On 30 Jun 2006 16:44:34 -0700, wrote:


Charles Ellson wrote:
On 30 Jun 2006 10:42:51 -0700, wrote:

IMU no local
authority devoid of subsidiary authorities is currently classified as
a "county" for local government purposes, although other bits of
officialdom or semi-officialdom might continue to do so.
--
_______
Isn't the Isle of Wight a County devoid of subsidiary components?

The only current mention of "county" seems to be in the name of their
HQ which seems to be basically a case of not "fixing" an established
address. It has actually got "subsidiary authorities" in the form of
town/community councils (which I'd forgotten about) but not in the
form which I had in mind of authorities which provide day-to-day
council services (e.g. roads, rubbish, welfare, etc.).
--
_______
+---------------------------------------------------+ |\\ //|
| Charles Ellson: | | \\ // |
+---------------------------------------------------+ | |
| // \\ |
Alba gu brath |//___\\|

On 30 Jun 2006 16:41:09 -0700, wrote:

snip

Thank you for expalaining that the Scottish regions have gone. They
never seamed very meaningful to me. I much preferred the counties.
Are the counties back?

All are now single tier "Councils" in "Council Areas", some of which
bear a remarkable similarity to the traditional cities and counties.

What happened to Strathclyde?

Generally, functions passed to what were the district councils with
"joint boards" (formed with reps from councils) to manage what
remained from districts+regions days, mainly fire and police.

Am I right in thinking there is still a Strathclyde PTE?

No, there's now a "son of", see:-
http://www.spt.co.uk/about/index.html
although there's possibly not much difference to the passengers.

The only "next-nearest-to-a-PTE" (buses-only public authority
transport operator) in Scotland seems now to be trading as Lothian
Buses:-
http://www.lothianbuses.co.uk/
which unless I've missed something is the jointly-owned (East, West
and Mid-Lothian councils) Lothian Region Transport in disguise.

--
_______
+---------------------------------------------------+ |\\ //|
| Charles Ellson: | | \\ // |
+---------------------------------------------------+ | |
| // \\ |
Alba gu brath |//___\\|

In article . com writes:
Richard M Willis wrote:
Surely, counties are not needed at all on postal addresses ?
All I usually give is

Persun's Name
xxx StreetName
postcode

It is a while since I have seen a Royal Mail Manual covering the
subject. It used to state that Counties are required followed the Post
Town with exceptions. The list of exceptions was very long.

Ah, in the Netherlands it is much easier. Postal code plus house number is
sufficient to get the mail delivered. So when you look at my signature
it is overcomplete. 1025 JN 215 is enough to deliver without any further
indication, you do not even need to state my name.
--
dik t. winter, cwi, kruislaan 413, 1098 sj amsterdam, nederland, +31205924131
home: bovenover 215, 1025 jn amsterdam, nederland; http://www.cwi.nl/~dik/

On Sat, 1 Jul 2006 01:26:04 GMT, "Dik T. Winter"
wrote:

In article . com writes:
Richard M Willis wrote:
Surely, counties are not needed at all on postal addresses ?
All I usually give is

Persun's Name
xxx StreetName
postcode

It is a while since I have seen a Royal Mail Manual covering the
subject. It used to state that Counties are required followed the Post
Town with exceptions. The list of exceptions was very long.

Ah, in the Netherlands it is much easier. Postal code plus house number is
sufficient to get the mail delivered. So when you look at my signature
it is overcomplete. 1025 JN 215 is enough to deliver without any further
indication, you do not even need to state my name.

In most cases postcode and house number will get a letter delivered in
the UK but one single simple error can send the letter somewhere very
different. The postcode is principally a device for Royal Mail's use
and is not readily translatable by the majority of people whereas an
address has much wider usage. In the absence any other public
authority defining addresses in a uniform manner it is the RM
definition which in practice has universal usage when premises need to
be located, but minimising the presented information increases the
risk of confusion of same- or similatly-names places. Although the
county is not regarded by RM as a required address detail it still
exists within the RM system, usually seen as a deciding detail where a
postcode is requested for an address in a place whose name is not
unique or is almost the same as another place elsewhere in the
country.
--
_______
+---------------------------------------------------+ |\\ //|
| Charles Ellson: | | \\ // |
+---------------------------------------------------+ | |
| // \\ |
Alba gu brath |//___\\|

On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 23:53:57 +0100, Charles Ellson
wrote:

What happened to the publication "Nicholson's London Streetfinder"?

Probably now branded as "Collins" (if still published), my 1995
Nicholson Greater London Street Atlas carrying the information "a
division of HarperCollinsPublishers [sic]".

I think it's still published as the Collins street atlas. The A5-ish
version covers a slightly different area to the similarly-sized A-Z,
it includes more of the SW London/Surrey bit and a bit less of North
London. Or it did when I lived in New Malden.

On Thu, 29 Jun 2006 23:15:53 +0100, "John Rowland"
wrote:

Ned Carlson wrote:

What I'm wondering, is HTF did apostrophes get into the
English language, anyway? None of its ancestor/contributing
languages (Anglo-Saxon, Norse, French, Celtic) use or
used apostrophes, did they?

Modern Dutch uses apostrophes in the plural of certain (or all?) nouns
ending in a long single vowel, such as "2 taxi's" or "3 piano's".

So does English...

German uses the apostrophe for the possessive of personal nouns,
rather like english, eg Adolf's.

"Phil Clark" wrote:
Modern Dutch uses apostrophes in the plural of certain (or all?) nouns
ending in a long single vowel, such as "2 taxi's" or "3 piano's".

So does English...

No it doesn't.

--
"For want of the price of tea and a slice, the old man died."

wrote:
On Thu, 29 Jun 2006 21:46:48 GMT, Richard J. wrote:

UK postal addresses now need the county to be included.

If you're going to quote me, then at least do so competently.
That should read "No UK postal addresses now need the county ...".

I find it irritating when websites ask for your address with the
county as a mandatory field. Many of them will not accept an
address in the form 123 Xyz Road, London, [postcode]. You are
forced either to enter London twice or to insert an unnecessary
district name such as Acton in place of the town name.

Which is absurd as Greater London is *not* an administrative county.

Irrelevant, as we're talking about postal counties, and of course London
isn't one of those either.
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

"Charles Ellson" wrote
There's a certain amount of Alice in
Wonderland in the way that descriptions and definitions are used in
English local government arrangements nowadays.

I have to agree with you on that!

"Charles Ellson" wrote
wrote:
Charles Ellson wrote:
wrote:
IMU no local
authority devoid of subsidiary authorities is currently classified as
a "county" for local government purposes, although other bits of
officialdom or semi-officialdom might continue to do so.
Isn't the Isle of Wight a County devoid of subsidiary components?
The only current mention of "county" seems to be in the name of their
HQ which seems to be basically a case of not "fixing" an established
address. It has actually got "subsidiary authorities" in the form of
town/community councils (which I'd forgotten about) but not in the
form which I had in mind of authorities which provide day-to-day
council services (e.g. roads, rubbish, welfare, etc.).

I think some parish and district councillors might get upset at the
suggestion that their councils are in any way subsidiary to the council of
the county in which they are located. Although county, district and parish
councils (community councils in Wales) are sometimes described as 1st, 2nd
and 3rd tier authorities, they are independent in terms of their
decision-making and precept setting, not being answerable to the tier or
tiers above them.