Talk:Redcliffe-Maud Report

message: Interesting to note that the plans for North West Province are not entirely dissimilar to the current unitary plans.
*Cumberland & North Westmorland = North Cumbria
*Furness & North Lancashire = Morecambe Bay
*the Fylde = Blackpool and the Fylde
*Preston-Leyland-Chorley = Central Lancashire
Then with Blackburn/Burnley, the only difference in the 2004 proposals
is that Ribble Valley should be to Burnley (as part of East Lancashire),
rather than associated with Blackburn.  Of course, a Blackburn with Ribble
was propsed in the 2003 draft.
Also Southport-Crosby is basically the same as the proposed Sefton and West Lancashire (apart from the Bootle thing)
Morwen - Talk 22:35, 19 Jul 2004 (UTC)

message: That I'm glad the Redcliffe-Maud proposals were never fully implemented! Talk about vandalism of the counties!! David 19:22, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Well I'm of the opinion that because the proposals were so radical, that if they were implemented they wouldn't have affected the perception of counties that much — witness what happened in Scotland. Because the watered-down LGA 1972 areas were so similar in names and areas to counties in most places, the actual affect on the perception of counties has actually been worse. Look at the confusion that has happened south of the border since 1974, whereas Scotland's local government of regions and districts was always understood to be completely separate from the counties. Obviously in a best-case scenario both the LGA 1972 and LG(S)A 1973 would never have happened! Owain 20:02, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, in Scotland I regularly see people quoting their address as being in Tayside or Strathclyde, even though that was always wrong.  Morwen - Talk 09:45, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Well exactly, you can never legislate anything out of existence as long as people remember it! Owain 09:51, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Can I just say... 

message: ...but based on an article that isn't freely available.  I have a copy I bought myself, which also contains maps and the like.  It shows Derek Senior's proposal in full; said proposal splits England into five provinces, none of which would seem to have any parity in population or industry.  The area around Berwick-upon-Tweed (I believe it also includes some land south of the Tweed, though it's hard to tell) is marked as "Berwick Area (special arrangements)", presumably a form of power-sharing.  The article is available at http://www.jstor.org/pss/1795107 if anyone has a subscription.
Shaucker (talk) 12:37, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Minor edit... 

message: My recollection was that RM homed in on a size of about 1 million, because this was the minimum that could employ specialist staff, such as the aforesaid peripatetic music advisor. (Avon certainly had one, only, when my missus taught Junior school music). Anyone able to confirm?
Interesting to see who was classed in the 'great & good' in those days - J.L. Longland is presumably Sir Jack Longland (educationalist, broadcaster & mountaineer - I've resolved the redlink), and T Dan Smith must have got involved only months before his fall from grace! Bob aka Linuxlad (talk) 09:20, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Size of counties, or the Peripatetic Music Advisor

message: Very good article.  However, I was wondering which district Barnsley was due to go in.  Is anyone able to add this information please?  Epa101 (talk) 20:14, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Barnsley?