SkyscraperCity banner

1981 - 2000 of 3448 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
994 Posts
Anyway, any good suggestions for where our new County Hall / City Hall could go? 1 St Peter's Square would have been perfect, but that's not an option anymore.
It would be nice to have a big prominent building in town but my feeling is that it should be around the quays. Geographically central in GM but near to the city centre and adjacent to the media also.
 

·
Mancunian in exile
Joined
·
232 Posts
It would be nice to have a big prominent building in town but my feeling is that it should be around the quays. Geographically central in GM but near to the city centre and adjacent to the media also.
I thought the leader of Wigan council had been touted as the nominee from the current leadership of the 10 metro's to be interim mayor (sorry don't know his name).

Will we need a county hall, city hall whatever it is to be called, given the make up of the governing authority?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
899 Posts
As I haven't followed this especially closely am I to understand taxpayers money is going to be spent on a new office building/staff/local politicians that we don't currently have including a "mayor" with a large salary to go with the job?

Is any of the existing council bureaucracy going to be cut or abolished to ensure we don't simply spend money on additional admin/accommodation on top of what we already have or is this going to be a gravy train for councillors and politicians?

The thought of politicians who were apparently abusing MPs expenses getting in on the act is a dismal prospect too.

Perhaps someone with more knowledge can expand on the plans?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,783 Posts
Lots of understandably excited people on here.

The Osborne proposals are welcomed, but are modest. What Labour proposals are vague, but I am sure we all would agree on bus regulation being restored at "County council" level.

However I am getting a feedback that the local council leaderships look at this as incremental change not some big bang revolution. If they can make a success of it, then further powers will be transferred.

If someone has a link to the specifics, i would like to read it, but as yet I am sure what the Elected Mayor will be.

We know the Council of the Ten remains, but I am sure if the Elected Mayor will be directly elected as in London, if it will elected amongst the Ten, what powers he or she has and how they constitutionally relate to the Council of Ten.

Just imagine say the good voters elected a UKIP Mayor, but a council of Ten council leaders all bar one, being Labour. Or say a Green Mayor and as in 2010 a majority of the. ten councils led by Lib Dem or Tories?

(And let's not consider Elected Mayor Liam Gallagher. It will be a circus. Albeit in my alt Mancunia, we had Elected Chancellor Anthony H Wilson in the noughties.)

I am also unsure constitutionally how the "Super council" relates to the ten MBCs/Cities. Will it be a steroid version of the councils or a separate entity?

I know these are the obscure issues of local government governance and law, but they do matter.

I can see why the national Tories would prefer a directly elected Mayor as it increases the prospect
of a right winger winning as an Leader appointed by the Ten councils or by an elected assembly would almost certainly wouldn't be a Tory.

Good news nevertheless.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,783 Posts
As I haven't followed this especially closely am I to understand taxpayers money is going to be spent on a new office building/staff/local politicians that we don't currently have including a "mayor" with a large salary to go with the job?

Is any of the existing council bureaucracy going to be cut or abolished to ensure we don't simply spend money on additional admin/accommodation on top of what we already have or is this going to be a gravy train for councillors and politicians?

The thought of politicians who were apparently abusing MPs expenses getting in on the act is a dismal prospect too.

Perhaps someone with more knowledge can expand on the plans?
Got to concur the prospects of failed and greedy minded ex Westminster politicians filling this post fills me with dread.

Aside from having an ignorant clown like one of the Gallaghers, there would be nothing more likely to make people resent the concept that parachute in a Blear.

I am sure though the likes of Leese aren't just going to negotiate all this to let a Westminster politico sit in the driving seat. Unless the New Mayor is to be. A nodding horse for the decisions of the Ten council leaders.

As for shinning new buildings. The reality of when GMC was established in the 70s, the full council meet at Mc Town Hall, the various departments were filled by existing LG bureaucrats seconded from the MBCs and were distributed in a number of rented offices.

The truth is that redundancies have striped a layer of localpen psuhers out of the system. Unlike though the 70s, the proposals aren't envisaging huge departments running services, but as regulators and commissioners which envisages a very different bureaucrat than with GMC.

Eventually though it might be more ideal for new buildings. However it might be an opportunity to use the state for some re generation.

Who would object if Elected Mayor Freeman signed off works for the GMA occupying the Old Fire Station and a Whitehall of the North aside Piccadilly station?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,522 Posts
Will we need a county hall, city hall whatever it is to be called, given the make up of the governing authority?
Since TfGM already have dedicated offices in 2PP (or is it 1PP); I suspect that the secretairiat may camp out there pro-tem. Once more space is needed, there might well be a floor or so available in 3PP or 4PP.

There won't be any councillors; so a council chamber would not be neccessary. I imagine that public cabinet meeting will continue to be peripatetic around the town halls of the city - as with the Combined Authority now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
899 Posts
Got to concur the prospects of failed and greedy minded ex Westminster politicians filling this post fills me with dread.

Aside from having an ignorant clown like one of the Gallaghers, there would be nothing more likely to make people resent the concept that parachute in a Blear.

I am sure though the likes of Leese aren't just going to negotiate all this to let a Westminster politico sit in the driving seat. Unless the New Mayor is to be. A nodding horse for the decisions of the Ten council leaders.

As for shinning new buildings. The reality of when GMC was established in the 70s, the full council meet at Mc Town Hall, the various departments were filled by existing LG bureaucrats seconded from the MBCs and were distributed in a number of rented offices.

The truth is that redundancies have striped a layer of localpen psuhers out of the system. Unlike though the 70s, the proposals aren't envisaging huge departments running services, but as regulators and commissioners which envisages a very different bureaucrat than with GMC.

Eventually though it might be more ideal for new buildings. However it might be an opportunity to use the state for some re generation.

Who would object if Elected Mayor Freeman signed off works for the GMA occupying the Old Fire Station and a Whitehall of the North aside Piccadilly station?
So who occupied County Hall on Portland Street? Wasn't this the HQ for GMC now or formerly known as Westminster House?

As for a Whitehall of the north I hope the aim isn't to create such a beast but indeed to scale back Westminster and Whitehall and "big" government particularly.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,032 Posts
As I haven't followed this especially closely am I to understand taxpayers money is going to be spent on a new office building/staff/local politicians that we don't currently have including a "mayor" with a large salary to go with the job?

Is any of the existing council bureaucracy going to be cut or abolished to ensure we don't simply spend money on additional admin/accommodation on top of what we already have or is this going to be a gravy train for councillors and politicians?

The thought of politicians who were apparently abusing MPs expenses getting in on the act is a dismal prospect too.

Perhaps someone with more knowledge can expand on the plans?
Firstly, the Greater Manchester Combined Authority already exists. At the moment, this tier of government is unelected. The proposal is essentially to replace this with an elected Mayor who will be held to account by the existing council leaders. It's not creating a whole new tier of government, it's just making the current structure we have more democratic.

Secondly, it's likely that the position of Police & Crime Commissioner will be merged into the Mayor's office, as with Greater London. So it's not increasing the number of politicians either.

Thirdly, we don't know what the HQ of the Mayor would be. I suspect an old building would be used for now, but in the future it could be decided to build a new HQ, but that decision would have to be taken at the time.

Fourthly, the Mayor's proposed powers would be devolved from Westminster, not taken from the councils. There's no justification for reducing the number of councils or councillors because their workload will stay the same (or arguably increase given that they will now have to hold the Mayor to account).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,783 Posts
Cheers Councillor Dawz.

Version One. Elected assembly that elects a leader of the council and ceremonial mayor

Version two appointed board with a nominated chair

Version three Elected Mayor to a nominated board of the ten council leaders
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,783 Posts
Cheers Councillor Dawz.

May I remind the chair that there was six years between GMC being proposed in the Redcliffe-Maud Royal Commission in 1968 and said authority moving into County Hall, now called Westminster House. And even then, substantial services were located elsewhere in the region such as County Records and Full Council met at Manchester Town Hall until it's demise in the mid 1980s.

If we compare that chair, to the current time line, then any new County Authority would desire a permanent home around 2020 or later. However given the new authority will house much fewer public servants than in the 70s, then such a behemoth as Westminster House would not be necessary.

(Raucous cheers in the assembly)

And chair, unlike the 1970s, the City Region has substantially more adequate office space now for such a new authority to move to. I concur with Councillor Moveon that the Old Fire Station could
be investigated as such a solution.

Chair, as a point of order, let me clarify a statement made regarding the former Whitehall of the North proposal. This was a suggestion by the then Labour government amidst a property boom in which it was envisaged public and private money was to be used to re generate a squalid crime ridden area of Manchester's city centre called Mayfield.

It imagined concentrating all the various regional UK governmental offices into one space. The advantage to the tax payer would have been the sale or cessation of renting various offices such as Trafford House and Inland Revenue.

I note that Mayfield remains a Victorian slum, thus leading me to conclude the private sector again is inadequate in such regeneration.

I give way to the Member for Stupidville.
 

·
thread killer
Joined
·
720 Posts
Eventually though it might be more ideal for new buildings. However it might be an opportunity to use the state for some re generation.

Who would object if Elected Mayor Freeman signed off works for the GMA occupying the Old Fire Station and a Whitehall of the North aside Piccadilly station?
Totally agree, hell they even do this in the USA, the ultimate capitalist society that Dave C dreams of turning the UK into.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,534 Posts
Talking a few people on this Manchester, Salford, Trafford and Stockport are positive on this deal tomorrow. The other six as Labour leaders and further away from Manchester have some reservations, namely what power a 'metro-mayor' will have over them.

No doubt critics will wheel out "Manchester rejected a mayor a few years back so how is this justifiable?". One key point: that was just for the 500,000 people in Manchester - this is a figurehead for 2.7 million people in GM which is a very different thing. Also, the M.E.N conducted a poll at the time of the mayor referendum and found a majority wanted a "metro-mayor" for GM with clout rather than a mayor for a single borough. Unofficially you could say there is an appetite for a "mayor" but one with influence for Greater Manchester.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,032 Posts
Cheers Councillor Dawz.

May I remind the chair that there was six years between GMC being proposed in the Redcliffe-Maud Royal Commission in 1968 and said authority moving into County Hall, now called Westminster House. And even then, substantial services were located elsewhere in the region such as County Records and Full Council met at Manchester Town Hall until it's demise in the mid 1980s.
I think Folly is correct when he says that the Quays will likely be the best candidate for a new County Hall.

The Anthony H. Wilson People's Palace of Pomona perhaps? :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,783 Posts
Talking a few people on this Manchester, Salford, Trafford and Stockport are positive on this deal tomorrow. The other six as Labour leaders and further away from Manchester have some reservations, namely what power a 'metro-mayor' will have over them.

No doubt critics will wheel out "Manchester rejected a mayor a few years back so how is this justifiable?". One key point: that was just for the 500,000 people in Manchester - this is a figurehead for 2.7 million people in GM which is a very different thing. Also, the M.E.N conducted a poll at the time of the mayor referendum and found a majority wanted a "metro-mayor" for GM with clout rather than a mayor for a single borough. Unofficially you could say there is an appetite for a "mayor" but one with influence for Greater Manchester.

Well look at the figures. If it's one vote per council then the 800000 people of Rochdale, Bury Tameside and Oldham combined have four votes, whilst the 700000 of Manchester and Salford are two.

A GM Elected Mayor will be that and not a sole Manchester thang. It will be a change in the regions political culture for sure.

As for the physicality ( and this is after all an architectural forum) I think there are plenty of spare office space around the County as it doesn't need to be within MCC or Salford.

But if you want a statement, albeit funded by me and you, then Salford Quays smiling at the BBC is yer best bet. As the Landonas then they have this http://www.london.gov.uk/city-hall/the-building/key-facts-about-city-hall
 

·
Registered 外国人
Joined
·
121 Posts
It begins.

http://www.manchester.gov.uk/news/a...chester_and_govt_reach_trailblazing_agreement

Greater Manchester has today, Monday 3 November 2014, agreed an historic devolution settlement with Government.

The agreement, reached with the Chancellor who has called for a 'Northern Powerhouse' to maximise the economic potential of the north - and building on the work of the Greater Manchester Combined Authority (GMCA) established in 2011 - will give greater powers to the combined authority working in partnership with a directly-elected Mayor.

These will open up new opportunities for increasing economic growth and improving the quality of life of Greater Manchester residents by replacing an over-centralised national model – imposing ‘one size fits all’ solutions – with greater local control over certain budgets and powers.

For example, they will unlock huge public transport improvements and help tens of thousands of Greater Manchester residents into work.

Under the settlement, a directly-elected Mayor for Greater Manchester will be created.

Powers to be devolved to Greater Manchester include:

Transport
Responsibility for local transport, with government providing a longer-term budget to enable better planning and a more co-ordinated transport strategy. Subject to local consultation, there will also be franchising of bus services – in a similar model to London – with Greater Manchester controlling franchises, service routes and frequencies and fares. Greater Manchester will commit to introducing an Oyster card-style smart ticketing system which can be used across all modes of public transport across the region.

Planning
Devolved planning freedoms, including the power to create a statutory spatial strategy – in line with the framework already being developed by GMCA - which will guide investment and development across Greater Manchester .

Housing
Control of a new Housing Investment Fund of up to £300m which will deliver an additional 15,000 homes across Greater Manchester over a 10-year period.

Freedoms which can be devolved as soon as possible include:

Public Service Reform
-Helping people back into work
Greater Manchester’s public service reform programme, which goes hand in hand with promoting economic growth, aims to provide the intensive support that people and families trapped in a cycle of benefit dependency need to escape it – helping them while reducing public sector spending in the longer term. For example the city region’s Troubled Families programme has helped ‘turn around’ almost 5,500 families.

The devolution deal will enable Greater Manchester’s work to be scaled up to help up to 50,000 people back into work, supported by a combined budget of £100 million.

-Health and Social Care
Another element of public service reform is the need to integrate health and social care to reduce pressure on A&E departments and unnecessary hospital stays and provide better care closer to home.

The agreement will give GMCA, working with health organisations across Greater Manchester, control of existing health and social care budgets, which have been pooled by local authorities across Greater Manchester. The government will also invite GMCA and the region’s clinical commissioning groups to develop a plan for joined up health and social care.

Earn Back
Control of a revamped earn back deal, which allows GMCA to be paid by results as investment in infrastructure improvements (for example transport) results in economic growth. This allows Greater Manchester to be ‘paid back’ up to £30m a year over a 30 year period. Under the reformed deal, the complicated formula under which this was calculated will be scrapped to give more certainty and larger investment opportunities. This will enable the Metrolink extension to Trafford Park to go ahead.

Skills and Business support
The abilitity to influence further education provision in the city region by giving skills providers the financial incentive to match the supply of skills to the needs of local employers.

Responsibility for devolved business support budgets to ensure that Greater Manchester businesses get the right support, at the right time, to help them grow and innovate.

Governance arrangements
The elected Mayor will lead GMCA, chair its meetings and allocate responsibilities to its cabinet, made up of the leaders of each of Greater Manchester’s 10 local authorities. The first Greater Manchester Mayoral elections are expected to take place in 2017.

The directly-elected Mayor will be responsible for the new powers in relation to transport, planning, housing and policing but will be required to consult the GMCA Cabinet on his/her strategies, which it may reject if two-thirds of members agree to do so. The statutory spatial framework will require approval by a unanimous vote of the Mayor’s Cabinet.

The existing Police and Crime Commissioner’s role will also be merged with the Greater Manchester Mayor’s role.

The creation of a directly-elected Greater Manchester Mayor will not happen overnight and further work is required on all the detailed implementation of these changes. New legislation is needed before transport and planning powers can be transferred and there will be a transitional arrangement of an appointed mayor who will assume some of the responsibilities of an elected mayor.

Lord Peter Smith, chair of GMCA, said: “Make no mistake, this devolution settlement is a momentous day for Greater Manchester. It gives us greater control over our own destiny in several key areas and the ability to base decisions on local priorities and needs rather than on ‘one size fits all’ dictates from Westminster.

“This isn’t about taking powers from individual Greater Manchester authorities. It’s about powers coming down from central government to a more localised level.”

Sir Richard Leese, vice chair of GMCA, said: “Greater Manchester has been in the vanguard of the national devolution debate. It was clear that an over-centralised national system was not delivering the best results for our people or our economy.

“We are extremely pleased that we can now demonstrate what a city region with greater freedoms can achieve and contribute further to the growth of the UK.

“Our ultimate ambition is for full devolution of all public spending in Greater Manchester, currently around £22 billion a year, so that we either influence or control the whole amount.

“We recognise that this cannot happen overnight and there needs to be a staged approach based on evidence that devolution delivers increased economic growth and better public services. But today’s settlement is a huge move forwards and a road map for the future.”

Chancellor George Osborne said:"This is a massive moment for the north of England and our plan to build the Northern Powerhouse. After several months of private discussions with local representatives from all three parties, I have reached agreement with the civic leaders of Greater Manchester to create the first metro-wide elected mayor outside of London. This will give Mancunians a powerful voice and bring practical improvements for local people, with better transport links, an Oyster-style travelcard, and more investment in skills and the city's economy.

"I want to talk to other cities who are keen to follow Manchester's lead - every city is different, and no model of local power will be the same.

"The Northern Powerhouse is becoming a reality. We plan to make major investments in northern transport and science, now we have agreement on the first metro area Mayor. This is what we've achieved in just a few months. Giving cities power is part of our long term economic plan to reduce the decades-old gap between north and south, London and the rest."

Greater Manchester and government will now work together to progress the implementation of the agreement, taking it through each local authority and there will be a public consultation on the governance proposals.
:cheers:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,439 Posts
From the Businessdesk

'Massive moment" as Greater Manchester agrees devolution deal
3rd November 2014

GREATER Manchester has agreed a major devolution deal with the Government for the transfer of powers covering transport, housing, planning and policing - under the remit of a directly-elected city mayor.

The new mayor will be elected in 2017 and the initiative is part of Chancellor George Osborne's drive to create a Northern Powerhouse so cities like Liverpool, Manchester, Leeds and Sheffield can fulfil their economic potential and close the gap on London and the South East.

The new mayor would assume the powers currently held by the elected police and crime commissioner for Greater Manchester, a role held by the former MP Tony Lloyd.

http://www.thebusinessdesk.com/mobi...ampaign=NorthWest_3rd_Nov_2014_-_Daily_E-mail
 
  • Like
Reactions: MarkO

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,159 Posts
While there may be a bit of healthy cynicism towards this (what with next May's General on the horizon), may I just throw in the thought that: the fact that it's even being discussed, agreed with all 10 councils and announced with such vigour has gotta be one of the most potentially important days in the history of Greater Manchester.

You gotta remember:
* What a mountain has been climbed for these proposals to get this far (and so quickly in political time).
* It was after all George's predecessors who (maliciously) killed off the Met. Councils
* What a beacon it will be for other urban areas (especially West Yorkshire which is likely to be next).
* What an achievement it is for all 3 main political parties to reach agreement (a pragmatism not so well mirrored elsewhere and which has led to so many cross-boundary schemes - transport plans in particular - falling apart).
* Few other equivalent sized European urban areas function as we have done since the break up of the Met counties with their constituent parts fighting it out separately.
* Even if the Tories don't win the election, Labour has similar plans and substantial devolution to GM is so firmly on the agenda it's almost unstoppable.

Sure Watcher & Co will add a whole host of other benefits, but as an interested lay-person I for one am putting me bunting out!
:dance:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,067 Posts
I wonder if this deal was precipitated by the Scottish referendum. I mean, I know a mayor has been on the docket for basically ever, in one form or another, but this clear and definitive step seems to come off the back of a call for more English regional devolution.

Perhaps because Manchester was already far along in the process of devolution, it's being used to test the waters and see how the process would be rolled out to the rest of the country.

edit: To be clear, I'm talking specifically about the Tory side of things. Their co-operation as a reactionary concession, rather than an actual desire to give GM powers. Especially with Labour already trying to steal the baton on this issue.

I guess what I'm saying is; George Osbourne, Don't Believe His Lies.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,067 Posts
If a regional senate is based in GM, does that make Manchester the capital of England, and London the capital of the UK?

A kind of Bern - Zurich situation?
 
1981 - 2000 of 3448 Posts
Top