Hyndburn to be axed.

[Ianto.W.]

Originally Posted by garinda

Thanks for that very interesting information Graham.

I don't know why, but I have a picture in my head of that other megalomaniac Nero, who played his fiddle whilst Rome burned.

Full costings of this proposed name change should be made public, and then a proper decision can be made.

If you look at old pictures drawings gary the likenness to Nero is striking
This cretin need s stopping now how can one person have so much power is it the indepenents that are the monkey in the woodpile?

[Wynonie Harris]

Originally Posted by WillowTheWhisp

What possible advantage can it be?

Far better for the image of the borough to have a well-known name than the monicker of an anonymous river which is renowned for its stink locally and totally unknown outside the confines of East Lancashire.

[garinda]

Originally Posted by Wynonie Harris

Far better for the image of the borough to have a well-known name than the monicker of an anonymous river which is renowned for its stink locally and totally unknown outside the confines of East Lancashire.

...and when in the course of your daily conversations do you use the political name of the borough?

[Wynonie Harris]

I don't but I'm not looking to attract inward investment or grants to the area or to promote the borough generally. Names/first impressions/image counts for a lot in today's media-conscious world.

[garinda]

Originally Posted by Wynonie Harris

I don't but I'm not looking to attract inward investment or grants to the area or to promote the borough generally. Names/first impressions/image counts for a lot in today's media-conscious world.

Trust me, I know all about marketing, certainly more than this shower.

In my opinion changing the name of the borough will not make one iota of difference in attracting investment to the area. Indeed changing the name again, after thirty three years, may very well have the opposite affect.

[Gayle]

I'm sorry that's not a good enough point Wynonie - the public agencies and investors all know exactly where Hyndburn is. It is not the name that is stopping people from investing here.

I stand by my earlier point that if you wanted to promote the area as a place to invest a business there is no reason to mention Hyndburn. You could easily produce a brochure called 'Accrington and surrounding districts' - there is no legal reason why the council would have to promote the area as Hyndburn. It is a purely administrative name and an extremely fair one at that for all the surrounding towns.

[Wynonie Harris]

Originally Posted by Gayle

the public agencies and investors all know exactly where Hyndburn is.

Do they?...not in my experience, they don't. Recognised brand names are worth their weight in gold these days - that's why they're all protected by trademark patents. To casually discard a well-known name like Accrington for the anonymity of Hyndburn was a thoroughly bad decision all those years ago. Time to redress the balance!

[Gayle]

Originally Posted by Wynonie Harris

Do they?...not in my experience, they don't. Recognised brand names are worth their weight in gold these days - that's why they're all protected by trademark patents. To casually discard a well-known name like Accrington for the anonymity of Hyndburn was a thoroughly bad decision all those years ago. Time to redress the balance!

Accrington has never gone away. It was and always will be called Accrington, it wasn't renamed at all. This will not redress the balance this will further diminish the value of other towns in the borough.

When Hyndburn was formed, all of the eight towns had individual town councils but they banded together to form one large district. Accrington has never been discarded.

[Wynonie Harris]

The name of the pre-1973 borough was Accrington

The name of the post-1973 borough (admittedly expanded to take in a number of smaller surrounding towns) is Hyndburn.

In my view, that's replacing it.

The name of the borough in a few months time will hopefully be Accrington & Districts. Personally, I'd prefer just a simple Accrington, but I'd much rather have Accrington & Districts than Hyndburn!

[Gayle]

Originally Posted by Wynonie Harris

The name of the pre-1973 borough was Accrington

The name of the town was Accrington. The only other area that it encompassed was Huncoat as far as I can see on the records I've found. Other towns remained individual i.e. Oswaldtwistle, Gt Harwood, Rishton, Clayton and Baxenden - these were not part of Accrington pre-1973. I can't quite see from the maps about Church, whether it was or wasn't.

Originally Posted by Wynonie Harris

The name of the post-1973 borough (admittedly expanded to take in a number of smaller surrounding towns) is Hyndburn.


In my view, that's replacing it.

This was not a replacement - this was the towns coming together to form one larger district. By coming together this gave them more political power.

Originally Posted by Wynonie Harris

The name of the borough in a few months time will hopefully be Accrington & Districts. Personally, I'd prefer just a simple Accrington, but I'd much rather have Accrington & Districts than Hyndburn!

That's outrageous - you can not change the names of all the towns within Hyndburn to Accrington! Oswaldtwistle, Great Harwood, Rishton, Clayton and Baxenden might well come under the administrative title of Hyndburn but they have never been part of Accrington!!!!!

[Neil]

Originally Posted by Gayle

That's outrageous - you can not change the names of all the towns within Hyndburn to Accrington! Oswaldtwistle, Great Harwood, Rishton, Clayton and Baxenden might well come under the administrative title of Hyndburn but they have never been part of Accrington!!!!!

No one is suggesting that Gayle. Look over in Blackburn with Darwen. Many other towns and villages are part of Blackburn with Darwen but they come under that collective name.

I am not saying I am for or against the name change by the way.

[Gayle]

Originally Posted by Neil

No one is suggesting that Gayle. Look over in Blackburn with Darwen. Many other towns and villages are part of Blackburn with Darwen but they come under that collective name.

I am not saying I am for or against the name change by the way.

Yes, of Blackburn and Darwen. These where the two town councils that came together to form the one borough which is why the borough has both names in its title. With Hyndburn it was a bigger problem because there were eight towns that came together to make Hyndburn so it couldn't be called Accrington with Oswaldtwistle, Gt Harwood, Rishton etc - that's why they came up with the all encompassing name of Hyndburn.

They had the same issue as Hyndburn with Rawtenstall, Bacup, Haslingden, etc which is why they settled on Rossendale. There was a similar issue with Clitheroe, Whalley, Ribchester etc which is why they gave it the name Ribble Valley.

[Wynonie Harris]

Originally Posted by Gayle

That's outrageous - you can not change the names of all the towns within Hyndburn to Accrington! Oswaldtwistle, Great Harwood, Rishton, Clayton and Baxenden might well come under the administrative title of Hyndburn but they have never been part of Accrington!!!!!

Nothing outrageous about it at all - Huncoat was once an indepedent town but was incorporated into the borough of Accrington in 1928. Other towns incorporate surrounding towns under their name. The Metropolitan Borough of Stockport includes numerous towns such as Bramhall, Hazel Grove, Poynton and many others - I'm not aware of the residents of these towns feeling outraged.

[Wynonie Harris]

And, incidentally, Gayle, as far as I'm aware, Baxenden has always been part of Accrington!

[Neil]

The Metropolitan Borough of Accrington does have a nice ring to it