Burgh says no to Glas­gow rule

Ru­glo­ni­ans re­ject web­site view

Rutherglen Reformer - - School News - Dou­glas Dickie

Ru­glo­ni­ans have taken to the in­ter­net to once again warn against any at­tempts to take the town back into Glas­gow City Coun­cil.

Dozens com­mented on the pop­u­lar Ruther­glen Face­book page last week when an ar­ti­cle from 2012 resur­faced, say­ing the Burgh should once again be part of Glas­gow.

The au­thor, Ruther­glen na­tive Gary Brown, ar­gued that the town would ben­e­fit from be­ing part of Glas­gow through tourism.

He also said that many Ru­glo­ni­ans of a cer­tain gen­er­a­tion look at them­selves as Glaswe­gian, hav­ing grown up when the town was part of the city.

But the vast ma­jor­ity have once again re­jected that idea.

One per­son wrote: “When Glas­gow an­nexed us they used its au­thor­ity to com­pul­sory pur­chase fam­ily lands three times in thirty years ( 19781992).

“They moved na­tives from their homes and broke up clan so­cial struc­ture. The last thing any na­tive son of Ruther­glen wants is to be back un­der Glas­gow’s jack­boot.”

An­other wrote: “Glas­gow treated us with ut­ter con­tempt. The boarded-up Town Hall was a sym­bol of that. It was no co­in­ci­dence that there was an all­party sup­port to get us out of Glas­gow and into South La­nark­shire.”

That was a view echoed by many oth­ers, in­clud­ing one per­son who said: “I re­mem­ber when Ruther­glen be­came part of Glas­gow and, even as an eight-year-old boy grow­ing up in East­field, I was gut­ted at be­ing forced to be Glaswe­gian.

“I was al­ways Ru­glo­nian and proud of it too. I was part of some­thing spe­cial un­til we joined Glas­gow.”

The is­sue has raised its head sev­eral times since Ruther­glen and Cam­bus­lang were taken out of Glas­gow in 1996 and be­came part of South La­nark­shire Coun­cil.

The two towns had been part of Glas­gow from 1975.

Dur­ing that time many lo­cals felt the towns lost their in­de­pen­dence and suf­fered ne­glect, with the de­cay of the town hall be­com­ing syn­ony­mous with a gen­eral de­cline.

A high-pro­file cam­paign even­tu­ally bore fruit when the towns be­came part of South La­nark­shire in 1996.

In 2015 the Re­former re­ported that his­to­rian Ian Mitchell was keen to see the two towns ab­sorbed again into the city.

He ar­gued: “Peo­ple in Ruther­glen use Glas­gow ser­vices a lot more than peo­ple in Glas­gow would use Ruther­glen ser­vices. The flow works largely one way.

“In terms of plan­ning, the initiatives hap­pen­ing in Glas­gow’s East End, Ruther­glen has man­aged to get on its coat tails. Ruther­glen would not have got that on its own and this is an ex­am­ple of how pe­riph­eral ar­eas can ben­e­fit.”

How­ever, his state­ments were rub­bished by Coun­cil­lor Robert Brown and Lord McAvoy, both of whom were in­stru­men­tal in re­mov­ing the towns from Glas­gow.

Coun­cil­lor Brown said Ruther­glen had been “left be­hind” while Lord McAvoy claimed the town hall would have been bull­dozed if the Burgh had stayed.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from UK

© PressReader. All rights reserved.