DH
Daniel H
My Sat Nav which is all but 6 months old still has this as an attraction - I wish!
On the tour there was also a room you went through that had a mocked set of Bline Date and an Emmerdale house. Also did anyone brave the SkyTrak flying rollercoaster?!?
Does anyone know where Make Your Play is filmed, in the Globe Theatre as well?
It's amazing how small the garden studio looks, once your stick a couple of cameras in there must be a tight squeeze.
On the tour there was also a room you went through that had a mocked set of Bline Date and an Emmerdale house. Also did anyone brave the SkyTrak flying rollercoaster?!?
Does anyone know where Make Your Play is filmed, in the Globe Theatre as well?
It's amazing how small the garden studio looks, once your stick a couple of cameras in there must be a tight squeeze.
RM
Wikipedia is hardly accurate for these types of things! Having worked in the transport industry for over 20 years, some of which advising the former metropolitan counties that you mention, I have to disagree with your analysis!
PTA's were formed in 1969 to cover the areas of Tyneside, Manchester, West Midlands and Merseyside. Greater Glasgow followed in 1973 and then South and West Yorkshire in 1974. In effect the PTA's took over the planning of buses and road transport within their area, whilst the actual process of locla government was retained at the local levels.
In 1974 the role of PTA's changed, and their ability to plan road transportation was absolved to the local metropolitan County Council. The PTA's were replaced by PTE's whose sole responsibility was to plan and provide public transport facilities within their respective area (hence, Wigan, previously outside the boundary was incorporated into the PTE, being in GMC, whilst Alderley Edge was removed from PTE control as that remained in Cheshire).
As for the former metropolitan counties, each local council became unitary authorities, and henceforth in effect, became their own county council. Their is no sheriff for South Yorkshire etc. As for people getting 'over it', I am sure if you displaced wherever you live to some other place, you'd be a bit p***ed off - so attributing that people should move loyalties on the whim of some civil servant is ridiculous.
It wasn't just Wikipedia, it was Encyclopaedia Britannia and the Guiness Book of Answers I consulted too.
I feel you're missing the point-- or maybe I am? What do PTAs and PTEs have do with the existence of geographic counties? Yes metropolitan counties' councils were abolished in 1986. Metropolitan counties per se are not former . They still exist legally, ceremonially and geographically.
Not all met borough functions are controlled by the individual met boroughs. Some government functions are still decided at county-level in met counties: Police/fire cover, transport (Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Authority e.g) and civil planning etc. That's what makes them met counties still.
Met counties also do have Lord-Lieutants (plus deputies) etc. South Yorkshire has a high sheriff , at presentDavid Moody.
Counties don't just change at a stroke of a civil servant's pen. It took two years for the counties to be changed last round (1994-1996), with numerous amendments to the plans on the way! It took the boundary changes of 1974 nine years to be realised.
I wouldn't be that p*ssed off if I swapped counties actually-- it would be annoying but I would get over it. Why should I feel loyalty to a geographic county, unless I were a cricket fan? I think counties are not the same as having nationality of a sovereign state. There weren't exactly any street protests when counties were changed in 1974-- because it is not really a big deal.
Greater Manchester can't be that unpopular anyway. Otherwise it would have been scrapped in 1996; like Cleveland, Avon and Humberside were because they were unpopular.
Things change, needs change. Nobody calls for Lancashire to re-absorbed by Cheshire do they? Besides why shouldn't the Manchester conurbation have its own county? Bristol has had its own county for centuries (except for the"Avon" gap) and is much smaller than the Manchester conurbation.
What's wrong with Saddleworth being in Greater Manchester anyway? As a 40-something couple from Saddleworth once pointed out to me, Saddleworth is on the edge of the Manchester conurbation and is far closer to Manchester than York or Wakefield! Therefore they identify with Manchester-- not York or Wakefield.
As for the postal counties: The reason Greater Manchester was never taken up as postal county was to avoid confusion with Manchester itself, so the pre-1974 boundaries remained in the eye of the Royal Mail. That said the postal counties were scrapped in 1996 anyway!
Whether you like it or not, ceremonial counties in England are the geographic counties of England. Consult the Guiness Book of Answers , Wikipedia says the same-- FYI Wiki's page on the matter is sourced from Encyclopaedia Britannica .
Huddy Refreshed posted:
Wikipedia is hardly accurate for these types of things! Having worked in the transport industry for over 20 years, some of which advising the former metropolitan counties that you mention, I have to disagree with your analysis!
PTA's were formed in 1969 to cover the areas of Tyneside, Manchester, West Midlands and Merseyside. Greater Glasgow followed in 1973 and then South and West Yorkshire in 1974. In effect the PTA's took over the planning of buses and road transport within their area, whilst the actual process of locla government was retained at the local levels.
In 1974 the role of PTA's changed, and their ability to plan road transportation was absolved to the local metropolitan County Council. The PTA's were replaced by PTE's whose sole responsibility was to plan and provide public transport facilities within their respective area (hence, Wigan, previously outside the boundary was incorporated into the PTE, being in GMC, whilst Alderley Edge was removed from PTE control as that remained in Cheshire).
As for the former metropolitan counties, each local council became unitary authorities, and henceforth in effect, became their own county council. Their is no sheriff for South Yorkshire etc. As for people getting 'over it', I am sure if you displaced wherever you live to some other place, you'd be a bit p***ed off - so attributing that people should move loyalties on the whim of some civil servant is ridiculous.
It wasn't just Wikipedia, it was Encyclopaedia Britannia and the Guiness Book of Answers I consulted too.
I feel you're missing the point-- or maybe I am? What do PTAs and PTEs have do with the existence of geographic counties? Yes metropolitan counties' councils were abolished in 1986. Metropolitan counties per se are not former . They still exist legally, ceremonially and geographically.
Not all met borough functions are controlled by the individual met boroughs. Some government functions are still decided at county-level in met counties: Police/fire cover, transport (Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Authority e.g) and civil planning etc. That's what makes them met counties still.
Met counties also do have Lord-Lieutants (plus deputies) etc. South Yorkshire has a high sheriff , at presentDavid Moody.
Counties don't just change at a stroke of a civil servant's pen. It took two years for the counties to be changed last round (1994-1996), with numerous amendments to the plans on the way! It took the boundary changes of 1974 nine years to be realised.
I wouldn't be that p*ssed off if I swapped counties actually-- it would be annoying but I would get over it. Why should I feel loyalty to a geographic county, unless I were a cricket fan? I think counties are not the same as having nationality of a sovereign state. There weren't exactly any street protests when counties were changed in 1974-- because it is not really a big deal.
Greater Manchester can't be that unpopular anyway. Otherwise it would have been scrapped in 1996; like Cleveland, Avon and Humberside were because they were unpopular.
Things change, needs change. Nobody calls for Lancashire to re-absorbed by Cheshire do they? Besides why shouldn't the Manchester conurbation have its own county? Bristol has had its own county for centuries (except for the"Avon" gap) and is much smaller than the Manchester conurbation.
What's wrong with Saddleworth being in Greater Manchester anyway? As a 40-something couple from Saddleworth once pointed out to me, Saddleworth is on the edge of the Manchester conurbation and is far closer to Manchester than York or Wakefield! Therefore they identify with Manchester-- not York or Wakefield.
As for the postal counties: The reason Greater Manchester was never taken up as postal county was to avoid confusion with Manchester itself, so the pre-1974 boundaries remained in the eye of the Royal Mail. That said the postal counties were scrapped in 1996 anyway!
Whether you like it or not, ceremonial counties in England are the geographic counties of England. Consult the Guiness Book of Answers , Wikipedia says the same-- FYI Wiki's page on the matter is sourced from Encyclopaedia Britannica .
JR
And the Encyclopædia Britannica is in itself a poor source - it relies on its prestige and reputation, and nothing else to be considered reliable. At least Wikipedia cites its sources. And either way it shouldn't be citing tertiary sources.
Roger Mellie posted:
...FYI Wiki's page on the matter is sourced from
Encyclopedia Britannica
.
And the Encyclopædia Britannica is in itself a poor source - it relies on its prestige and reputation, and nothing else to be considered reliable. At least Wikipedia cites its sources. And either way it shouldn't be citing tertiary sources.
RM
And the Encyclopædia Britannica is in itself a poor source - it relies on its prestige and reputation, and nothing else to be considered reliable. At least Wikipedia cites its sources. And either way it shouldn't be citing tertiary sources.
OK, fair enough. Guiness Book of Answers is reliable though, AFAIK-- it is extremely thorough too.
Anyway (!).... back to Granada. I don't if this has been mentioned before, but what was the official reason for the discontinuation of Granada tours? Was one ever given?
jrothwell97 posted:
Roger Mellie posted:
...FYI Wiki's page on the matter is sourced from
Encyclopedia Britannica
.
And the Encyclopædia Britannica is in itself a poor source - it relies on its prestige and reputation, and nothing else to be considered reliable. At least Wikipedia cites its sources. And either way it shouldn't be citing tertiary sources.
OK, fair enough. Guiness Book of Answers is reliable though, AFAIK-- it is extremely thorough too.
Anyway (!).... back to Granada. I don't if this has been mentioned before, but what was the official reason for the discontinuation of Granada tours? Was one ever given?
JE
And the Encyclopædia Britannica is in itself a poor source - it relies on its prestige and reputation, and nothing else to be considered reliable. At least Wikipedia cites its sources. And either way it shouldn't be citing tertiary sources.
OK, fair enough. Guiness Book of Answers is reliable though, AFAIK-- it is extremely thorough too.
Anyway (!).... back to Granada. I don't if this has been mentioned before, but what was the official reason for the discontinuation of Granada tours? Was one ever given?
They needed the Corrie set more often for filming was one of the reasons due to all the extra episodes.
Jez
Founding member
Roger Mellie posted:
jrothwell97 posted:
Roger Mellie posted:
...FYI Wiki's page on the matter is sourced from
Encyclopedia Britannica
.
And the Encyclopædia Britannica is in itself a poor source - it relies on its prestige and reputation, and nothing else to be considered reliable. At least Wikipedia cites its sources. And either way it shouldn't be citing tertiary sources.
OK, fair enough. Guiness Book of Answers is reliable though, AFAIK-- it is extremely thorough too.
Anyway (!).... back to Granada. I don't if this has been mentioned before, but what was the official reason for the discontinuation of Granada tours? Was one ever given?
They needed the Corrie set more often for filming was one of the reasons due to all the extra episodes.
RM
Anyway (!).... back to Granada. I don't if this has been mentioned before, but what was the official reason for the discontinuation of Granada tours? Was one ever given?
They needed the Corrie set more often for filming was one of the reasons due to all the extra episodes.
I see, thanks for that. It's a shame really, because people I know who went on it said it was great. I reckon they ought to do the occasional tour as a comprimise, perhaps a couple of days a month maybe?
Jez posted:
Roger Mellie posted:
Anyway (!).... back to Granada. I don't if this has been mentioned before, but what was the official reason for the discontinuation of Granada tours? Was one ever given?
They needed the Corrie set more often for filming was one of the reasons due to all the extra episodes.
I see, thanks for that. It's a shame really, because people I know who went on it said it was great. I reckon they ought to do the occasional tour as a comprimise, perhaps a couple of days a month maybe?
JE
Anyway (!).... back to Granada. I don't if this has been mentioned before, but what was the official reason for the discontinuation of Granada tours? Was one ever given?
They needed the Corrie set more often for filming was one of the reasons due to all the extra episodes.
I see, thanks for that. It's a shame really, because people I know who went on it said it was great. I reckon they ought to do the occasional tour as a comprimise, perhaps a couple of days a month maybe?
I went on it twice and it was excellent. I totally agree about opening it for special occasions.
Jez
Founding member
Roger Mellie posted:
Jez posted:
Roger Mellie posted:
Anyway (!).... back to Granada. I don't if this has been mentioned before, but what was the official reason for the discontinuation of Granada tours? Was one ever given?
They needed the Corrie set more often for filming was one of the reasons due to all the extra episodes.
I see, thanks for that. It's a shame really, because people I know who went on it said it was great. I reckon they ought to do the occasional tour as a comprimise, perhaps a couple of days a month maybe?
I went on it twice and it was excellent. I totally agree about opening it for special occasions.
SP
I know for a few of years after it was closed to the public, private groups could arrange to use the Corrie set for functions, etc..
For a couple of years (must have been around 1999 / 2000) as part of the Manchester Mardi Gras they had an event called 'Treat On The Street' which was basically a big party on the Corrie set. A friend of mine went to one of them and said it was a great night... although apparently there was quite a bit of man-on-man naughtiness going on in the backstreet.
For a couple of years (must have been around 1999 / 2000) as part of the Manchester Mardi Gras they had an event called 'Treat On The Street' which was basically a big party on the Corrie set. A friend of mine went to one of them and said it was a great night... although apparently there was quite a bit of man-on-man naughtiness going on in the backstreet.