I see that irritating non-story – the “contest” to be Britain’s second city – is doing the rounds again.

This time it is in an opinion piece in The Birmingham Post from a PR type who has relocated to Birmingham from Manchester.

The crux of the argument appears to be that because Manchester has won the opportunity to host the UK’s first super-casino, it should take the mantle of Second City.

The BBC’s Inside Out, with the ever-smiling and waving Ashley Blake, is set to “discuss” the issue too this week.

The warnings are dire. Birmingham is being over-taken in the race to occupy the positions behind London.

Fine by me.

As I’ve stated before, I see no benefit in even debating such a pointless and worthless issue.

Quite simply, if Manchester wants to be viewed as second best to London then Birmingham should let it carry on and concentrate on enhancing its international brand and image. Equally, if Manchester wants to host such a ghastly venture as a super-casino then I suggest we offer up thanks that Birmingham has escaped.

There is no realistic chance of competing with London. The minor places are up for grabs so let those who are bothered jostle for position.

Birmingham’s efforts are better directed in continuing the progress of the last decade, generating a better image overseas and not selling itself short as being second best or second rate.

Leave that to Manchester, it is worthy of such a title.


One response

  1. […] futile debate on the title of “second city” and the desire of so many influential people in Birmingham to beat off […]