It's amazing to see the pictures that C4 came up with for the ten worst places to live. Some of the pictures that they showed for Strabane were from back alley ways that very few people see. These could be from any town or city, even the top 10 best places to live.
I'm from Strabane. I lived in England for many years and decided to return home for a better lifestyle. I am educated to post degree level (as do my family and friends who also live here).
I am very happy to live here. So Phil it is not one of the worst places to live. Come back and we will show you the postitive side of Strabane.

There are three fundamental flaws in with the programme…
1) in its use of socio-economic indicators as the main criterion for a nice place to live which implies that ‘nice place to live’ is defined in terms of away from ‘nasty poor people’ which explains the prominence of home counties suburbia among the top ten ‘best’ places and inner cities among the ‘worst’. In reality it is difficult to find objective quantifiable definitions of nice and nasty places to live, people value different things, poor schools is not an issue of you are a young childless 20 something but lack of things to do in a commuter village with no public transport undoubtedly is. Similarly people value different things, the sense of community in more materially deprived parts of the country is more welcoming to some them people in detached wisteria lane style areas where no one walks and the only communication is restricted to shouting at traffic on the school run from your 4 by 4.
As a social researcher with a lot of time on their hands and access to most of these statistics (the crime, life expectancy, education and employment ones) I did a crude estimate of some of the results in order to pick out to of the places I have lived in the past and loved living in and low and behold they were among the worst areas. Oxford (vibrant city with a lovely centre and lots of green spaces and restaurants and shops, but appalling exam results (consistently in the bottom 10 authorities in the country) and high levels of crime scored a lot worse then local rivals Swindon on all main indictors but few people would choose to live in the latter) similarly my hometown Brighton with grand architecture, beautiful coast and countryside surroundings and some of the best independent shops and restaurants in the country but problems with unemployment and crime - scored worse on all in indicators than nearby legoland Crawley yet again people at aren’t queuing up to flee up the A-23.
2) There were a number of methodological flaws with the selection of socio-economic indicators themselves. The crime rates where calculated based on offences against the population of the area this is problematic in areas that have a large number of people commute into the area to work, shop or go out which inflates the number of people in an area at any one time and increases risk of crime (hence the city of London would have been number one and big urban centres like Manchester and Nottingham). The education figures only include state educated pupils and are biased against inner London areas where a large number of kids are privately educated. The employment figures leave out information on people on incapacity benefit which are growing as unemployment rates are falling a truer picture of worklessness particularly in northern England.There are also a load of indicators missing from a full socio-economic picture
- skill level of the population as a whole (Islington, Hackney, Manchester and Nottingham have a significantly greater proportion of chattering class middle class types than the likes of Eastliegh at the top of the list and these groups tend to have an impact on the type of employment that locates into an area, the quality of amenities and cultural facilities etc and attract a significant money and investment into an area). Wages (the average wage in Hackney is higher than in Winchester) provide a more general picture of the affluence of an area then focusing on how poor the poorest people in an area are and I would argue that alongside cost of living (including the issue of inflated house prices that the property culture that programmes like this create) is the crucial indicator in assessing the quality of life you will enjoy in an area, Winchester may be very nice but if all you can afford is a studio flat on the edge of an industrial estate, you may prefer a nice big house in Middlesbrough. Lastly using local authorities to talk about towns is also misleading, Manchester and Nottingham are bound to score worse because there local authority boundaries only cover the poorer inner areas of the cities, affluent parts of Nottingham city are in the neighbouring authorities such as Rushcliffe whilst the likes of Stockport and Trafford contain some of the more well to do parts of Manchester city. Similarly living in a poor neighbourhood has a bigger impact in areas that are isolated. In London you can always send your kid to a school in a more affluent neighbouring borough and do your shopping in the west end etc.
3 The way the programme presents the areas. The classical music for the best areas and the carefully placed camera shots zooming in on grafitti and dog poo in the worst. Most parts of the country have nice and less nice areas, the Victorian grandeur in central Manchester, Nottingham and Middlesbrough could have been used with classical music playing if they wanted to present them differently whilst I am sure that Winchester and Horsham and the like have some pretty grotty areas as well (Sometimes these programmes downright lie - the best places to invest one had the cheek to say this typical Jericho street when walking along the inside of an Oxford college! The real thing is rows unremarkable little terraced houses yet the buy to letters still lapped it up pushing the remaining locals further out). No town is all rich or all poor in this unequal country and some of the poor in the best areas are gonna just get poorer as programmes like this inflate the property in there areas so they are priced out of the market.
End of rant

In the end if you are going to make programmes like this the statistics will have to privelage certain people. C4 appear to know their target audience and the show was heavily biased to families who would have to avail themselves of local schools, services and medical care. I'm in that position so it was meaningful to my aspirations.

I respect it may not have acknowledged the needs of singles, gay couples, the young, the very wealthy who can afford private everything or niche cultural demand but for the target for whom exam results, the walk to the doctor's surgery and local facilities and safety are the meat and two veg of life it was a reasonable portrayal.
Whether the programme should have been made in the first place is a different matter. I'm sure they were in no doubt about the publicity and fall-out that would transpire especially with an uber-estate agent and another pukka Sloane fronting the thing.

Well, the show was harder on Strabane this year than last year, even though by the calculations the town has moved up 5 places from three to eight. I think you found every run down building in the town, but you didn't show one of the new housing areas that are blooming. As for the comment regarding the weather, a wee bit daft - I think the sun does shine here too every now and again! I would agree on the comment regarding the poor wages, salaries are rubbish, but we are still managing to buy houses, eat, run cars etc.
We moved back here from London 12 years ao, partly because the education system is better here. I dont think my children will suffer with their education, if anything, it has improved.
I felt so badly for Strabane after the show, the town isn't getting a chance to reply. I wouldn't move back to England for love nor money. UP STRABANE!!!!!!!

I thought that Grace Dent was spot on in her review.The programme serves no purpose whatsoever and simply underlines the gap between the haves and have nots in our society in a most unpleasant way.These are people's home towns and roots that are being sneered at. The two presenters should be ashamed of themselves for fronting such a divisive, specious programme. I would love to know how much they get for this kind of thing. Bet it's very lucrative.

And why should K Alsopp's unknown sister be suddenly taken on by Channel 4? Nepotism at work here!Lacks even more credibility.

quote:

Originally posted by Blue eyed rover:
These are people's home towns and roots that are being sneered at.

I grew up in one of the poorest and worst parts of one of them. I agree it deserved to be on the list of the worst ones. I would never dare suggest anyone lived there even though that is where my "roots" are.

I think the point about life expectancy is worth making although, of course, it is not the location per se but the poverty and social class of the residents that causes early death.

Indeed, they did not tell the whole truth on lifespan which is how wide the extremes are. When my dad died recently in his mid-50's, I was told that that *is* the life expectancy for working men in that paticular area. Truly shocking :O.

I agree with much of what your contributor at 12.09 said, although I can't tell what his or her name is! The point that I was trying to get at with my earlier misty-eyed elegy on Nottingham is that the most interesting places are often the ones with the biggest problems: London, or New York, Los Angeles or Paris, being obvious examples. If you subscribe to the Spencer-Allsopp philosophy a great place to live will be a safe cul-de-sac like Horsham or South Cambridgeshire (somewhere our friend Stateofplay, for instance, would be proud to defend). But if you want a bit more out of life than 'no muggings', then you may just choose to live somewhere more interesting, like Nottingham, Hackney, Islington, Manchester, somewhere where, yes muggings happen but things are created as well. And not have to suffer having your neighbourhood characterised as a 'hellhole' by some crass self-justifying journalists. Maybe the programme should have been called the "10 best and worst places to stagnate" - then this year's rankings would be spot on and none of us could argue.

Well, I don't live in South Cambs or Horsham. Not my cup of tea, but having spent many hours driving through South Cambs I can say that it is a lovely part of the world, very picturesque. And apparantly it has good Education, low crime rate, etc etc.

I have lived in Harlesden, Harrow and Kingsbury in NW London. I would not move back. Yes, great culture. But at what price? Residents living in fear? Unable to go out at night for fear of being attacked? Posters at every bus stop telling you that gun crime is on it's way down, thank god for the London Borough of Brent!

But if you are happy to accept that high crime, poor education and low employment make for a great lifestyle, then NW London is great for you.

Your indignation at someone pointing out that you live in an area that is in need of better policing astounds me! I mean, the whole idea of such a league table should be for those who live in such places to try and improve the area they live in, not celebrate the failures of local government, the local education authority and the Police force!

I think the problem is that whatever way Channel four had measured the stats etc it would have upset someone.

E.G-last year everyone was saying how biased it was towards London, this year there are 4 named London places in their top 10 and noone is mentioning that.

If they had based it purely on 'community spirit' (not sure how you'd measure thou) then people would be saying "how daft to measure it on that, surely it should be based on crime, education etc"!!!!

Channel four would whatever way they'd portrayed/calculated it had people dissappointed........its one of those things that not everyone will be happy, and the posts above prove that!!!

I THOUGHT IT WAS ABSOUTELY BRILLIANT.
Its amazing how they can fill 1 hour of prime t.v. time with such c;;p it must be genius at work

Our village (about 70 houses) in North Yorkshire was featured in The Times '10 Best Villages in the UK'in 2000. Now, it is very nice and we plan on retiring there but I would not have thought that it was among the 10 best . Having said that, there are prettier places, but we have an excellent primary school, a super state grammar school (that the commies did not manage to abolish ), a bec, a 300 year old pub and we are about 5 minutes off the A1.

In any case the result of the article was a tripling of house prices in the village in six years which is good if you live there but not so good if you are wanting to buy a house today.

Avro

The reason that it is flawed is, well because the whole concept is flawed. It is no good people saying it's "just hard grapes, there will always be winners and losers, blah blah etc etc". The premise is just wrong, no matter who comes top or bottom.
Lest we forget, C4's heading to this debate reads "The 10 Worst. The locations to leave - lock, stock and barrel". No nuance, no recognition of the diversity of places or the fact that exciting edgy places also have problems. Just "leave...".
Watch out, the roads are going to be crowded this weekend, as the populations of Manchester and half of London head out looking for a better place to live.
So wrong, so inadequate as an 'analysis'. And yet people on this forum seem to be impressed by it!

quote:

Originally posted by avro:
Our village (about 70 houses) in North Yorkshire was featured in The Times '10 Best Villages in the UK'in 2000. Now, it is very nice and we plan on retiring there but I would not have thought that it was among the 10 best . Having said that, there are prettier places, but we have an excellent primary school, a super state grammar school (that the commies did not manage to abolish ), a bec, a 300 year old pub and we are about 5 minutes off the A1.

In any case the result of the article was a tripling of house prices in the village in six years which is good if you live there but not so good if you are wanting to buy a house today.

Avro

I can make a good stab at where that is avro. You lucky blighter.

quote:

Originally posted by cakehead:

I can make a good stab at where that is avro. You lucky blighter.

My wife is Chinese and probably the most desirable home for that group traditionally has been a new Barratt home in Milton Keynes. She (and the rest of her family in England) thought we were absolutely mad for buying a 200 year old stone cottage in a village.

Guess who's laughing now

BTW she loves the Yorkshire countryside and Dales now.


Avro

quote:

Originally posted by Woll:
The reason that it is flawed is, well because the whole concept is flawed. It is no good people saying it's "just hard grapes, there will always be winners and losers, blah blah etc etc". The premise is just wrong, no matter who comes top or bottom.
Lest we forget, C4's heading to this debate reads "The 10 Worst. The locations to leave - lock, stock and barrel". No nuance, no recognition of the diversity of places or the fact that exciting edgy places also have problems. Just "leave...".
Watch out, the roads are going to be crowded this weekend, as the populations of Manchester and half of London head out looking for a better place to live.
So wrong, so inadequate as an 'analysis'. And yet people on this forum seem to be impressed by it!

So the crime rate is not bad in these places? Education results are better than the local authority statistics? Unemployment doesn't really exist, it's just make believe and nonsense?

Why don't people do something positive? Instead of whining about where your home town has been placed, take up the issues highlighted by this survey with the appropriate authorities.

Ask your local authority why what they are doing about it. Ask the Police force what plans they have to improve things. Ask your local education authority how they are going to improve the education of the children in your town.

No point burying your head in the sand and saying that it's all nonsense. Facts are facts.

Stop whining about a couple of hooray henry's, and get on with improving your town!!

Are you a relative of the 2 prats that presented the show by any chance?

Unfortunately it isn't as easy as you state to change things especially in inner city areas.

I grew up in a sink estate, and I can assure you it is possible to change things.

You just need to stop feeling sorry for yourself and do something positive.

Hate whingers!

Anyone who can't see the difference between Wapping and Shadwell, Canary Wharf and Poplar, the Motor Show at Excel and nearby Custom House / Canning Town, or even Hoxton Square and Hoxton Street, which runs right off it, is kidding themselves about East London. You could continue with genrified Tredegar Square, and the sink estates that are within a stone's throw away. And so on...

London is a city of extremes. Nowhere more ridiculously so than East London. Any Cockney would agree with 3 of our boroughs being in the top 5 - maybe those with enough cash to ignore the drugs, prostitution, crime & deprivation at close hand should get to know the area a little better.

But then again, chances are they won't be raising their kids here, so why should they care...

quote:

Originally posted by mousse:
Grace Dents review:

http://www.radiotimes.com/content/features/tvod/

Sums it up for me.

P.S. I like Newham

This woman is talking rubbish. Just because she lives in a well-kept Newham street does not airbrush out the abundance of high rise, crumbling crime-ridden estates that are never more than a few minutes' walk away.

I really wish middle-class journalists would stop misrepresenting what the reality of East London is like or so many who live here.

I just could not believe my eyes tonight when watching the national TV awards. There, on stage presenting an award to other real professionals was Kirstie Allsop with sister Sofie in tow! I mean, after one property programme of dubious worth, kid sister is presenting awards to others! I am astonished that the producers of the award show agreed to such blatant nepotism. It was embarrassing.

Completely disgusted by that show! How can Harrogate have dropped one place to 4th in the best place list!!!!!! Very angry - even if it is Phil's personal favourite! By-the-way live in Islington now - someone was murdered at the bottom of my street last week, but I still love it.

The only person who I have noticed whingeing is dear old State of Play who seems deeply offended that not everyone shares his cosy satisfaction with the show's findings. When people proudly talk up their cities and towns (as some have done above), he accuses them of living in cloud cuckoo land, and when they question the show's lack of proper analysis he calls them whingers.
Why is he - and the show - so obsessed with "Crime"? Why is "Crime" or its absence taken as the only measure by which a place's worth can be judged? Does his home area have NOTHING else to sell it but "Lack of Crime"?