Talk:Salfords

Monotype Corporation "Rifle" Factory
Monotype did, briefly, produce machine gun parts at Salfords during the first world war. But it was never a "rifle factory". Bagunceiro (talk) 12:51, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Reason for district change
This parish was originally to be in Mole Valley under the LGA1972, but the the Charlwood and Horley Act 1974 changed this to be part of Reigate and Banstead... why? 194.66.226.95 17:52, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Per the local government minister in 1974 (Con): "there was strong local reaction from Horley to stay in Surrey, even if it meant that Horley was separated from the airport." ... "The part of Horley now to be returned [to Surrey] is to be a new parish forming part of the new district of Reigate and Banstead".  Put simply, Mole Valley district council did not wish to take Horley: Reigate and Banstead council were persuaded by the Minister (actually I think I know the people it could have been advising in his department).  So Salfords and Sidlow would almost become a stand-alone eastern salient of Mole Valley with only a tiny border to the rest.  Horley would become an exclave of Reigate and Banstead so the above two effects were resolved to grow Reigate and Banstead (a lot).


 * In language in a Freudian slip way which was pompous about Horley and about Bangladesh's independence the minister said "The new parish of Salfords and Sidlow, created by the 1972 Act, will go with Horley into the district of Reigate and Banstead. If we are not to have a sort of Bangladesh situation in [Horley] [see Bangladesh Independence War], it is necessary for Salfords and Sidlow to be transferred to that district." House of Commons 1973-11-13


 * In realpolitik, the Minister's sympathy with the unwillingness of Mole Valley to countenance urbanising their district with quite frankly far more social housing than any other part of its district per acre, with more hideous unfinished concreted roads/Gatwick flyovers (to boot) in the far west of Horley, prevailed. This meant Horley (less its Airport) had to go into Reigate and Banstead as did Salfords and Sidlow, both at the foot of the valley of the river Mole, and no matter what relatively middle class landowners of Salfords and Sidlow may have wanted in elitism they would also go to Reigate and Banstead, which would therefore work out as a very interesting sort of district: Horley would top up its eastern council housing with some southern council housing.  This would hopefully be totally offset by the castle town, beautiful Georgian, Victorian and Edwardian planned roads of Reigate and Banstead themselves, tons of middle income and upper income homes on the widest part of the North Downs (Tadworth and Kingswood), and borough status connected to the terrifically ingrained history of Reigate in the public psyche - Reigate Foreign and Reigate Borough together covered more than 10,000 acres or 4 square miles and on strategic routes, with a castle and a seat in Westminster, so many rich people have flocked there than any part of Dorking/Leatherhead in history.  In simple terms such a rich place could afford a bit of poor long-term on the side.  Which might eventually less deprived as anti-wealth measures and anti-low wage measures feed in as they have somewhat (eg IHT, Right to Buy, Minimum Wage). Similar social engineering mixed-wealth plans have won the way from Kensington to Scotland and are a testament to Third Way neo-socialism, one economic society.  So the ultimate reason is togetherness and all politicians have to accepted that to a degree and won broad appeal.   However the Conservative's Local Government Act 1974 was to ensure party-political entrenchment on most councils and hence why central government must distribute so much wealth.  This useful function is the role institutions of religion used to achieve alone.


 * The alternatives would under-balance a housing estate leading to ultra-economic liberalism and disparity with social breakdown. As capital is 'hoarded at the top' a social onus is from those accumulating instead to alleviate hunger, eradicate infectious disease and curb population explosions else entrench poverty; whether some of them have studied history and want the best for humanity is dubious.  This leads to the rationale: you can trust a neutral hand more with fair borders than you can wealthy or poor outspoken 'local people and politicians' who perpetuate matters.-  Adam37   Talk  20:03, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * And articles on odd social map interpretations, such as civil parishes spanning two different settlements and 'rich belts/other journalese' are superfluous; they do not meet WP:N in my view. Constructs such as Greater London Urban Area are purged.  As for the amorphous 'London Commuter Belt' please look to consensus instead - editors delete that at will in prose and quite rightly. -  Adam37   Talk  20:19, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Salfords. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080626120127/http://www.salfordscc.co.uk/jambla/ to http://www.salfordscc.co.uk/jambla/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110927211614/http://www.surrey.police.uk/news_item.asp?area=3&itemID=13508&division= to http://www.surrey.police.uk/news_item.asp?area=3&itemID=13508&division=
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081121051617/http://www.salfordscc.co.uk/jambla/content/view/13/28/ to http://www.salfordscc.co.uk/jambla/content/view/13/28/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 13:15, 3 December 2017 (UTC)