please empty your brain below

Aren't cities and hamlets at the opposite ends of the scale?

I think you need a Pizza Express to qualify as a city anyway. Is there a Pizza Express in Tower Hamlets? Pizza Hut doesn't count.

Royal Borough status makes a certain amount of sense, given the Tower's history as you note, but city status does seem bizarre. I wouldn't have thought it too appropriate for a new 'city' to be created within London for the reasons in the wikipedia article you linked to.

That said, if any London borough is to go for it, I think my own has a better claim (I'm getting my conflict of interest up front), although I see that it has tried and failed before.

Southwark has a very long history as an urban settlement and was one of the three pillars of the historic urban centre of London alongside the City itself and Westminster. It has two cathedrals (both Anglican and Catholic ones), as well as something of a mix of large city centre to inner city as well as posh suburbs. I know cathedrals aren't actually relevant for city status but in many people's minds it is important.

Could this not just be the tip of the iceberg. I predict their full independence to become the People's Democratic Republic of Tower Hamletistan within 5 years.

I take it from what you say that you are against the idea? And without a M & S you cannot be a city anyway?
What I find appalling is that there should be any thought of rewarding the City ..ankers for what they are doing to the economy, wherever they may be based.

DG for Lord Mayor - I reckon that you of all people have earned it.

Ok - so by becoming the City of Tower Hamlets the first effect would be to lose the "East End" identity. So the bankers don't want to be in the East End anymore do they? Let them live in the City of Dogs then.

Despite probably stronger claims, Southwark & Croydon have been repeatedly knoncked back - I'm sure I've read somewhere before (can't find it though) that the Home Office is generally strongly opposed to turning suburbs of metropolitan areas that are already cities themselves into cities, which would suggest Tower Hamlets' chances are pretty slim.

I thought Croydon had tried and failed for City status in the past too. It does not seem a particularly necessary title for any London borough to apply for and I'm not sure that the expense would justify any possible advantages. Presumably officers at Tower Hamlets council are having to put resources into the bid for this and if successful lots of money will need to be spent on re-doing anything with the council logo on (as presumably Greenwich will be doing next year when they become a Royal borough). And what's the return? A little publicity when the decision is made and that's about it.

Leicester! LOL! Spot on--- I know exactly what you mean

I think Croydon has a very strong case - I see Croydon as being a city that got absorbed by a metropolis. Other than that my vote would be for my old home, Milton Keynes.

Croydon tried in 1954, 2000 and 2002, getting knocked back each time. It bases its claim on being one of the top ten most populous local authorities in England (it's number nine), although that doesn't really say much about anything other than local authority boundaries. The actual city areas of Manchester, Newcastle and Nottingham are pretty small, for example. I can't really see it succeeding in the future, let alone Tower Hamlets.

If one of the rules for becoming a city were to include the necessity for having clean streets devoid of litter and old dumped beds etc, Tower Hamlets wouldnt have a hope in hell of being chosen.

Lutfur could at least do Middlesbrough the courtesy of spelling its name correctly.

p.s. it took Lewis Mumford 600+ pages to write about 'The City in History' in which he cannot point to a single adequate definition of what a city is. I'm pretty sure he'd tell you the London Borough of Tower Hamlets is not one and never will be one.

I am reminded of Gwendoline Butler's books about the (imaginary) Second City of London police force, which I believe were inspired by a speech by David Owen proposing such a city. The Second City was located in Docklands, but I think it was meant to take bits from several existing boroughs, rather than being equivalent to Tower Hamlets.

It’s a unique borough and it needs to be given more recognition, city status would be the befitting accolade for Tower Hamlets.

You're just some random person who was not even born in tower hamlets, you're getting way too big for your boots trying to act like some spokesperson. If you hate it so much why do you live here? There's diversity in culture and colour, diversity in the types of areas ( places like canary wharf compared to whitechapel market) TH is just so different to other parts of london and the UK, and does deserve city status, it's like it's own world. PS stop throwing shade at aberfeldy estate it's beautiful, looks like a village










TridentScan | Privacy Policy