Wolverhampton NOT a city, says think-tank
'Ludicrous.' That was the verdict of a stunned council leader after hearing that Wolverhampton is not considered to be a city by a leading economic think-tank, based on its 'economic activity'.
Wolverhampton has been a city for 16 years, but has not been recognised as such by the London-based Centre for Cities, which describes itself as 'an independent, non-partisan think tank dedicated to understanding and improving city economies'.
Wolverhampton does not make the list of 63 'primary urban areas' highlighted, but the list includes smaller towns including Telford, Chatham, Wigan and Reading.
The Centre for Cities considers itself 'the first port of call' for UK and international decision makers seeking to boost city economies.
It has recently undertaken a review of which locations it considers as cities based on the concentration of economic activity.
It will consider Wolverhampton part of Birmingham in its workings moving forward, despite it being awarded city status alongside two other 'Millennium Cities'.
Civic leaders have expressed their disappointment at Wolverhampton's omission from the list.
Leader of Wolverhampton council, Councillor Roger Lawrence, said: "This is irritating, but I don't think anyone should lose any sleep over the fact a think tank chooses to use this ludicrous methodology.
"I have been taking issue with the Centre for Cities about for the past decade. They know my feelings on the matter very well.
"Wolverhampton and the Black Country deserve to be recognised and there are plenty of other think tanks out there that do."
Wolverhampton South West MP, Rob Marris, added: "If the Centre for Cities have decided that Wolverhampton is not a city then it make me question their name.
"Telford is somewhere for which I have affection and respect. It makes the list but it is not a city.
"It makes me wonder whether the Centre for Cities knows what it is doing."
On its website the Centre for Cities claims in 2016 it will continue to lead the debate on the devolution of powers and responsibilities to UK city-regions.
It was first launched in 2005, is an official partner of the New Statesman and both a registered charity and company.
But it has never considered Wolverhampton as a stand-alone city.
The think tank worked alongside the Centre for Urban and Regional Development Studies at Newcastle University to update its list of 'primary urban areas', which will form the basis of the centre's work from 2016 onward.
Despite several changes, Wolverhampton still does not appear on the list.
Alexandra Jones, Chief Executive of Centre for Cities, said: "There are lots of ways of defining a city but, as an economics think tank, our focus is on identifying where large concentrations of economic activity take place.
"Because Wolverhampton is very close to Birmingham and the built-up areas of both places overlap, they count as one city economy under the PUA system, even though they are otherwise classed as separate cities and continue to have their own distinctive civic identities. This kind of combination can also be seen in other parts of the country – for example, our definition of Greater Manchester includes Bolton and Rochdale, which in other ways can be considered as distinct, individual cities."
It was confirmed in November that a West Midlands Combined Authority would be created and the region will have an elected mayor.
But the name 'Greater Birmingham' was scrapped amid concerns about areas within the West Midlands losing their unique identities.
