that are better done on a countywide basis.

Manchester's first step must surely be to have its suburbs treated like Leeds or Sheffield and fully incorporated in the one authority. It's the natural state of things. It's these mickey mouse boroughs like Trafford, Tameside, Sefton or Knowsley that need to go. They simply disadvantage Manchester and Liverpool compared to cities that are half their size like Leeds or Sheffield. If Mcr wants to be a world city it needs to start by incorporating all Manchester suburbs (though leaving the satellite towns) and having a tax base that reflects its real population. Nothing controversial about that.

Agreed. If you're 0161, you're in. Six fingered types, keep out.
Longsight M13 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 21st, 2005, 04:15 PM   #31
Farsight
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 3,632
Likes (Received): 171

I copied this off a post by Tony Sebo (thanks Tony) on the Liverpool thread. Good stuff:

Independent Think Tank NLGN (New Local Government Network) launched their City Regions report this week (Tuesday 14th December 05) to a gathering of local government brethren at Manchester Town Hall. The report, 'Seeing the light? Next steps for City-Regions', explores the benefits of a city's economic, cultural and demographic reach extending beyond its perceived political boundaries. Put together by the City Regions Commission, it included input from our own former Kaiser Chief Mike Storey.

It would seem that we are lagging far behind our European and US counterparts when it comes to the regional urban renaissance. Germany's system of devolved urban authority has seen its (until recently failing) cities thriving on their greater fiscal and political independence; this is mirrored by similar success in France as well as in the States. In fact it seems like the dollar dropped for them a while back: in order to be competitive in today’s marketplace you have to be a bit more savvy about how your organise yourself at a wider metropolitan and regional level.

Planning for transport, housing, investment and regeneration of a city suddenly gets a whole lot easier to co-ordinate and – essentially - to realise if core, suburban and hinterland local authorities can work together in a co-operative and mutually productive way.

With the original plans for 'Regionalism' never being the right way to maximise the potential inherent in our great cities, and national government being less enamoured with the model now anyway, NLGN's core findings could prove incredibly valuable for those charged with leading our cities into the 21st century. But! UK local governments, it would seem, are still hankering after the parish council style of doing things. Liverpool has been pretty much Balkanised since Merseyside County Council was abolished 20 years ago. We have 5 (6 if you include Halton, as many as 9 if you count Elesmere, Nesston and parts of vale Royal on the 'Left Bank' of the Mersey and of course, West Lands tothe North) local councils acting autonomously and competitively, often to the detriment of both themselves and the wider city region. Our city is failing to achieve its true potential.

To paraphrase the report; the consequences of this failure are mainly economic, cultural and social, but the causes are political. Could there be a better case in point than the embarrassment of the Merseytram? People, we need to learn how work together here. For those of us concerned that the old 'Merseyside' construct never fully encompassed or maximised the metropolitian region anyway, witnessing the further decline into petty fiefdoms in recent years has been utterly dispairing.

Another, aposite example. Here we are with Liverpool anticipating its glory year as European Capital of Culture 2008. Yet C of C officially bypasses the people of Huyton, kirkby and halewood (in ‘Knowsley’), Bootle, Netherton, Crosby and Formby (they’re in ‘Sefton’), Wirral, and Halton, because they supposedly aren’t part of ‘Liverpool’. All that potential contribution, cultural cohension and ‘Scouse Pride’ is a resource it would be impossible to put a price on, but it is being ignored because of administrative/political boundaries.

And how about you put yourself in the shoes of, say, a rich American investor. He’s heard of Liverpool of course, and if he’s particularly clued up he’ll know that Manchester is a pleasant town he passed through sometime on vacation in Missouri.
Now say this investor is looking for somewhere to plant his business. Does he plump for ‘Liverpool’, with its, ferries and it's Beatles, it's population of ‘450,000’ and a fairly modest economic growth rate, or does he plump for the perceived magnetism of (greater) ‘Manchester’, with its marketed population of 2 and a half million (cos they include their ‘burbs and the disparate towns of the old met County are savvy enough to understand the advantages to be accrued from being part of the greater entity) and its pretty bleedin’ dynamic economic growth rate?

Of all the potential city-regions in the UK Liverpool is perhaps among the most fractured politically, yet the most homogenous and unified in terms of being sure of its own identity. Liverpool is not merely a city of 450,000; it is a seething, creative and vibrant mass of over a million people who are proud to call themselves Liverpudlians.

The NLGN report urges ‘natural’ city regions (Manchester and West Midlands) and gently encourages possible city regions (Newcastle, Bristol and Liverpool – though we are seen as been the tricky dicky of the UK purely because our local authorities have such a bad reputation when it comes to working together) to work together on this. The impression is incorrect as we are the most natural city region of them all... but that isn't the impression people get 'down South'... and sadly it is not the impression that our current political 'elite' wish to give either. This is the serious consequences of the afore mentioned Balkanised thinking’ that has caused most local councilors to only think about avoiding the possibilities of the next government grant going ‘next door’ rather than into their own mitts.

The compilers of the report want us to be ‘bold and blaze a trail’, to set aside our vested interests and look at the bigger picture. Above all they want us to show strength in numbers so that we can achieve our potential. Take it to Government, show them how well you work together and wrest some power from Whitehall. It is apparently as simple as that. We would not want to disagree.

Of course, here in Liverpool we have the additional advantage of having ‘a place in the world’, and in the ever globalised 21st century it is probably the opportunities created by world markets that we are most at risk of losing out in.

But for all the urging and focus grouping in the world, this is something we have to bring to the table. The Government is hedging its bets on this one. Having seemingly fallen slightly out of love with the idea of city mayors, it is keen to explore its options, without imposition. And without looking, well, like it did the wrong thing, if things don’t work out. Still smarting from the precedent of the North East’s failed referendum for devolution in 2004 perhaps. Let the children make their own mistakes.

So who exactly is going to bring about this ‘organic and individual’ process to bear fruit? How do we get our ‘strategic’ leaders to think strategically and not just how to appease their Chamber? There are no easy answers here, but if we want to stop London and the more ‘natural’ city regions zooming ahead and leaving us to run with the 2nd rate and the amateurs we have to raise our game, take ourselves seriously. It’s united we stand, divided we fall, fellas?

Louise McWatt 14th December 2005

To download the report, 'Seeing the light? Next steps for City-Regions' and find out more about NLGN by visiting their site http://www.nlgn.org.uk/

Also lads, take a look at this one too
http://www.nlc.org/home/
Farsight no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 23rd, 2005, 04:37 PM   #32
neil
Registered User
 
neil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Manchester
Posts: 1,340
Likes (Received): 128

There is an articule on UK city regions on the City mayors website. Here is the link UK City Regions
neil no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 2nd, 2007, 02:13 PM   #33
Metrolink
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 6,738
Likes (Received): 0

Manchester Governance and AGMA

The government is about to publish a white paper that will allow for powers to be devolved down to local councils, and when those councils enter 'multi area agreements' the powers are to be devolved down to authorities such as AGMA.

AGMA appear to be by far the most advanced authority in the country that represents a group of volunteer councils working together.

The following has more to do with the forthcoming bill than the congestion charge...

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co....ajority_voting

C-charge: majority voting

David Ottewell
2/11/2007

GREATER Manchester's 10 councils are set to introduce a majority voting system for key decisions - which could include the congestion charge.

It could mean individual authorities introducing measures they oppose.

The Association of Greater Manchester Authorities (AGMA) currently makes major decisions by a consensus but council leaders have unanimously agreed that majority voting should now be used as a `last resort' on a range of issues. A two-thirds majority would be necessary.

Senior sources said it was too early to say whether the proposals would affect any final decisions on the bid for money from the Transport Innovation Fund.

The bid - being considered by the government - would see £3bn worth of public transport improvements in exchange for a peak-hour congestion charge of up to £5 a day.

Liberal Democrat-led Stockport and Conservative Trafford voted against the bid being submitted at a meeting in July.

They were only thwarted because it was ruled that the leaders had a `general agreement' it should be decided by a one-off majority vote.

If the bid is successful, it has been feared Trafford and Stockport could still jeopardise the scheme by refusing to take part. Majority voting would remove that possibility.

Other issues which could be decided by vote include area-wide `strategic policies and plans', responses to government consultations and `decisions with financial consequences to the member authorities'.

Leaders of Labour councils said the move was not an attempt to railroad the opposition. Labour controls six councils, the Tories and Lib Dems have two each.

Manchester council leader Sir Richard Leese said: "Sovereignty will remain with the 10 local authorities, and they would have to opt in to these arrangements.

"We have a willingness to work together. This is not about one [political] group bullying the others."
Metrolink no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 2nd, 2007, 03:03 PM   #34
heatonparkincakes
Registered User
 
heatonparkincakes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 5,889
Likes (Received): 371

Welcome back Metrolink

Ah, a pet subject of mine this local democracy malarky.

I suppose you are refering to the various ideas afloat at Whitehall around City-Regions and/or giving some more powers to the Metro Counties. Taht might appear in a Green paper in the next 6 months.

And you know my views. A Manchester centred city regional adminstration from Rossendale to Leek, with a political structure and power akin to Mayor Livingstone and the GLC.
heatonparkincakes no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 2nd, 2007, 03:16 PM   #35
Metrolink
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 6,738
Likes (Received): 0

Think a white paper is due this month from the dept for Communities.

Quite abit is already known (have a look at the monutes for the AGMA Exec for the last few months - looking for Sub National Review - or Multi Area Agreements).

I doubt very much the average man on the street will know anything has changed, however, democratically it should lead to decisions being made at a much more local level.
Metrolink no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 2nd, 2007, 04:18 PM   #36
Isaac Newell
Registered User
 
Isaac Newell's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 12,910
Likes (Received): 27

Very French
Isaac Newell no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 2nd, 2007, 05:13 PM   #37
STUBBY
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 552
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by heatonparkincakes View Post
Ah, a pet subject of mine this local democracy malarky.

I suppose you are refering to the various ideas afloat at Whitehall around City-Regions and/or giving some more powers to the Metro Counties. Taht might appear in a Green paper in the next 6 months.

And you know my views. A Manchester centred city regional adminstration from Rossendale to Leek, with a political structure and power akin to Mayor Livingstone and the GLC.
Metro counties? What are they then?

I doubt people in Leek or Macclesfield would welcome some Manchester based city-region what's in it for them? Nothing.
STUBBY no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 2nd, 2007, 09:59 PM   #38
highriser
Registered User
 
highriser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 4,311
Likes (Received): 26

Quote:
Originally Posted by STUBBY View Post
Metro counties? What are they then?

I doubt people in Leek or Macclesfield would welcome some Manchester based city-region what's in it for them? Nothing.
Tuff .

If it was the other way round , would they think the same ??
highriser no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 2nd, 2007, 10:04 PM   #39
Metrolink
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 6,738
Likes (Received): 0

But it ain't the other way around, and no half sane politician is going to force any area into a city region against their will - what on earth would they, the city region or the unhappy area gain?

Simply NOT going to happen, read up about Multi Area Agreements in the Sub National Review if you want to see what may happen.
Metrolink no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 2nd, 2007, 10:24 PM   #40
highriser
Registered User
 
highriser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 4,311
Likes (Received): 26

I dont think Leek or Macc should be Manchester , they are in Cheshire and Staffs . but what i do think should be included as Manchester are the bouroughs of Trafford Salford and Tameside , plus the areas taken by Rochdale Bury Oldham ,,
highriser no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT +2. The time now is 02:32 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like v3.2.5 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

Hosted by Blacksun, dedicated to this site too!
Forum server management by DaiTengu