Nick writes
Would you prefer they referred to you as 'Dear resident of the
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.
I still thiink it would be better whether you think it's ridiculous or not.
If you did a quick straw poll of people in the street and asked them if
they thought it was better - I reckon they'd all think you were a
nutter.
My point was that it was a "reluctanct" London borough judging by the
councillors I've spoken to. Note that Bexley dropped the "London
Borough" part of its name for most purposes some years ago, and now
goes under the alias of Bexley Council.
But my point was that it wasn't a 'new' thing. Not GLA propaganda as
you would believe.
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.
Yes, they might've done. So? Let local areas be called what local people
want them to be.
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.
They bore a very strong relationship with almost all counties at one point.
You've merely picked out some of the (relatively few) that didn't match up.
Most did!
Postal counties *never* matched geographical counties. The postal
county derived from your postal town - if this was in a different county
(as it frequently was) then you had the wrong postal county.
People living in the London postal districts had London as part of their
address ever since the establishment of those districts (which mutt be
more than a 100 years). So people living in the Borough of Wood Green
in the County of Middlesex would have had their postal address as
London.
So it was a lot more widespread than you think, certainly more than just
a few. The organisation of postal districts/towns/counties was merely
for the operating convenience of the postal service - and for nothing
else.
Not an acceptable characteristic of a "Londoner" I know.
The thing is. I actually have some sympathy with some of what you say,
but when you make a stupid comment like this (which would be offensive
to many people), then it undermines the rest of your argument.
I think you are aiming at the wrong target. You're blaming the GLA for
a process which was set in stone in 1965. A process that started long
before that.
I too think its sad that local identity is being lost, but whereas you
think of it in Bexley vs London, I think of it in smaller terms. I live
in the London Borough of Haringey, I don't know of anyone who, when
asked, would say they live in Haringey - they would say they live in
places such as Tottenham, Wood Green, Crouch End, Muswell Hill, or even
Harringay - but never Haringey. However, if asked if they came from
Middlesex or London, then I reckon most would say London.
Why? Nothing to do with the GLA, just that over the past 100 years, the
area has become more Londonised (for the various reasons outlined
previously).
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.
The GLC never referred to Bexley as "south east London" did they.
I don't know. But I can't think of any other term they would have used
for it
The GLA do, and intentionally so.
Indeed. Bexley is in the south-east corner of Greater London. It seems
eminently sensible to refer to it as south east London.
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.
I can quote you an equally long list of services provided by Kent-based
agencies and bodies, but so what?
But you didn't. Perhaps you couldn't think of any. I'd be surprised if
there were any that were as 'visible' as the ones I listed.
So the links to London are far greater than to places like Margate or
Maidstone.
Only because they have been intentionally severed and/or tampered with, and
continue to be.
Links such as?
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.
I disagree entirely.
For 15 years, there was no level of government for the whole of Greater
London. Now there is, so you are bound to see more London-wide
material.
What I find very puzzling is why you seem to single out the GLA as some
sort of ethnic cleansing body determined to eradicate all signs of
Kentishness. That's not only bizarre but bordering on the paranoid.
--
Dave