Nick writes
Would you prefer they referred to you as 'Dear resident of the and area
formerly part of the county of Middlesex, Kent, Surrey, Hertfordshire or
Essex'?
Quite frankly, that would be better.
Quite frankly that's just ridiculous and merely serves to undermine the
rest of your argument.
Ever heard of the 'London Borough of Bromley'? That's its proper name -
see the main page of www.bromley.gov.uk
Yeah, I've heard of it, it's just next door. Their website does appear
rather London-enthusiastic now (it never used to). I have never spoken to
any Bromley councillors who are though.
Well the name of the council will have been the same since it was
formed.
I am sure the vast majority of people in Bexley and Bromley would not
describe themselves as living "in London". All the real Londonders I have
ever met and worked with would never regard such "outlying" areas as Bexley
as part of London either.
And there are many residents living in the Boroughs of Bexley and
Bromley who do not regard themselves as living in Bexley or Bromley; but
living in places such as Orpington or Chislehurst. They may have
objected as strongly to being forced to become 'Bexley' or 'Bromley'
residents as you do to being addressed as a Londoner.
So perhaps we should wind back *all* the 1960s local Government
revisions and go back to having local parish councils only.
There has been no need to put a county as part of your address for many
years. So the correct postal address would end 'Bromley BR1...' or
'Bexley BR5...'.
Correct, but the postal county is still used extensively and I would guess
well over 75% of all mail delivered in the UK still has a county field. So
lots of people will see Bexley and Bromley addressed as Kent (and NEVER
London, which is not acceptable as part of the address).
Of course even when used, postal counties bore no relation to
geographical or political counties. Addresses in Cockfosters would have
a postal town of Barnet, Herts. Despite Cockfosters being in the London
Borough of Enfield and (geographically) in the County of Middlesex.
Part of my point in general is that it may well be sensible to include
places such as Dartford and Swanley as part of the GLA administration (so
Dartford station could be added to Zone 6 etc :-), but this is jeopardised
by the fact that GLA will then want to take away the Kent branding and call
the residents Londoners. People don't want it, it's not necessary, and I
believe it undermines the history and character of the areas they do this
with.
I think you're being *far* too sensitive.
The old GLC slogan was 'Working for London' and used for many years. It
appeared on everything that they made or did. I really don't see what
the difference is today with the GLA.
Let's look at some of the services provided in your area: buses will
have been 'London Transport' since 1933 (and in those days covered a far
wider area than they do today); the local TV news programmes are called
BBC London News and London Tonight; the local evening paper is the
Evening Standard, whose website is called
www.thisislondon.co.uk; fires
are extinguished by the London Fire Brigade; crimes investigated by the
Metropolitan Police; even before WWII, water supplied by the
Metropolitan Water Board; accident victims are tended to by the London
Ambulance Service.
So the links to London are far greater than to places like Margate or
Maidstone.
I am not anti-GLA, I just don't want the London branding and to be
artificially separated from the Dartford area.
Nothing has changed in that respect since 1965.
--
Dave