Bid to make Colchester the nation's next city lost

COLCHESTER has lost the race to become the nation's next city.

Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg announced this morning that Essex county town Chelmsford, St Asaph in Wales and Perth in Sctoland had won the competition, launched as part of the Queen's Diamond Jubilee celebrations.

Community group Destination Colchester, backed by Colchester Council, submitted a bid styling the town as Britain's First City - harking back to its status as the Roman capital of Britain.

But the bid did not have universal support - with many living in towns and villages in Colchester borough voicing opposition.

Fellow Essex town Southend also missed out on the accolade.

Does Colchester deserve to be a city? Is Colchester better off staying a town? Post your thoughts below.

Comments (69)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

says...

10:08am Wed 14 Mar 12

FormerColchesterGirl says...

Colchester would never make it as a city the state it is in now. For starters, Cities normally have attractions people find exciting to visit and good shopping/retail areas. Colchester fails in both aspects.
Colchester would never make it as a city the state it is in now. For starters, Cities normally have attractions people find exciting to visit and good shopping/retail areas. Colchester fails in both aspects. FormerColchesterGirl

11:06am Wed 14 Mar 12

Say It As It Is OK? says...

Good, we remain the Oldest Recorded Town! better than being the newest City.
Good, we remain the Oldest Recorded Town! better than being the newest City. Say It As It Is OK?

11:10am Wed 14 Mar 12

StopLookListen says...

I totally agree. If by some magic the High Street could be brought back to late 1950s glory with its privately owned and well kept shops full of interest and variety, not to be found elsewhere, that would be a start, but I do recognise that the town has gone along the same path as many others of equal size.
.
As to the historic attractions, the level now is somewhere between the scholarly and the theme park, neither side will have a full interest in the Town.
.
There was once a "West End" from the Town Hall westwards, and Head St and Crouch St had some lovely, albeit more expensive shops. On my visits now I see these areas as without any interest at all.
.
Reading about the fate of the old "Regal" cinema only confirms my views. What Town aspiring to be a City could leave this building to decay in such a way?
.
For those visiting the Town solely for the purpose of studying the history, there is not a good enough background for making them comfortable,
and an opportunity is lost for gaining valuable income with unique shops.
I totally agree. If by some magic the High Street could be brought back to late 1950s glory with its privately owned and well kept shops full of interest and variety, not to be found elsewhere, that would be a start, but I do recognise that the town has gone along the same path as many others of equal size. . As to the historic attractions, the level now is somewhere between the scholarly and the theme park, neither side will have a full interest in the Town. . There was once a "West End" from the Town Hall westwards, and Head St and Crouch St had some lovely, albeit more expensive shops. On my visits now I see these areas as without any interest at all. . Reading about the fate of the old "Regal" cinema only confirms my views. What Town aspiring to be a City could leave this building to decay in such a way? . For those visiting the Town solely for the purpose of studying the history, there is not a good enough background for making them comfortable, and an opportunity is lost for gaining valuable income with unique shops. StopLookListen

11:14am Wed 14 Mar 12

Dug says...

I'm actually glad that Essex has a city.

Well done Chelmsford!
I'm actually glad that Essex has a city. Well done Chelmsford! Dug

11:14am Wed 14 Mar 12

Sdapeze says...

We are both the oldest recorded town in Britain and the first British capital. What have you got Mr Chelmsford? An excellent result for the lacklustre winners. My Colchester is the best there is; city, town or capital. Who cares? Can we now get on with making Colchester a place that people want to visit, starting with banning all traffic from our town centre.
We are both the oldest recorded town in Britain and the first British capital. What have you got Mr Chelmsford? An excellent result for the lacklustre winners. My Colchester is the best there is; city, town or capital. Who cares? Can we now get on with making Colchester a place that people want to visit, starting with banning all traffic from our town centre. Sdapeze

11:21am Wed 14 Mar 12

Duckorange says...

In retrospect, the town motto of "You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy" didn't help matters much
In retrospect, the town motto of "You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy" didn't help matters much Duckorange

11:22am Wed 14 Mar 12

jim_bo says...

Internet shopping, out of town retail and supermarkets are to blame for "town centre" decline.

The decline will continue as we, consumers continue to strive for cheaper and cheaper deals. The high rents, high rates "high st prices" will continue to drive consumers away.

Perhaps its time to ditch town centre shops to the Chains and concentrate on business or tourism to "reclaim" the town centre.
Internet shopping, out of town retail and supermarkets are to blame for "town centre" decline. The decline will continue as we, consumers continue to strive for cheaper and cheaper deals. The high rents, high rates "high st prices" will continue to drive consumers away. Perhaps its time to ditch town centre shops to the Chains and concentrate on business or tourism to "reclaim" the town centre. jim_bo

11:27am Wed 14 Mar 12

RobWalker says...

I'm actually really surprised Chelmsford got it. Although I'm pleased Essex has a city it feels a bit like Colchester is confirmed as playing second fiddle, which it shouldn't be.
Feels like a bit of a snub or is it just me?
I'm actually really surprised Chelmsford got it. Although I'm pleased Essex has a city it feels a bit like Colchester is confirmed as playing second fiddle, which it shouldn't be. Feels like a bit of a snub or is it just me? RobWalker

11:32am Wed 14 Mar 12

Checkout says...

Not often I agree with you Sdapeze but I do now. A clear victory for concrete, misdirected council tax revenues and political machinations.
Not often I agree with you Sdapeze but I do now. A clear victory for concrete, misdirected council tax revenues and political machinations. Checkout

11:56am Wed 14 Mar 12

Say It As It Is OK? says...

Sdapeze has changed his tune Now he wants to ban all traffic from from our town centre! Presumably this includes buses, taxis and motorcycles. It's the only way to make pedestrianisation work.
Sdapeze has changed his tune Now he wants to ban all traffic from from our town centre! Presumably this includes buses, taxis and motorcycles. It's the only way to make pedestrianisation work. Say It As It Is OK?

11:59am Wed 14 Mar 12

Geoff@W2TurnerRise says...

I think Chelmsford is a bit better than being described as 'concrete' In fact it has definite advantages over Colchester in several areas - history obviously not one of them though.

I'd definitely not have voted for Colchester, as I think it's (crucially in my opinion) visitor unfriendly, which is a shame for a town with said history.

It looks like Chelmsford had a much tougher scrap than the Welsh ( 2 entries ) and Scottish ( 1! ) nominees. That does seem politically expedient to me!
I think Chelmsford is a bit better than being described as 'concrete' In fact it has definite advantages over Colchester in several areas - history obviously not one of them though. I'd definitely not have voted for Colchester, as I think it's (crucially in my opinion) visitor unfriendly, which is a shame for a town with said history. It looks like Chelmsford had a much tougher scrap than the Welsh ( 2 entries ) and Scottish ( 1! ) nominees. That does seem politically expedient to me! Geoff@W2TurnerRise

11:59am Wed 14 Mar 12

romantic says...

As one of the many who didn´t see what we would gain from being a city, I´m not greatly disappointed by this. Instead of the parade of consultants we would have inevitably hired to manage the transition, maybe we can now get on with being a town. A pretty good town on the whole, but with some stuff that needs to improve. Let Chelmsford spend months and years designing new logos, reprinting everything connected with the council, rebranding, re-energising. Take your pick from a hundred public sector management speak terms.

Becoming a city might have been a big ego boost for those involved, but would have given no tangible rewards for us, Joe Public. I am glad we didn´t get it, now we can concentrate on getting the town right.
As one of the many who didn´t see what we would gain from being a city, I´m not greatly disappointed by this. Instead of the parade of consultants we would have inevitably hired to manage the transition, maybe we can now get on with being a town. A pretty good town on the whole, but with some stuff that needs to improve. Let Chelmsford spend months and years designing new logos, reprinting everything connected with the council, rebranding, re-energising. Take your pick from a hundred public sector management speak terms. Becoming a city might have been a big ego boost for those involved, but would have given no tangible rewards for us, Joe Public. I am glad we didn´t get it, now we can concentrate on getting the town right. romantic

12:10pm Wed 14 Mar 12

TheCaptain says...

Whilst having a cathederal doesn't make you a city and a city doesn't need to have one, all three chosed town do indeed have one. Strange
Whilst having a cathederal doesn't make you a city and a city doesn't need to have one, all three chosed town do indeed have one. Strange TheCaptain

12:25pm Wed 14 Mar 12

Sdapeze says...

I have always been in favour of banning all traffic from the town centre. It will inconvenience just about all of us but it will make olchester a better, healthier and safer place to visit. How can you pedestrianise the High Street yet allow buses, taxis, motorcyles, etc? Any motorised vehicle is a danger to a pedestrian. I am unsure about bicycles, as there are some inconsiderate idiots on them too. As to losing our city bid, who cares?
I have always been in favour of banning all traffic from the town centre. It will inconvenience just about all of us but it will make olchester a better, healthier and safer place to visit. How can you pedestrianise the High Street yet allow buses, taxis, motorcyles, etc? Any motorised vehicle is a danger to a pedestrian. I am unsure about bicycles, as there are some inconsiderate idiots on them too. As to losing our city bid, who cares? Sdapeze

12:57pm Wed 14 Mar 12

TheCaptain says...

I'm not worried that we aren't a city but feel a bit ripped off that Chelmsford made it.
I'm not worried that we aren't a city but feel a bit ripped off that Chelmsford made it. TheCaptain

1:10pm Wed 14 Mar 12

Shambolic says...

Can't see that Chelmsford is any more attractive than Colchester!
Can't see that Chelmsford is any more attractive than Colchester! Shambolic

1:10pm Wed 14 Mar 12

Sdapeze says...

They were the county town Captain. It is only right that they should get it. Good for them! Essex rules! OK!
They were the county town Captain. It is only right that they should get it. Good for them! Essex rules! OK! Sdapeze

1:20pm Wed 14 Mar 12

hughie-s says...

No doubt the County Council will see this as an excuse to give Chelmsford an even bigger share of the budget than they do now.

Will Chelmsford City FC now change their name to Chelmsford Town;)
No doubt the County Council will see this as an excuse to give Chelmsford an even bigger share of the budget than they do now. Will Chelmsford City FC now change their name to Chelmsford Town;) hughie-s

1:56pm Wed 14 Mar 12

upandaterm says...

Where did Jaywick come???
Where did Jaywick come??? upandaterm

2:27pm Wed 14 Mar 12

Cuthbert says...

hughie-s wrote:
No doubt the County Council will see this as an excuse to give Chelmsford an even bigger share of the budget than they do now. Will Chelmsford City FC now change their name to Chelmsford Town;)
I must admit I thought Chelmsford was a city for years ( until the Millennium I think and the same type of bidding process then ) due to the Cathedral and Chelmsford City!
[quote][p][bold]hughie-s[/bold] wrote: No doubt the County Council will see this as an excuse to give Chelmsford an even bigger share of the budget than they do now. Will Chelmsford City FC now change their name to Chelmsford Town;)[/p][/quote]I must admit I thought Chelmsford was a city for years ( until the Millennium I think and the same type of bidding process then ) due to the Cathedral and Chelmsford City! Cuthbert

4:08pm Wed 14 Mar 12

wellnow says...

i always thought of chelmsford as a city.what ever this bit of nonsense changes beats me.maybe those who dress as romans or play at being round heads may have a moan, but what the heck.a least we won't get a visit from the mad greek.
i always thought of chelmsford as a city.what ever this bit of nonsense changes beats me.maybe those who dress as romans or play at being round heads may have a moan, but what the heck.a least we won't get a visit from the mad greek. wellnow

4:08pm Wed 14 Mar 12

ShallowRemarks says...

upandaterm wrote:
Where did Jaywick come???
Jaywick is already the **** hole of the universe, isn't that enough.
[quote][p][bold]upandaterm[/bold] wrote: Where did Jaywick come???[/p][/quote]Jaywick is already the **** hole of the universe, isn't that enough. ShallowRemarks

4:22pm Wed 14 Mar 12

newtactic says...

Never mind. Colchester is still a much more interesting place than Chelmsford. It also has a higher population and more railway stations.
Never mind. Colchester is still a much more interesting place than Chelmsford. It also has a higher population and more railway stations. newtactic

4:27pm Wed 14 Mar 12

newtactic says...

Having city status isn't going to make Chelmsford any more attractive. It has a small cathedral and the Essex administration offices. Given the choice of living in Colchester or Chelmsford (which I once was) I chose Colchester... no regrets!
Having city status isn't going to make Chelmsford any more attractive. It has a small cathedral and the Essex administration offices. Given the choice of living in Colchester or Chelmsford (which I once was) I chose Colchester... no regrets! newtactic

5:34pm Wed 14 Mar 12

super waluigi says...

Again, so much negativity.

Even the reporter from the Gazette stated "harking back to the old days", like our history is a bad thing!!!!

I would love to have seen Colchester become a city, for nothing other than funding. Otherwise, who really cares for a name or title????
Again, so much negativity. Even the reporter from the Gazette stated "harking back to the old days", like our history is a bad thing!!!! I would love to have seen Colchester become a city, for nothing other than funding. Otherwise, who really cares for a name or title???? super waluigi

6:06pm Wed 14 Mar 12

wegottagetoutofthisplace says...

Oh no! You mean we've papered every available space with five storey blocks of flats with hardly any thought of supporting infrastructure, gridlocked the roads as a bonus, spent millions on some sort of pointless alien ship where the bus station used to be, hired consultants to write forgotten reports on how to make the High Street better, converted all pedestrian walkways to cycle paths by painting a white stripe down the middle - and we still don't get city status? Never mind.
Oh no! You mean we've papered every available space with five storey blocks of flats with hardly any thought of supporting infrastructure, gridlocked the roads as a bonus, spent millions on some sort of pointless alien ship where the bus station used to be, hired consultants to write forgotten reports on how to make the High Street better, converted all pedestrian walkways to cycle paths by painting a white stripe down the middle - and we still don't get city status? Never mind. wegottagetoutofthisplace

6:26pm Wed 14 Mar 12

hughie-s says...

"..converted all pedestrian walkways to cycle paths by painting a white stripe down the middle -"

They've given up on the white lines on the news ones, eg Boadicea Way, it's now a free for all.
"..converted all pedestrian walkways to cycle paths by painting a white stripe down the middle -" They've given up on the white lines on the news ones, eg Boadicea Way, it's now a free for all. hughie-s

6:57pm Wed 14 Mar 12

6079 Smith W says...

newtactic wrote:
Having city status isn't going to make Chelmsford any more attractive. It has a small cathedral and the Essex administration offices. Given the choice of living in Colchester or Chelmsford (which I once was) I chose Colchester... no regrets!
I did likewise and made the same move. Colchester has so much more to offer than the soulless dormitory town of Chelmsford, which is why Chelmsford probably needed this. It has nothing else going for it!
[quote][p][bold]newtactic[/bold] wrote: Having city status isn't going to make Chelmsford any more attractive. It has a small cathedral and the Essex administration offices. Given the choice of living in Colchester or Chelmsford (which I once was) I chose Colchester... no regrets![/p][/quote]I did likewise and made the same move. Colchester has so much more to offer than the soulless dormitory town of Chelmsford, which is why Chelmsford probably needed this. It has nothing else going for it! 6079 Smith W

7:01pm Wed 14 Mar 12

Yendor says says...

ShallowRemarks wrote:
upandaterm wrote:
Where did Jaywick come???
Jaywick is already the **** hole of the universe, isn't that enough.
Ha ha ..... brilliant !!!
[quote][p][bold]ShallowRemarks[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]upandaterm[/bold] wrote: Where did Jaywick come???[/p][/quote]Jaywick is already the **** hole of the universe, isn't that enough.[/p][/quote]Ha ha ..... brilliant !!! Yendor says

7:02pm Wed 14 Mar 12

theequaliser1 says...

Won wonders, how much this evaluation or pipe dream cost the borough in the first place...Every time this old chestnut comes up I laugh with the usual aplomb...Colchester will always be third fiddle to Chelmsford & Ipswich...The real big players will not come here there is not the cash to chuck about...The town has lost its Mojo over the years, under the LIB DEMS now CON/DEMS The Borough lost its je ne sais quoi...The town needs to return to political Blue Blood and become Tory again to re establish itself...under the flag of the yellow dove its lost its puff...The Gravy Train of the heady days under Paddy Ashdown and the boys in the middle is over, I know I was a big supporter...We all need to get our heads out of the sand and give the town the credibility it deserves and get the Blue Flag waving again that is the only way the big players will make the nod and the wink in the right direction...Otherwis
e its third base against Chelmsford and Ipswich...
Won wonders, how much this evaluation or pipe dream cost the borough in the first place...Every time this old chestnut comes up I laugh with the usual aplomb...Colchester will always be third fiddle to Chelmsford & Ipswich...The real big players will not come here there is not the cash to chuck about...The town has lost its Mojo over the years, under the LIB DEMS now CON/DEMS The Borough lost its je ne sais quoi...The town needs to return to political Blue Blood and become Tory again to re establish itself...under the flag of the yellow dove its lost its puff...The Gravy Train of the heady days under Paddy Ashdown and the boys in the middle is over, I know I was a big supporter...We all need to get our heads out of the sand and give the town the credibility it deserves and get the Blue Flag waving again that is the only way the big players will make the nod and the wink in the right direction...Otherwis e its third base against Chelmsford and Ipswich... theequaliser1

7:05pm Wed 14 Mar 12

6079 Smith W says...

hughie-s wrote:
No doubt the County Council will see this as an excuse to give Chelmsford an even bigger share of the budget than they do now.

Will Chelmsford City FC now change their name to Chelmsford Town;)
As somebody who thinks the only thing going for the county town is my beloved clarets, and also as an apathetic republican, I say well done to the founders of Chelmsford City for ignoring the diktats of the monarch and calling themselves 'City'!
Actually, according to the club's historian, City was actually founded in the Golden Fleece, and they were having difficulties coming up with a name. They left the pub (stumbled out?), saw the cathedral in front of them, and concluded its presence made Chelmsford a city. Anyway, I hope this bodes well for the Clarets' conference promotion push. Up the City - Wheel 'em in!
[quote][p][bold]hughie-s[/bold] wrote: No doubt the County Council will see this as an excuse to give Chelmsford an even bigger share of the budget than they do now. Will Chelmsford City FC now change their name to Chelmsford Town;)[/p][/quote]As somebody who thinks the only thing going for the county town is my beloved clarets, and also as an apathetic republican, I say well done to the founders of Chelmsford City for ignoring the diktats of the monarch and calling themselves 'City'! Actually, according to the club's historian, City was actually founded in the Golden Fleece, and they were having difficulties coming up with a name. They left the pub (stumbled out?), saw the cathedral in front of them, and concluded its presence made Chelmsford a city. Anyway, I hope this bodes well for the Clarets' conference promotion push. Up the City - Wheel 'em in! 6079 Smith W

7:14pm Wed 14 Mar 12

jut1972 says...

Part of the reason of going for this was extra funding. Chelmsford already gets a greater share than Colchester this will make this worse.

Here you go Bob a cause worth highlighting.
Part of the reason of going for this was extra funding. Chelmsford already gets a greater share than Colchester this will make this worse. Here you go Bob a cause worth highlighting. jut1972

8:05pm Wed 14 Mar 12

25414nora says...

Find it hard to believe..That a bland, concrete, faceless, soulless, east London district Chelmsford, has been chosen for city status instead of historic Colchester. With our rich ancient heritage, lovely oldy worldly preserved buildings, award winning town centre park, our norman castle, and wealth of museums.. Like sir Bob, I feel we have been short changed..
Find it hard to believe..That a bland, concrete, faceless, soulless, east London district Chelmsford, has been chosen for city status instead of historic Colchester. With our rich ancient heritage, lovely oldy worldly preserved buildings, award winning town centre park, our norman castle, and wealth of museums.. Like sir Bob, I feel we have been short changed.. 25414nora

8:33pm Wed 14 Mar 12

The_truth_talker says...

Much better to stay as a Town than become a city
Much better to stay as a Town than become a city The_truth_talker

9:09pm Wed 14 Mar 12

colchester300yrs says...

I live in Colchester and work in Chelmsfrod, so know both places well. Chelmsford has it's problems, but it does not have Colchester's problems, i.e. no massive blocks of commuter dormitory flats everywhere, Jobs, Industry, Space and less overcrowding. Colchester may be an historic town, but VERY few historic buildings remain, indeed the council wish to demolish most of St Botolphs street (victorian) and replace it with a glass and stainless steel construction which will be full of more faceless chain stores. Why should we be a city, most of those who live here clear off every working day and have no interest at all in the place they live in, we haven't even got a bus station (Chelmsford has a brand new one).
I live in Colchester and work in Chelmsfrod, so know both places well. Chelmsford has it's problems, but it does not have Colchester's problems, i.e. no massive blocks of commuter dormitory flats everywhere, Jobs, Industry, Space and less overcrowding. Colchester may be an historic town, but VERY few historic buildings remain, indeed the council wish to demolish most of St Botolphs street (victorian) and replace it with a glass and stainless steel construction which will be full of more faceless chain stores. Why should we be a city, most of those who live here clear off every working day and have no interest at all in the place they live in, we haven't even got a bus station (Chelmsford has a brand new one). colchester300yrs

9:43pm Wed 14 Mar 12

Feisty CBC says...

We woz robbed.
We woz robbed. Feisty CBC

9:53pm Wed 14 Mar 12

newtactic says...

There are those who say the best view of Chelmsford is from an intercity train which doesn't stop there. The bonus is that those visitors who do decide to stop there to have a look at this new city are likely to ask, "is there somewhere more interesting nearby", "yes", they will be told, "Colchester, and it's only a few minutes away on the train."
There are those who say the best view of Chelmsford is from an intercity train which doesn't stop there. The bonus is that those visitors who do decide to stop there to have a look at this new city are likely to ask, "is there somewhere more interesting nearby", "yes", they will be told, "Colchester, and it's only a few minutes away on the train." newtactic

11:44pm Wed 14 Mar 12

ExPatMiddlesexer says...

When I read the news at lunchtime, my first reaction was 'yes'! I know it's been said before; but I'd like to back that up I would much rather live in 'England's oldest recorded town' rather than in what would have been England's newest city. I must admit that was my status on Facebook.

I'm now waiting for all the comments about how Facebook is the devils spawn! Maybe so, so but I got more responses from my comments on there (from all over the world) than I will do on here!
When I read the news at lunchtime, my first reaction was 'yes'! I know it's been said before; but I'd like to back that up I would much rather live in 'England's oldest recorded town' rather than in what would have been England's newest city. I must admit that was my status on Facebook. I'm now waiting for all the comments about how Facebook is the devils spawn! Maybe so, so but I got more responses from my comments on there (from all over the world) than I will do on here! ExPatMiddlesexer

12:50am Thu 15 Mar 12

Boris says...

Ipswich, a far more impressive place than Colchester or Chelmsford, gave up bidding after several attempts. Colchester should do likewise.
Given that one of the three successful new "cities" has a population smaller than that of Tiptree, I suggest we should all get behind Tiptree when the next opportunity comes.
Ipswich, a far more impressive place than Colchester or Chelmsford, gave up bidding after several attempts. Colchester should do likewise. Given that one of the three successful new "cities" has a population smaller than that of Tiptree, I suggest we should all get behind Tiptree when the next opportunity comes. Boris

1:04am Thu 15 Mar 12

Speaker182 says...

I am gutted for Colchester - the place with the history; garrison and much, much more!
Okay, so Essex has a city - although it wouldn't surprise me that it was a Tory fix.
Colchester will now forever have to bow to Chelmsford and ECC, but it doesn't stop Colchester from being the premier place in Essex.
I am gutted for Colchester - the place with the history; garrison and much, much more! Okay, so Essex has a city - although it wouldn't surprise me that it was a Tory fix. Colchester will now forever have to bow to Chelmsford and ECC, but it doesn't stop Colchester from being the premier place in Essex. Speaker182

9:40am Thu 15 Mar 12

RobWalker says...

The ultimate decision was with Nick Clegg, no doubt on advice from his civil servants.
It seems like such a bizarre decision because towns such as Reading are far larger and more deserving than Chelmsford.
I do not want Colchester becoming a satellite of Chelmsford.
The ultimate decision was with Nick Clegg, no doubt on advice from his civil servants. It seems like such a bizarre decision because towns such as Reading are far larger and more deserving than Chelmsford. I do not want Colchester becoming a satellite of Chelmsford. RobWalker

3:50pm Thu 15 Mar 12

gemkees says...

Sad but not surprising. With the debacle going on right now with the council over the future of Joyce Brooks House, Abbeygate House and others, it does not bode well to those in Westminster about how appalling some Colchester Councillors are behaving.
Sad but not surprising. With the debacle going on right now with the council over the future of Joyce Brooks House, Abbeygate House and others, it does not bode well to those in Westminster about how appalling some Colchester Councillors are behaving. gemkees

4:05pm Thu 15 Mar 12

ShallowRemarks says...

Well today is the first day of Chelmsford being a city and Colchester not, you really can feel the difference cant you?
Well today is the first day of Chelmsford being a city and Colchester not, you really can feel the difference cant you? ShallowRemarks

4:18pm Thu 15 Mar 12

Boris says...

RobWalker wrote:
The ultimate decision was with Nick Clegg, no doubt on advice from his civil servants.
It seems like such a bizarre decision because towns such as Reading are far larger and more deserving than Chelmsford.
I do not want Colchester becoming a satellite of Chelmsford.
Rob, just help to make sure we never again elect a majority of Tory councillors. Mind you, that won't make us better than Chelmsford; just different.
[quote][p][bold]RobWalker[/bold] wrote: The ultimate decision was with Nick Clegg, no doubt on advice from his civil servants. It seems like such a bizarre decision because towns such as Reading are far larger and more deserving than Chelmsford. I do not want Colchester becoming a satellite of Chelmsford.[/p][/quote]Rob, just help to make sure we never again elect a majority of Tory councillors. Mind you, that won't make us better than Chelmsford; just different. Boris

4:30pm Thu 15 Mar 12

Boris says...

gemkees wrote:
Sad but not surprising. With the debacle going on right now with the council over the future of Joyce Brooks House, Abbeygate House and others, it does not bode well to those in Westminster about how appalling some Colchester Councillors are behaving.
I'm pleased to report that this morning several of us watched an excellent play at the University about the plight of the Joyce Brooks House residents. Brilliant imitations of Tim Young, the Mayor, the Mayor's Chaplain, Bobby Hunt, etc.
Right now, Joyce Brooks House is festooned with notices saying "THIS IS OUR HOME AND WE ARE NOT MOVING". It is inspiring to see the fighting spirit of the residents, also of the students who have explained that to-day's students are to-morrow's pensioners, and that is why they put on this play.
Tim Young claims that he is "morally in the right", and that anything other than his solution would be "inappropriate".
The struggle continues, not just for Joyce Brooks House, but for sheltered housing in Colchester, all of which is now under threat.
[quote][p][bold]gemkees[/bold] wrote: Sad but not surprising. With the debacle going on right now with the council over the future of Joyce Brooks House, Abbeygate House and others, it does not bode well to those in Westminster about how appalling some Colchester Councillors are behaving.[/p][/quote]I'm pleased to report that this morning several of us watched an excellent play at the University about the plight of the Joyce Brooks House residents. Brilliant imitations of Tim Young, the Mayor, the Mayor's Chaplain, Bobby Hunt, etc. Right now, Joyce Brooks House is festooned with notices saying "THIS IS OUR HOME AND WE ARE NOT MOVING". It is inspiring to see the fighting spirit of the residents, also of the students who have explained that to-day's students are to-morrow's pensioners, and that is why they put on this play. Tim Young claims that he is "morally in the right", and that anything other than his solution would be "inappropriate". The struggle continues, not just for Joyce Brooks House, but for sheltered housing in Colchester, all of which is now under threat. Boris

5:04pm Thu 15 Mar 12

RobWalker says...

Boris wrote:
RobWalker wrote: The ultimate decision was with Nick Clegg, no doubt on advice from his civil servants. It seems like such a bizarre decision because towns such as Reading are far larger and more deserving than Chelmsford. I do not want Colchester becoming a satellite of Chelmsford.
Rob, just help to make sure we never again elect a majority of Tory councillors. Mind you, that won't make us better than Chelmsford; just different.
Well I stood last year and that seemed to help ;)
[quote][p][bold]Boris[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]RobWalker[/bold] wrote: The ultimate decision was with Nick Clegg, no doubt on advice from his civil servants. It seems like such a bizarre decision because towns such as Reading are far larger and more deserving than Chelmsford. I do not want Colchester becoming a satellite of Chelmsford.[/p][/quote]Rob, just help to make sure we never again elect a majority of Tory councillors. Mind you, that won't make us better than Chelmsford; just different.[/p][/quote]Well I stood last year and that seemed to help ;) RobWalker

1:03am Fri 16 Mar 12

Boris says...

RobWalker wrote:
Boris wrote:
RobWalker wrote: The ultimate decision was with Nick Clegg, no doubt on advice from his civil servants. It seems like such a bizarre decision because towns such as Reading are far larger and more deserving than Chelmsford. I do not want Colchester becoming a satellite of Chelmsford.
Rob, just help to make sure we never again elect a majority of Tory councillors. Mind you, that won't make us better than Chelmsford; just different.
Well I stood last year and that seemed to help ;)
Well done Rob, maybe they will find you a winnable ward one of these days. You certainly seem to be a cut above the average Tory.
[quote][p][bold]RobWalker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Boris[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]RobWalker[/bold] wrote: The ultimate decision was with Nick Clegg, no doubt on advice from his civil servants. It seems like such a bizarre decision because towns such as Reading are far larger and more deserving than Chelmsford. I do not want Colchester becoming a satellite of Chelmsford.[/p][/quote]Rob, just help to make sure we never again elect a majority of Tory councillors. Mind you, that won't make us better than Chelmsford; just different.[/p][/quote]Well I stood last year and that seemed to help ;)[/p][/quote]Well done Rob, maybe they will find you a winnable ward one of these days. You certainly seem to be a cut above the average Tory. Boris

7:01am Fri 16 Mar 12

Smouldering Ewok says...

What?
No comment from Bob Russell?
What? No comment from Bob Russell? Smouldering Ewok

8:20am Fri 16 Mar 12

hughie-s says...

Smouldering Ewok wrote:
What?
No comment from Bob Russell?
He was busy in the House....

http://tinyurl.com/6
t9dpo8


Col 384 & Col 389
[quote][p][bold]Smouldering Ewok[/bold] wrote: What? No comment from Bob Russell?[/p][/quote]He was busy in the House.... http://tinyurl.com/6 t9dpo8 Col 384 & Col 389 hughie-s

10:27am Fri 16 Mar 12

Sdapeze says...

Gemkees is right. Colchester is under the control of fools. The decision makers for the city bids must have seen that. We didn't deserve such an accolade - although I do believe that Chelmsford was better qualified to be a city than we were. Both our county town, possessing a cathedral, a seat of power, lack of squabbling councillors, bland, uninteresting to visitors, etc. What else could a city want?
Gemkees is right. Colchester is under the control of fools. The decision makers for the city bids must have seen that. We didn't deserve such an accolade - although I do believe that Chelmsford was better qualified to be a city than we were. Both our county town, possessing a cathedral, a seat of power, lack of squabbling councillors, bland, uninteresting to visitors, etc. What else could a city want? Sdapeze

10:29am Fri 16 Mar 12

Douglas Park says...

I wonder if Chelmsford's new city status will see it replace Colchester on the BBC weather map?
I wonder if Chelmsford's new city status will see it replace Colchester on the BBC weather map? Douglas Park

10:55am Fri 16 Mar 12

romantic says...

RobWalker wrote:
Boris wrote:
RobWalker wrote: The ultimate decision was with Nick Clegg, no doubt on advice from his civil servants. It seems like such a bizarre decision because towns such as Reading are far larger and more deserving than Chelmsford. I do not want Colchester becoming a satellite of Chelmsford.
Rob, just help to make sure we never again elect a majority of Tory councillors. Mind you, that won't make us better than Chelmsford; just different.
Well I stood last year and that seemed to help ;)
We need more like you!
[quote][p][bold]RobWalker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Boris[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]RobWalker[/bold] wrote: The ultimate decision was with Nick Clegg, no doubt on advice from his civil servants. It seems like such a bizarre decision because towns such as Reading are far larger and more deserving than Chelmsford. I do not want Colchester becoming a satellite of Chelmsford.[/p][/quote]Rob, just help to make sure we never again elect a majority of Tory councillors. Mind you, that won't make us better than Chelmsford; just different.[/p][/quote]Well I stood last year and that seemed to help ;)[/p][/quote]We need more like you! romantic

11:53am Fri 16 Mar 12

RobWalker says...

Thanks very much Boris and romantic. Personally I think we need more people who contribute to this website to stand in elections. There is a large amount of informed opinion, common sense and genuine political discussion here.
Thanks very much Boris and romantic. Personally I think we need more people who contribute to this website to stand in elections. There is a large amount of informed opinion, common sense and genuine political discussion here. RobWalker

12:49pm Fri 16 Mar 12

Sdapeze says...

People vote for parties - not individuals Rob. Common sense has no place in it. Were I to stand for election, the press would have a field day with my past.
People vote for parties - not individuals Rob. Common sense has no place in it. Were I to stand for election, the press would have a field day with my past. Sdapeze

1:29pm Fri 16 Mar 12

RobWalker says...

Sdapeze wrote:
People vote for parties - not individuals Rob. Common sense has no place in it. Were I to stand for election, the press would have a field day with my past.
I think a lot of people vote for individuals if they have a choice, rather than for rosettes on cardboard cut-outs.
People are interested in someone's history for sure, but where you are now is more important.
[quote][p][bold]Sdapeze[/bold] wrote: People vote for parties - not individuals Rob. Common sense has no place in it. Were I to stand for election, the press would have a field day with my past.[/p][/quote]I think a lot of people vote for individuals if they have a choice, rather than for rosettes on cardboard cut-outs. People are interested in someone's history for sure, but where you are now is more important. RobWalker

10:01pm Fri 16 Mar 12

Boris says...

RobWalker wrote:
Sdapeze wrote:
People vote for parties - not individuals Rob. Common sense has no place in it. Were I to stand for election, the press would have a field day with my past.
I think a lot of people vote for individuals if they have a choice, rather than for rosettes on cardboard cut-outs.
People are interested in someone's history for sure, but where you are now is more important.
If you stand as an independent, you might get 10% or 15% of the vote, but you will not get elected. Sdapeze is right, most people vote for parties and not individuals. There have been exceptions, like the doctor who was elected to parliament in Kidderminster, but they are very rare.
Standing for election without a party organisation to back you is extremely hard work. With no real prospect of success, most people will say no.
[quote][p][bold]RobWalker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Sdapeze[/bold] wrote: People vote for parties - not individuals Rob. Common sense has no place in it. Were I to stand for election, the press would have a field day with my past.[/p][/quote]I think a lot of people vote for individuals if they have a choice, rather than for rosettes on cardboard cut-outs. People are interested in someone's history for sure, but where you are now is more important.[/p][/quote]If you stand as an independent, you might get 10% or 15% of the vote, but you will not get elected. Sdapeze is right, most people vote for parties and not individuals. There have been exceptions, like the doctor who was elected to parliament in Kidderminster, but they are very rare. Standing for election without a party organisation to back you is extremely hard work. With no real prospect of success, most people will say no. Boris

10:32pm Fri 16 Mar 12

RobWalker says...

Boris wrote:
RobWalker wrote:
Sdapeze wrote:
People vote for parties - not individuals Rob. Common sense has no place in it. Were I to stand for election, the press would have a field day with my past.
I think a lot of people vote for individuals if they have a choice, rather than for rosettes on cardboard cut-outs.
People are interested in someone's history for sure, but where you are now is more important.
If you stand as an independent, you might get 10% or 15% of the vote, but you will not get elected. Sdapeze is right, most people vote for parties and not individuals. There have been exceptions, like the doctor who was elected to parliament in Kidderminster, but they are very rare.
Standing for election without a party organisation to back you is extremely hard work. With no real prospect of success, most people will say no.
You don't have to stand as an independent to be independently minded, although I agree it is rare unfortunately.
[quote][p][bold]Boris[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]RobWalker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Sdapeze[/bold] wrote: People vote for parties - not individuals Rob. Common sense has no place in it. Were I to stand for election, the press would have a field day with my past.[/p][/quote]I think a lot of people vote for individuals if they have a choice, rather than for rosettes on cardboard cut-outs. People are interested in someone's history for sure, but where you are now is more important.[/p][/quote]If you stand as an independent, you might get 10% or 15% of the vote, but you will not get elected. Sdapeze is right, most people vote for parties and not individuals. There have been exceptions, like the doctor who was elected to parliament in Kidderminster, but they are very rare. Standing for election without a party organisation to back you is extremely hard work. With no real prospect of success, most people will say no.[/p][/quote]You don't have to stand as an independent to be independently minded, although I agree it is rare unfortunately. RobWalker

11:24pm Fri 16 Mar 12

newtactic says...

At least Essex has a city at last and the focus is on the only county in England to have a new city created this year. We could blame a certain political party for failing to support Colchester's bid. Let's hope the whole county benefits from this. Let's also hope that our county town and new city is so delighted it will now spend an adequate proportion of its budget on Colchester. It has been noticeable since ECC has taken over certain services from the CBC (for instance Highways) that spend and standards seem to have been reduced.
At least Essex has a city at last and the focus is on the only county in England to have a new city created this year. We could blame a certain political party for failing to support Colchester's bid. Let's hope the whole county benefits from this. Let's also hope that our county town and new city is so delighted it will now spend an adequate proportion of its budget on Colchester. It has been noticeable since ECC has taken over certain services from the CBC (for instance Highways) that spend and standards seem to have been reduced. newtactic

4:10pm Sat 17 Mar 12

6079 Smith W says...

RobWalker wrote:
Boris wrote:
RobWalker wrote:
Sdapeze wrote:
People vote for parties - not individuals Rob. Common sense has no place in it. Were I to stand for election, the press would have a field day with my past.
I think a lot of people vote for individuals if they have a choice, rather than for rosettes on cardboard cut-outs.
People are interested in someone's history for sure, but where you are now is more important.
If you stand as an independent, you might get 10% or 15% of the vote, but you will not get elected. Sdapeze is right, most people vote for parties and not individuals. There have been exceptions, like the doctor who was elected to parliament in Kidderminster, but they are very rare.
Standing for election without a party organisation to back you is extremely hard work. With no real prospect of success, most people will say no.
You don't have to stand as an independent to be independently minded, although I agree it is rare unfortunately.
Rob, do you mean it is rare that independents get elected, or that it is rare to find the independently minded within the party machine? Sadly, I'd say both are too true.
[quote][p][bold]RobWalker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Boris[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]RobWalker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Sdapeze[/bold] wrote: People vote for parties - not individuals Rob. Common sense has no place in it. Were I to stand for election, the press would have a field day with my past.[/p][/quote]I think a lot of people vote for individuals if they have a choice, rather than for rosettes on cardboard cut-outs. People are interested in someone's history for sure, but where you are now is more important.[/p][/quote]If you stand as an independent, you might get 10% or 15% of the vote, but you will not get elected. Sdapeze is right, most people vote for parties and not individuals. There have been exceptions, like the doctor who was elected to parliament in Kidderminster, but they are very rare. Standing for election without a party organisation to back you is extremely hard work. With no real prospect of success, most people will say no.[/p][/quote]You don't have to stand as an independent to be independently minded, although I agree it is rare unfortunately.[/p][/quote]Rob, do you mean it is rare that independents get elected, or that it is rare to find the independently minded within the party machine? Sadly, I'd say both are too true. 6079 Smith W

6:53pm Sat 17 Mar 12

RobWalker says...

6079 Smith W wrote:
RobWalker wrote:
Boris wrote:
RobWalker wrote:
Sdapeze wrote:
People vote for parties - not individuals Rob. Common sense has no place in it. Were I to stand for election, the press would have a field day with my past.
I think a lot of people vote for individuals if they have a choice, rather than for rosettes on cardboard cut-outs.
People are interested in someone's history for sure, but where you are now is more important.
If you stand as an independent, you might get 10% or 15% of the vote, but you will not get elected. Sdapeze is right, most people vote for parties and not individuals. There have been exceptions, like the doctor who was elected to parliament in Kidderminster, but they are very rare.
Standing for election without a party organisation to back you is extremely hard work. With no real prospect of success, most people will say no.
You don't have to stand as an independent to be independently minded, although I agree it is rare unfortunately.
Rob, do you mean it is rare that independents get elected, or that it is rare to find the independently minded within the party machine? Sadly, I'd say both are too true.
It's rare for people once elected to use their individual judgement or conscience because of the pressure to behave as directed. Some become like lobbyists within their own party to move it in a particular direction, others become more interested in personal advancement, but most become a bit of both.
I think we have three main parties with similar policies on most issues - the only real difference being the spin and buzz words used. I think people want their representatives to think more independently and behave like real people not actors being fed lines.
More free votes that are not whipped along party lines will help.
[quote][p][bold]6079 Smith W[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]RobWalker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Boris[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]RobWalker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Sdapeze[/bold] wrote: People vote for parties - not individuals Rob. Common sense has no place in it. Were I to stand for election, the press would have a field day with my past.[/p][/quote]I think a lot of people vote for individuals if they have a choice, rather than for rosettes on cardboard cut-outs. People are interested in someone's history for sure, but where you are now is more important.[/p][/quote]If you stand as an independent, you might get 10% or 15% of the vote, but you will not get elected. Sdapeze is right, most people vote for parties and not individuals. There have been exceptions, like the doctor who was elected to parliament in Kidderminster, but they are very rare. Standing for election without a party organisation to back you is extremely hard work. With no real prospect of success, most people will say no.[/p][/quote]You don't have to stand as an independent to be independently minded, although I agree it is rare unfortunately.[/p][/quote]Rob, do you mean it is rare that independents get elected, or that it is rare to find the independently minded within the party machine? Sadly, I'd say both are too true.[/p][/quote]It's rare for people once elected to use their individual judgement or conscience because of the pressure to behave as directed. Some become like lobbyists within their own party to move it in a particular direction, others become more interested in personal advancement, but most become a bit of both. I think we have three main parties with similar policies on most issues - the only real difference being the spin and buzz words used. I think people want their representatives to think more independently and behave like real people not actors being fed lines. More free votes that are not whipped along party lines will help. RobWalker

7:32pm Sat 17 Mar 12

6079 Smith W says...

Thanks Rob, a very thoughtful and interesting answer, and I'd have to agree with pretty much everything you've said. I can remember us before discussing on here, the really dangerous democrat deficit created by New Labour's Tory party mark II project. Yes, I'm sure people want their representatives to be more independently minded, and that's why there were those of us who applauded Bob during the first six months of coalition, but have lost all faith in him now. He will learn that harsh reality at the next election, and as I've said before, if we're going to have a Tory MP, I'd rather one who'd actually stood as a Tory (sorry Boris)!
Thanks Rob, a very thoughtful and interesting answer, and I'd have to agree with pretty much everything you've said. I can remember us before discussing on here, the really dangerous democrat deficit created by New Labour's Tory party mark II project. Yes, I'm sure people want their representatives to be more independently minded, and that's why there were those of us who applauded Bob during the first six months of coalition, but have lost all faith in him now. He will learn that harsh reality at the next election, and as I've said before, if we're going to have a Tory MP, I'd rather one who'd actually stood as a Tory (sorry Boris)! 6079 Smith W

7:43pm Sat 17 Mar 12

Yendor says says...

Beautiful .... time for a group hug everyone ??
Beautiful .... time for a group hug everyone ?? Yendor says

12:58am Sun 18 Mar 12

wellnow says...

oh rodney wants a hug.
oh rodney wants a hug. wellnow

7:40am Sun 18 Mar 12

Yendor says says...

Oh wellnow you plonker .... we have been there before ....
Oh wellnow you plonker .... we have been there before .... Yendor says

9:07pm Mon 19 Mar 12

6079 Smith W says...

Yendor says wrote:
Beautiful .... time for a group hug everyone ??
I'm not surprised this is a bit beyond you (and you even manage to built wellnow in terms of pig ignorance, and he's incapable of capital letters), but it is possible for those of us with different opinions to have a rational discussion. But don't forget, if you actually bother to exercise that brain of yours, you could also join in. Though it does mean a bit more effort, than merely spouting the spoon fed nonsense of others so preferred by those of an ovine nature.
[quote][p][bold]Yendor says[/bold] wrote: Beautiful .... time for a group hug everyone ??[/p][/quote]I'm not surprised this is a bit beyond you (and you even manage to built wellnow in terms of pig ignorance, and he's incapable of capital letters), but it is possible for those of us with different opinions to have a rational discussion. But don't forget, if you actually bother to exercise that brain of yours, you could also join in. Though it does mean a bit more effort, than merely spouting the spoon fed nonsense of others so preferred by those of an ovine nature. 6079 Smith W

1:42am Tue 20 Mar 12

Tramper1962 says...

Glad that the plan has been shot down. Glad too that the choice did not come to Colchester.
The stupidest place that has a dumb council that come up with the most dumbest of thoughts.
And for all you lot out there that thought I was out of order by stating why we should not become a city.
Well I gues the egg is all in your faces. Cause we knew that we would not get it.
Why this place is so ran down, so badly ran. Why would anyone want to make it a city?
Glad that the plan has been shot down. Glad too that the choice did not come to Colchester. The stupidest place that has a dumb council that come up with the most dumbest of thoughts. And for all you lot out there that thought I was out of order by stating why we should not become a city. Well I gues the egg is all in your faces. Cause we knew that we would not get it. Why this place is so ran down, so badly ran. Why would anyone want to make it a city? Tramper1962

5:23pm Tue 20 Mar 12

jacklumber1 says...

Should we be pleased to know that Colchester's MP Sir Bob has, according to ''TheyWorkForYou'' just put forward two written questions to ask 1) Who is on the Committee deciding where a town becomes a City? 2) On what basis do they make their decision? Isn't this a bit too late? Had Sir Bob obtained this information before the decision was made then he could have used that knowledge to ensure Colchester's bid was more effective! No good bleating after Colchester's bid has failed!
Should we be pleased to know that Colchester's MP Sir Bob has, according to ''TheyWorkForYou'' just put forward two written questions to ask 1) Who is on the Committee deciding where a town becomes a City? 2) On what basis do they make their decision? Isn't this a bit too late? Had Sir Bob obtained this information before the decision was made then he could have used that knowledge to ensure Colchester's bid was more effective! No good bleating after Colchester's bid has failed! jacklumber1

3:01am Wed 21 Mar 12

citycommuter says...

Sadly Colchester does not deserve any award, the Town cleanliness , traffic management, planning , infrastructure, influx of immigrants, constant violent behaviour, degradation of our historic shoppng areas, are all a complete disgrace. We talk the talk but do not walk the walk anymore.
I have lived here all my adult life including serving here for 10 very fulfilling years as part of my Police Service but I am no longer proud to be associated with Colchester - it is time to wake up and look around you, as other Towns such as Chelmsford leave us way behind.
I do however applaud the tough action of the new Police Commander & wish him every success.
Sadly Colchester does not deserve any award, the Town cleanliness , traffic management, planning , infrastructure, influx of immigrants, constant violent behaviour, degradation of our historic shoppng areas, are all a complete disgrace. We talk the talk but do not walk the walk anymore. I have lived here all my adult life including serving here for 10 very fulfilling years as part of my Police Service but I am no longer proud to be associated with Colchester - it is time to wake up and look around you, as other Towns such as Chelmsford leave us way behind. I do however applaud the tough action of the new Police Commander & wish him every success. citycommuter

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree