What a sterile, boring argument. He couldn't think of a single difference between GM and Lancashire because there is none. The real issue is that Bolton, like many towns was once proud and prosperous and is now just proud. That's a national political issue that needs attention over a long period - see E/W Germany. For my part, I live in Marple, Mercia, whereas Marple Bridge is in Northumbria (the River Goyt appears on old maps to be the boundary). I have nothing in common with Marple Bridge people, and the sooner we are independent, the sooner we can fulfill our true potential.
I completely agree that it's a daft argument, but the whole thing also shows (again!) how worked up people get about identity and how it can be manipulated for perverse ends. So I don't think it can just be dismissed. (As a resident of Marple Bridge, I have to admit that I do feel a certain pleasure in the borderland status and the fact that Marple Bridge was in Derbyshire for a thousand years before 1935.)
Exactly. But my point was not only that you 'Bridgeons' are in a different county, but a different Kingdom. Next time you come up the hill to use our ASDA, you will have to pay three groats and a cabbage. This is really the level of argument expressed in the article. On a more serious level, the met counties such as GM are generally unparished, which means there is no democratic legitimacy below district level (about 250,000 people). Area Committees, etc very definitely have no independent democratic legitimacy. Before 1973 there were generally urban and rural councils covering much smaller areas. The answer is probably more Town Councils. These don't always work in the wider world (example: Handforth), but where they do (example: New Mills and further afield Frome is a great one), they provide the local focus and pride that discrete communities need.
The problem with naming Greater Manchester as "South Lancashire" is that the county was also formed from parts of Cheshire. As indeed was Lancashire. Lancashire may have a thousand years of history but it was made out of chunks of Cheshire and Yorkshire, counties that have even longer histories. If you keep harking back to the past, where do you stop? Perhaps it's time the UK went back to being the Kingdoms of Northumbria, Mercia, etal?
And this ultimately is the problem. Counties are, and always have been, a basis for local government. The creation of Lancashire was just to subdivide the land for administrative purposes and taxation. Nothing more. People are basing their identity over a system of local government from hundreds of years ago. And realistically local government from a thousand years ago isn't necessarily the best way to organise local government now, regardless of identity.
Anyway as the big elephant in the room is that county boundaries are decided by the government, unless they are on board, nowt will every happen. And it's hard to see why anyone looking at the administration of this country would see a good argument for removing Bolton from Greater Manchester.
It’s worth mentioning that while Bolton is the 34th most deprived local authority in the country, Manchester is the 8th most deprived, despite its Apple Store and Selfridges.
This debate is a distraction from the real issue, which is that there is just insufficient investment in public services and infrastructure everywhere. There are plenty of places in Manchester and Salford proper which suffer from issues of poverty and underinvestment, like Newton Heath where my family are originally from.
The south of what is now Greater Manchester has long been more affluent than then north, and the economic decline of places like Bolton and Oldham has taken place over decades. Both trends predate the local government reorganisation of 1974.
Examples like the £10million skills capital funding from GM for the college of medical sciences in Farnworth, the Bee Network starting in Wigan and Bolton to improve transport connections, and the GM Housing Investment Fund money supporting new homes in Bolton Town Centre to aid in regeneration are examples of how Greater Manchester is part of the solution to addressing that decline and imbalance. It arguably needs more devolved powers and funding so it can provide much more support for places like Bolton and other areas to the north of the conurbation.
"If only we weren't part of this multi-member political grouping, we'd be doing so much better!"
It seems like Jones has fallen for it again. Bolton's problems are primarily caused by the Tory government, not the EU/GM/however the "liberal elite" is being packaged this week.
Identity politics was the scourge of the 20th century and is now bidding fair to be the scourge of the 21st century. Where someone is born is just a statement of fact - something neither to be proud or ashamed of. What matters is who has control of the money and resources - and in the UK, that power still lies with Westminster. The 'Taking back control' motto so beloved of Brexiters was never meant to be about citizens taking control.
The likes of Reform UK and its associates have nothing whatsoever to offer residents of Bolton or any other town. They are cynically stirring the pot with zilch ideas about how to regenerate prosperity in towns like Bolton. Maybe it wouldn't be such a bad idea if they took over Bolton Council - then residents would be able to find out for themselves that their emperor not only has no clothes on - but is sporting a vacant place where the brain ought to be.
Interesting article, thanks. One small point - I think you're missing an important detail when you mention Nick Buckley's support for Bolton leaving GM. His politics are very right wing, which I think is valuable context given the background of Jones. Buckley's twitter account for example features in the last few days:
- a youtube video with the title "Is Instagram selling white women to migrants"
- a claim that Pride these days is for "perverts", and is no longer about equality; and a promise that "I will introduce ‘old fashioned’ morals and values when in public. Do what you want in private for that is your business and no one else’s."
My family heritage is solidly Lancastrian. Having spent most of my adult life in Manchester, but most of my youth in Blackburn and Bolton (and married to a Bolton lass), I find no difficulty in identifying with both. The secessionists are of course pursuing a far right agenda based on general ignorance, which they foster by peddling apparently easy solutions to complicated issues. The 'cut off' argument is a case in point - the reason the metro link hasn't yet been extended to Bolton (but see the 'tram train' proposals) is that there are 170 trains a day from Bolton to Manchester, with numerous other stations in the Borough, and of course GMCA has proposals to take control and improve reliability. Of course the GMCA can help itself by learning from the Brexit debacle, and spending a bit more time making a case for itself.
Has GMCA been asked about the statement that Bolton puts money in but gets nothing out? All these arguments are classic Brexit ones. Haven’t they learned anything? We progress by cooperation, not by division and boundaries.
Quite right Moira. The 'statement' is a lie. I've just looked at the GMCA budget for 23/24 and find that it is overwhelmingly funded by Government grants, which are of course spent in the boroughs on items like the items of millions on adult education and skills development. The input of Bolton to this is less than a million.
Monty Pythonesque storyline here between the 'splitists' of Bolton and those of other areas e.g Radcliffe has a faction that wants separation from Bury too. The Mill recently covered Peel Holding which has more potential impact on both of the B towns with its plans for a golf course in Bolton and Elton reservoir in Bury.The rhetoric is akin to that of Brexit which is unsurprising given the leadership of this campaign supporting Reform UK Farage's latest vehicle.What is missing is how decoupling from Greater Manchester would lead to more investment in infrastructure and job growth.The current alternative is the begging bowl called the Towns initiative,a lottery of extra funding based largely upon how winnable your Westminster seat might be for the Conservative Party.Far better than tags about belonging to Lancashire,a largely rural county with little resemblance to urban Bolton, might be to put more effort into creating better transportation into the Manchester transport hub,something that Msyor Burnham is right behind but this central government is reluctant to fund.
You might have mentioned that administratively ‘Lancashire’ is run from Preston, where LCC has many more powers than Burnham and the GMCA. Is that what the Reform UK people are offering Boltonians - rule from Preston ?
It's hard to know for sure, but if Bolton was moved back in to Lancashire right now, it would most likely be a Unitary Authority with no involvement of LCC. This is what Warrington and other major towns tend to be.
In practice very similar to what the council does now with the extra fun of having to fund things like buses.
I live in South Manchester and have personal experience of these attitudes from the chess world. Historically, Manchester clubs were affiliated to Lancashire County Chess Association, or Cheshire CCA. After Greater Manchester was created, internal dissension stopped all Manchester clubs agreeing to create a new Greater Manchester CCA.
Five of us created one anyway, with most Manchester chess clubs affiliating to GMCCA. However some chose to stay with Lancashire CCA. This civil war continued for about three decades (including one individual litigating against the British Chess Federation for allowing GMCCA) before some kind of peace was established.
From the time Greater Manchester was created, for me Lancashire has just been a county that starts outside Greater Manchester.
Interesting article, but strange it doesn’t mention that it’s likely Bolton won’t have the option to leave GM and become a lower tier authority in Lancashire.
The current proposal is for 3 unitary authorities covering the county with the introduction of a Lancashire Combined Authority and an elected mayor. Presumably Bolton would be lumped into the proposed Central Lancashire Council, which would probably have its headquarters in Preston. The two tier (county and lower tier council) system is effectively being phased out in England.
More generally, I feel most non-political people understand it’s possible to hold multiple identities that don’t necessarily correspond with administrative boundaries.
Quite possible that it would be its own unitary authority if it ever happened. Like Warrington. But that's just speculation on a hypothetical situation!
If that’s correct then that is very fair comment. But if Bolton had not been part of GM when the airport expanded, and been in Lancs for example, they would surely not have benefited from the airport dividend.
I was under the impression that Greater Manchester is no longer an administrative county - it's merely what is referred to as a 'ceremonial county'. The GM combined authority is something different from the county of Greater Manchester, isn't it? (In which case, maybe some of the sting could be drawn from the issue by abolishing the county of GM, so that we are all clearly restored to Lancs for purposes of county identity, but maintaining the GM combined authority.) Also, as far as I know, both Manchester and Bolton continue to be in the postal county of Lancashire (confusing, isn't it?). In that sense, all of us living in the GM area have both a GM identity and a Lancs identity. And after all, Lancashire CCC continues to be based at Old Trafford, which is the most important point of all, right? :-)
How so? My postcode is M12, not Lancashire at all, and none of the auto-fill address choices except for that run by my bank come up with Lancashire as the county.
I don't see why an M12 postcode is less Lancashire than a BB2 (Blackburn etc) postcode, for example. As for the autofill addresses ... I guess that's the fault of the providers. I live in Stockport and sometimes (usually) get Cheshire and sometimes Greater Manchester in auto-fill addresses.
I was going to write a comment about English exceptionalism and our national inability to get over the fact that we don't have an empire any more and aren't the industrial or political leader we used to be, and how that then plays out at a local level, but I bored myself part way through.
Boundaries change for political reasons. National and regional identities are constructed in order to pull individuals in a particular direction collectively. We choose our tribe (political, sporting, cultural) because we need to belong. It's all arbitrary. The power hungry understand this and know how to push our buttons to their advantage.
What a sterile, boring argument. He couldn't think of a single difference between GM and Lancashire because there is none. The real issue is that Bolton, like many towns was once proud and prosperous and is now just proud. That's a national political issue that needs attention over a long period - see E/W Germany. For my part, I live in Marple, Mercia, whereas Marple Bridge is in Northumbria (the River Goyt appears on old maps to be the boundary). I have nothing in common with Marple Bridge people, and the sooner we are independent, the sooner we can fulfill our true potential.
I completely agree that it's a daft argument, but the whole thing also shows (again!) how worked up people get about identity and how it can be manipulated for perverse ends. So I don't think it can just be dismissed. (As a resident of Marple Bridge, I have to admit that I do feel a certain pleasure in the borderland status and the fact that Marple Bridge was in Derbyshire for a thousand years before 1935.)
Exactly. But my point was not only that you 'Bridgeons' are in a different county, but a different Kingdom. Next time you come up the hill to use our ASDA, you will have to pay three groats and a cabbage. This is really the level of argument expressed in the article. On a more serious level, the met counties such as GM are generally unparished, which means there is no democratic legitimacy below district level (about 250,000 people). Area Committees, etc very definitely have no independent democratic legitimacy. Before 1973 there were generally urban and rural councils covering much smaller areas. The answer is probably more Town Councils. These don't always work in the wider world (example: Handforth), but where they do (example: New Mills and further afield Frome is a great one), they provide the local focus and pride that discrete communities need.
Interesting and persuasive points. I have to take my hat off to you in going back beyond a thousand years to the Heptarchy.
The problem with naming Greater Manchester as "South Lancashire" is that the county was also formed from parts of Cheshire. As indeed was Lancashire. Lancashire may have a thousand years of history but it was made out of chunks of Cheshire and Yorkshire, counties that have even longer histories. If you keep harking back to the past, where do you stop? Perhaps it's time the UK went back to being the Kingdoms of Northumbria, Mercia, etal?
And this ultimately is the problem. Counties are, and always have been, a basis for local government. The creation of Lancashire was just to subdivide the land for administrative purposes and taxation. Nothing more. People are basing their identity over a system of local government from hundreds of years ago. And realistically local government from a thousand years ago isn't necessarily the best way to organise local government now, regardless of identity.
Anyway as the big elephant in the room is that county boundaries are decided by the government, unless they are on board, nowt will every happen. And it's hard to see why anyone looking at the administration of this country would see a good argument for removing Bolton from Greater Manchester.
It’s worth mentioning that while Bolton is the 34th most deprived local authority in the country, Manchester is the 8th most deprived, despite its Apple Store and Selfridges.
This debate is a distraction from the real issue, which is that there is just insufficient investment in public services and infrastructure everywhere. There are plenty of places in Manchester and Salford proper which suffer from issues of poverty and underinvestment, like Newton Heath where my family are originally from.
The south of what is now Greater Manchester has long been more affluent than then north, and the economic decline of places like Bolton and Oldham has taken place over decades. Both trends predate the local government reorganisation of 1974.
Examples like the £10million skills capital funding from GM for the college of medical sciences in Farnworth, the Bee Network starting in Wigan and Bolton to improve transport connections, and the GM Housing Investment Fund money supporting new homes in Bolton Town Centre to aid in regeneration are examples of how Greater Manchester is part of the solution to addressing that decline and imbalance. It arguably needs more devolved powers and funding so it can provide much more support for places like Bolton and other areas to the north of the conurbation.
And if anyone is interested in leading that effort for more devolved powers and funding, why, there’s a job to that effect going right now: https://www.civilservicejobs.service.gov.uk/csr/jobs.cgi?jcode=1873036
"If only we weren't part of this multi-member political grouping, we'd be doing so much better!"
It seems like Jones has fallen for it again. Bolton's problems are primarily caused by the Tory government, not the EU/GM/however the "liberal elite" is being packaged this week.
Identity politics was the scourge of the 20th century and is now bidding fair to be the scourge of the 21st century. Where someone is born is just a statement of fact - something neither to be proud or ashamed of. What matters is who has control of the money and resources - and in the UK, that power still lies with Westminster. The 'Taking back control' motto so beloved of Brexiters was never meant to be about citizens taking control.
The likes of Reform UK and its associates have nothing whatsoever to offer residents of Bolton or any other town. They are cynically stirring the pot with zilch ideas about how to regenerate prosperity in towns like Bolton. Maybe it wouldn't be such a bad idea if they took over Bolton Council - then residents would be able to find out for themselves that their emperor not only has no clothes on - but is sporting a vacant place where the brain ought to be.
Interesting article, thanks. One small point - I think you're missing an important detail when you mention Nick Buckley's support for Bolton leaving GM. His politics are very right wing, which I think is valuable context given the background of Jones. Buckley's twitter account for example features in the last few days:
- a youtube video with the title "Is Instagram selling white women to migrants"
- a claim that Pride these days is for "perverts", and is no longer about equality; and a promise that "I will introduce ‘old fashioned’ morals and values when in public. Do what you want in private for that is your business and no one else’s."
- climate denialist conspiracy stuff
- stuff about migrants and small boats
My family heritage is solidly Lancastrian. Having spent most of my adult life in Manchester, but most of my youth in Blackburn and Bolton (and married to a Bolton lass), I find no difficulty in identifying with both. The secessionists are of course pursuing a far right agenda based on general ignorance, which they foster by peddling apparently easy solutions to complicated issues. The 'cut off' argument is a case in point - the reason the metro link hasn't yet been extended to Bolton (but see the 'tram train' proposals) is that there are 170 trains a day from Bolton to Manchester, with numerous other stations in the Borough, and of course GMCA has proposals to take control and improve reliability. Of course the GMCA can help itself by learning from the Brexit debacle, and spending a bit more time making a case for itself.
Has GMCA been asked about the statement that Bolton puts money in but gets nothing out? All these arguments are classic Brexit ones. Haven’t they learned anything? We progress by cooperation, not by division and boundaries.
Quite right Moira. The 'statement' is a lie. I've just looked at the GMCA budget for 23/24 and find that it is overwhelmingly funded by Government grants, which are of course spent in the boroughs on items like the items of millions on adult education and skills development. The input of Bolton to this is less than a million.
Sorry, for 'items' read 'tens'.
Monty Pythonesque storyline here between the 'splitists' of Bolton and those of other areas e.g Radcliffe has a faction that wants separation from Bury too. The Mill recently covered Peel Holding which has more potential impact on both of the B towns with its plans for a golf course in Bolton and Elton reservoir in Bury.The rhetoric is akin to that of Brexit which is unsurprising given the leadership of this campaign supporting Reform UK Farage's latest vehicle.What is missing is how decoupling from Greater Manchester would lead to more investment in infrastructure and job growth.The current alternative is the begging bowl called the Towns initiative,a lottery of extra funding based largely upon how winnable your Westminster seat might be for the Conservative Party.Far better than tags about belonging to Lancashire,a largely rural county with little resemblance to urban Bolton, might be to put more effort into creating better transportation into the Manchester transport hub,something that Msyor Burnham is right behind but this central government is reluctant to fund.
You might have mentioned that administratively ‘Lancashire’ is run from Preston, where LCC has many more powers than Burnham and the GMCA. Is that what the Reform UK people are offering Boltonians - rule from Preston ?
It's hard to know for sure, but if Bolton was moved back in to Lancashire right now, it would most likely be a Unitary Authority with no involvement of LCC. This is what Warrington and other major towns tend to be.
In practice very similar to what the council does now with the extra fun of having to fund things like buses.
Would that be in Lancashire but not part of it ?
Basically!
I live in South Manchester and have personal experience of these attitudes from the chess world. Historically, Manchester clubs were affiliated to Lancashire County Chess Association, or Cheshire CCA. After Greater Manchester was created, internal dissension stopped all Manchester clubs agreeing to create a new Greater Manchester CCA.
Five of us created one anyway, with most Manchester chess clubs affiliating to GMCCA. However some chose to stay with Lancashire CCA. This civil war continued for about three decades (including one individual litigating against the British Chess Federation for allowing GMCCA) before some kind of peace was established.
From the time Greater Manchester was created, for me Lancashire has just been a county that starts outside Greater Manchester.
Interesting article, but strange it doesn’t mention that it’s likely Bolton won’t have the option to leave GM and become a lower tier authority in Lancashire.
The current proposal is for 3 unitary authorities covering the county with the introduction of a Lancashire Combined Authority and an elected mayor. Presumably Bolton would be lumped into the proposed Central Lancashire Council, which would probably have its headquarters in Preston. The two tier (county and lower tier council) system is effectively being phased out in England.
More generally, I feel most non-political people understand it’s possible to hold multiple identities that don’t necessarily correspond with administrative boundaries.
Quite possible that it would be its own unitary authority if it ever happened. Like Warrington. But that's just speculation on a hypothetical situation!
If that’s correct then that is very fair comment. But if Bolton had not been part of GM when the airport expanded, and been in Lancs for example, they would surely not have benefited from the airport dividend.
I was under the impression that Greater Manchester is no longer an administrative county - it's merely what is referred to as a 'ceremonial county'. The GM combined authority is something different from the county of Greater Manchester, isn't it? (In which case, maybe some of the sting could be drawn from the issue by abolishing the county of GM, so that we are all clearly restored to Lancs for purposes of county identity, but maintaining the GM combined authority.) Also, as far as I know, both Manchester and Bolton continue to be in the postal county of Lancashire (confusing, isn't it?). In that sense, all of us living in the GM area have both a GM identity and a Lancs identity. And after all, Lancashire CCC continues to be based at Old Trafford, which is the most important point of all, right? :-)
How so? My postcode is M12, not Lancashire at all, and none of the auto-fill address choices except for that run by my bank come up with Lancashire as the county.
I don't see why an M12 postcode is less Lancashire than a BB2 (Blackburn etc) postcode, for example. As for the autofill addresses ... I guess that's the fault of the providers. I live in Stockport and sometimes (usually) get Cheshire and sometimes Greater Manchester in auto-fill addresses.
Like most city dwellers, though, my "identity" is more associated with my city than my county. I should have clarified that.
I was going to write a comment about English exceptionalism and our national inability to get over the fact that we don't have an empire any more and aren't the industrial or political leader we used to be, and how that then plays out at a local level, but I bored myself part way through.
Boundaries change for political reasons. National and regional identities are constructed in order to pull individuals in a particular direction collectively. We choose our tribe (political, sporting, cultural) because we need to belong. It's all arbitrary. The power hungry understand this and know how to push our buttons to their advantage.