New Cities

[backontrack]

Interesting Grauniad piece here on the towns competing to be awarded City status as part of Lizzie's platinum jubilee celebrations.

From Goole to Gibraltar: the towns preparing to battle for city status in 2022

Competition planned as part of Queen’s Platinum Jubilee celebrations will also include Cayman Islands and Falklands

www.theguardian.com

Southend-on-Sea will be made a city, we now know, to pay tribute to David Amess, the Tory MP who was murdered.

Instead of quoting the entire article, here's the list of applicants hoping to join Southend.

CAYMAN ISLANDS
George Town

ENGLAND
Alcester, Blackburn, Bolsover, Boston, Bournemouth, Colchester, Crawley, Crewe, Doncaster, Dorchester, Dudley, Goole, Guildford, Marazion, Medway, Middlesbrough, Milton Keynes, Newport and Carisbrooke, Northampton, Reading, Warrington, Warwick

FALKLAND ISLANDS
Stanley

GIBRALTAR
Gibraltar

ISLE OF MAN
Douglas, Peel

NORTHERN IRELAND
Ballymena, Bangor, Coleraine

SCOTLAND
Dumfries, Dunfermline, Elgin, Greenock, Livingston, Oban, St Andrews, South Ayrshire

WALES
Wrexham

What do we think of that, then?

Personally, I think Colchester probably would have the best case for city status - except it's also the closest on the list to Southend (except Medway, but that's as the crow flies).

Bournemouth and Doncaster too could be in with a shout. Blackburn, Middlesbrough and Reading are perhaps dark horses; Medway could also become a city, perhaps (owing to Rochester's past city status), but I don't like acting like 'Medway' is a town when it's more of a sprawling conurbation. South Ayrshire - which I assume is Ayr, Alloway, Prestwick and Troon - feels similarly wrong to me. There's some real no-hopers in that list - Alcester, Bolsover, Goole, Peel.

In Scotland, St Andrews feels the most like a 'traditional' city so I reckon it's fairly possible. Dunfermline could also be in with a shout; I've mentioned it before as being perhaps the most natural candidate for Scotland's eighth city; large population and size (top 10 in Scotland and growing too), decent regional importance, and quite a bit of history behind it what with the abbey and palace. Either way, I feel like Fife may well gain a city.

Wrexham being the sole nominee feels a bit like Wales putting all its eggs in one basket - to be fair, it is far and away the next in the line as far as Wales goes. As for Northern Ireland, I think it's probably between Ballymena and Bangor - I'd say Bangor. (Also, Douglas might have a chance.)

Perhaps Liz and her team will choose one from each of the four nations of the UK, plus another overseas. In which case, I'd imagine it'd be Bournemouth, St Andrews, Wrexham and Bangor, plus Gibraltar. But what do you think? Which places here deserve city status, which absolutely do not (I'm looking at you, Marazion...), and which potentially strong candidates have been left out?

 

[dgl]

Bournemouth is interesting because of how it is part of one big area with only way to tell you have entered a different town by the road signs, a bit like the greater London area.

 

[75A]

Bournemouth is interesting because of how it is part of one big area with only way to tell you have entered a different town by the road signs, a bit like the greater London area.

I'd say Guidford's like that as well.

 

[backontrack]

Bournemouth is interesting because of how it is part of one big area with only way to tell you have entered a different town by the road signs, a bit like the greater London area.

Yeah, slightly surprised they've not gone for 'Bournemouth and Poole'.

 

[NorthOxonian]

Of the English contenders, personally Guildford seems the most deserving. It has a cathedral, a university, is the main hub for its county, and the local football team are even called Guildford City. The only thing which might count against it is proximity to London - but it's far enough out to have its own pull.

But Bournemouth, Milton Keynes, Northampton, and Reading are probably the more traditional favourites - all large places and all are in counties which are currently without them. I'd personally favour Reading - mainly because the central area really does feel like a city centre, moreso than the other three contenders.

Newport might be a bit of a dark horse - it has a small population, but it feels far more bustling than anywhere else with 25,000 residents. Everyone I've met from the Isle of Wight sees it as their capital, and the Minster is as impressive as many cathedrals. It would be confusing though, since we'd end up with two cities with the same name!

In Scotland, there seem to be two types of place applying. On the one hand, you have Elgin, Dumfries, and Oban - all quite small but important regional centres and very much independent from the other seven cities. On the other hand, you have Greenock, Livingston, and Dunfermline, which have much greater populations, but smaller hinterlands and are more dependent on other cities. St Andrews and South Ayrshire are somewhere in the middle of those two extremes. A lot will therefore depend on what factors they use to decide city status. Personally, I would favour one of those first three towns (probably Dumfries most of all) because I think a city shouldn't just have a lot of residents but needs to serve as a hub for a wider region - but those making the decision may have different criteria.

 

[backontrack]

In Scotland, there seem to be two types of place applying. On the one hand, you have Elgin, Dumfries, and Oban - all quite small but important regional centres and very much independent from the other seven cities. On the other hand, you have Greenock, Livingston, and Dunfermline, which have much greater populations, but smaller hinterlands and are more dependent on other cities. St Andrews and South Ayrshire are somewhere in the middle of those two extremes. A lot will therefore depend on what factors they use to decide city status. Personally, I would favour one of those first three towns (probably Dumfries most of all) because I think a city shouldn't just have a lot of residents but needs to serve as a hub for a wider region - but those making the decision may have different criteria.

A ludicrously minor consideration, but it is funny to think about what might happen to ScotRail's Inter7City branding if Scotland were to gain an eighth city from the ones listed

Elgin would be the easiest - no change there, it's already on the Inverness-Aberdeen route. The station for St Andrews, Leuchars, is already served by InterCity services too. But as for the others...

 

[Gloster]

Elgin is another one that was once claimed to be a city, although long ago.

 

[GB]

Can someone explain what the point or benefit this actually brings?

 

[Cheshire Scot]

Elgin is another one that was once claimed to be a city, although long ago.

With a football team called Elgin City! Formerly a Cathedral City.

Oban has two Cathedrals, although neither is Church of Scotland.

 

[Butts]

Of the English contenders, personally Guildford seems the most deserving. It has a cathedral, a university, is the main hub for its county, and the local football team are even called Guildford City. The only thing which might count against it is proximity to London - but it's far enough out to have its own pull.

But Bournemouth, Milton Keynes, Northampton, and Reading are probably the more traditional favourites - all large places and all are in counties which are currently without them. I'd personally favour Reading - mainly because the central area really does feel like a city centre, moreso than the other three contenders.

Newport might be a bit of a dark horse - it has a small population, but it feels far more bustling than anywhere else with 25,000 residents. Everyone I've met from the Isle of Wight sees it as their capital, and the Minster is as impressive as many cathedrals. It would be confusing though, since we'd end up with two cities with the same name!

In Scotland, there seem to be two types of place applying. On the one hand, you have Elgin, Dumfries, and Oban - all quite small but important regional centres and very much independent from the other seven cities. On the other hand, you have Greenock, Livingston, and Dunfermline, which have much greater populations, but smaller hinterlands and are more dependent on other cities. St Andrews and South Ayrshire are somewhere in the middle of those two extremes. A lot will therefore depend on what factors they use to decide city status. Personally, I would favour one of those first three towns (probably Dumfries most of all) because I think a city shouldn't just have a lot of residents but needs to serve as a hub for a wider region - but those making the decision may have different criteria.

St Andrews is a very cosmopolitan Town that harks back to olden times in appearance and pace of life. It's full of Money - a lot of it not local. With the castle, abbey, golf courses University and lot's of non-branded shops very metropolitan. Would becoming a City ruin it ? Would it be the only City in Scotland without a Railway Station ?

Falkirk is the obvious candidate to become Scotland's next City but not pretty enough !!

 

[backontrack]

With a football team called Elgin City! Formerly a Cathedral City.

Oban has two Cathedrals, although neither is Church of Scotland.

I mean Millport on Great Cumbrae also has a cathedral... (it's Episcopalian)

Brechin also has a cathedral, and a football team called Brechin City. Although they're not very good.

 

[Spaceflower]

Middlesbrough would be my first choice. Second biggest conurbation in the NE of England.

Some on that list are ridiculous. Goole ffs?

 

[Western Sunset]

It won't be Bournemouth; trust me.

 

[Gloster]

It has been commented that Newport (Isle of Wight) doesn’t even have a post office.

 

[higthomas]

In a break with past civic honours competitions, an expert panel will work closely with ministers to make their recommendations, which will then be approved by the Queen.

Any ministerial involvement makes me think there's no chance of a southern city winning, I'd have thought it'll be Middlesbrough given that.

 

[brad465]

The only thing we should be giving to tax havens is a notice of closure, not city status for the capital (thinking of the Cayman Islands capital of George Town being on this list).

 

[cactustwirly]

Well it should be Reading.
It's the largest town in the UK and it has a large amount of inward commuting despite being close to London.

It is also up and coming, becoming gentrified with new restaurants and offices.

There are ridiculous ones on there like Boston, Crawley, Goole, Doncaster, Crewe etc.

They are just provincial towns and don't deserve city status in my opinion

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Well it should be Reading.
It's the largest town in the UK and it has a large amount of inward commuting despite being close to London.

It is also up and coming, becoming gentrified with new restaurants and offices.

There are ridiculous ones on there like Boston, Crawley, Goole, Doncaster, Crewe etc.

They are just provincial towns and don't deserve city status in my opinion

I agree with all of this so strongly that it could have been me saying it. As for Crawley, there’s a reason they built London’s second airport there - because it’s a large insignificant space with nothing there. How ridiculous that’s it’s being considered a city.

Oban, has to be there as a joke.

 

[tbtc]

I think that we should add a bit of jeopardy to proceedings and remove city status from one of the "minor" places that currently has it - fair enough if you want to put Wrexham in it (largest place in north Wales, as the late merlodiilw proudly pointed out) then St Davids gets relegated out of the City league - otherwise we are getting so many cities that it no longer means so much

I can certainly see Middlesbrough getting it (no longer "just a small town in Yorkshire") - given that Ben Houchen has managed to secure lots of other trinkets for Teesside (nationalising the airport, bringing Treasury jobs to Darlington, winning "Freeport" status, buying lots of the Tata site) - he's the poster boy for "red wall" conservatism, and Westminster seem keen to shower him with things - I wouldn't be surprised if city status follows - "have a bang on that" as Ray Winstone used to say (I'm not saying Middlesbrough *should* get it, just that they've got the best chance of any English nomination)

But it feels like it's becoming yet another one of those Government schemes to get various local places to be seen to "bid" for something (whether that's the Network Rail head quarters, reinstating some old railway line, Channel Four headquarters... lots of "pots of funding" seem to be around for towns to squabble over - divide and rule, keep the provincial plebs busy arguing about why their place is so deserving, writing letters to MPs and whatnot)

 

[Bevan Price]

Personally, I think that every town with a population exceeding, say, 90-100,000 should be classed as a city.
At least it would avoid allegations of "favouritism" or "patronage".

(By town, I mean single entity, not the artificial creations of 1974 where places like Southport or Leigh were dragged into artificial combinations.)

 

[JonathanH]

Well it should be Reading.
It's the largest town in the UK and it has a large amount of inward commuting despite being close to London.

It doesn't help that significant parts of 'Reading' are in the West Berkshire and Wokingham authorities.

 

[backontrack]

Personally, I think that every town with a population exceeding, say, 90-100,000 should be classed as a city.
At least it would avoid allegations of "favouritism" or "patronage".

(By town, I mean single entity, not the artificial creations of 1974 where places like Southport or Leigh were dragged into artificial combinations.)

I think that would be a good policy if other things were also taken into account. Use population as a baseline.

I think that we should add a bit of jeopardy to proceedings and remove city status from one of the "minor" places that currently has it - fair enough if you want to put Wrexham in it (largest place in north Wales, as the late merlodiilw proudly pointed out) then St Davids gets relegated out of the City league - otherwise we are getting so many cities that it no longer means so much

I can certainly see Middlesbrough getting it (no longer "just a small town in Yorkshire") - given that Ben Houchen has managed to secure lots of other trinkets for Teesside (nationalising the airport, bringing Treasury jobs to Darlington, winning "Freeport" status, buying lots of the Tata site) - he's the poster boy for "red wall" conservatism, and Westminster seem keen to shower him with things - I wouldn't be surprised if city status follows - "have a bang on that" as Ray Winstone used to say (I'm not saying Middlesbrough *should* get it, just that they've got the best chance of any English nomination)

But it feels like it's becoming yet another one of those Government schemes to get various local places to be seen to "bid" for something (whether that's the Network Rail head quarters, reinstating some old railway line, Channel Four headquarters... lots of "pots of funding" seem to be around for towns to squabble over - divide and rule, keep the provincial plebs busy arguing about why their place is so deserving, writing letters to MPs and whatnot)

Hahahaha, forgive me... but it doesn't surprise me you'd want to take it away from smaller places!

I feel like you're right about Middlesbrough, though. It seems like Middlesbrough's been on the verge of city status for a while now, and coupled with the ministerial input and the reasons you've set out, it's pretty likely IMO. In the past they'd have turned their noses up at it, but the wind's blowing the other way now.

Wrexham is, of course, the largest place in North Wales - but it's also the fourth-largest place in Wales as a whole. And it's got a university (and a Roman Catholic cathedral, if not an Anglican one). It is kind of the only game in town if we're adding a city to Wales - call me when Aberystwyth has tripled in population!

 

[NorthOxonian]

Personally, I think that every town with a population exceeding, say, 90-100,000 should be classed as a city.
At least it would avoid allegations of "favouritism" or "patronage".

(By town, I mean single entity, not the artificial creations of 1974 where places like Southport or Leigh were dragged into artificial combinations.)

I definitely agree with the general idea of making the criteria for city status more clear, but I'm not sure population should be the only qualifier. Using that figure (and I appreciate it's only a rough one - but any number will have similar issues), you'd end up with Stockport and Gateshead being cities, but Carlisle and Inverness being towns. I'm about as biased as you can get (being from Gateshead), but even I don't think that's right.

I think any objective criteria for what constitutes a city needs to take into account the importance of a place to its hinterland and the level of facilities. Perhaps something along the lines of "the biggest settlement in each county" might be a better way to do it, with exceptions where counties are small (Oakham shouldn't be a city, even Newport/Ryde might be pushing it), or where county boundaries and historical changes mean an obvious candidate misses out (modern Warwickshire's biggest town might be Nuneaton but the county curves around Coventry, used to include it, and so that should be its city). Though there are no doubt issues with that method too - particularly in Scotland and Wales where counties are sometimes tiny!

 

[Lewlew]

It has been commented that Newport (Isle of Wight) doesn’t even have a post office.

I'm not sure why it matters but it has 3 (1 in Newport, 1 in Carisbrooke and 1 in Gunville) plus a Royal Mail delivery office. All within about 2 miles of each other.

 

[Peterthegreat]

Well it should be Reading.
It's the largest town in the UK and it has a large amount of inward commuting despite being close to London.

It is also up and coming, becoming gentrified with new restaurants and offices.

There are ridiculous ones on there like Boston, Crawley, Goole, Doncaster, Crewe etc.

They are just provincial towns and don't deserve city status in my opinion

I wouldn't put Doncaster in with that lot.

 

[Gloster]

I'm not sure why it matters but it has 3 (1 in Newport, 1 in Carisbrooke and 1 in Gunville) plus a Royal Mail delivery office. All within about 2 miles of each other.

These are all sub-post offices: the main one in the town centre closed early this year. And no, it is not important, but one would expect a city to have a fair range of facilities and a post office is a fairly basic one.

 

[backontrack]

I wouldn't put Doncaster in with that lot.

Yeah, it's a bit unfair. I think there's a fairly strong case for Doncaster.

 

[GusB]

Elgin is another one that was once claimed to be a city, although long ago.

With a football team called Elgin City! Formerly a Cathedral City.

Oban has two Cathedrals, although neither is Church of Scotland.

I have done a bit of googling and found this article from one of the local papers:

Is Elgin a long-established historic city or a large town? We try to clear up the confusion

While many persist in calling Elgin a city to this day, it's official status has been confusing over the decades. We delve into the archives to find the answer.

www.pressandjournal.co.uk

What is the city and town confusion?
Historically, Elgin was a popular residence for Scots royalty with its cathedral, known as the Lantern of the North at the time, being an important seat of learning.

King David I is said to have enjoyed the local hospitality so much that he bestowed royal burgh status on the community in the 12th Century.

This dusty charter is the source of confusion due to the term “city” not being used at the time.

Instead, the presence of cathedrals became an unofficial form of deciding which communities were in the upper echelons of Scottish life.

Aberdeen, Edinburgh and Glasgow were accepted as cities when rules changed in the 1890s with Dundee later joining them but doubt persisted about the official status of others, including Elgin, Inverness and Perth.

That was seemingly resolved in 1975 when a reorganisation of local government recognised only Aberdeen, Edinburgh, Dundee and Glasgow as cities – shunning the rest.

I was only just around in 1975, but I'm fairly certain that I can remember signage on the main roads into Elgin proclaiming "City and Royal Burgh of Elgin". It's possible that the council (it would have been Grampian Region that was responsible for roads at the time) didn't get round to replacing the signs for a few years.

It is possible that I've mixed my memories up with somewhere else, but then again it's one of those situations when you notice more when something is gone rather than when it was there.

 

[johnnychips]

These are all sub-post offices: the main one in the town centre closed early this year. And no, it is not important, but one would expect a city to have a fair range of facilities and a post office is a fairly basic one.

Sheffield’s main post office is in Wilko’s!

 

[Gloster]

Sheffield’s main post office is in Wilko’s!

Newport’s last one was in the Co-op, but the Co-op closed and nobody elèse would take on the post office.