Skip to main content

Weddings in The Council House

Although the Evening Mail and Radio WM are interested in this story, the editor of www.icbirmingham.co.uk declined to publish the article about Weddings in The Council House.

The City Council has decided to allow people to have civil ceremonies in The Council House. They have been allowed at Highbury for some time. However, the Charities Commission are bouncing up and down about what happens at Highbury (because it is a charitable trust). Also it is something that people might like to have as an option.

The idea is that The Council House belongs to the citizens of Birmingham. It is, therefore, appropriate that Citizens of Birmingham should be able to make use of the banqueting suite for their events. (Within the constraints of booking and also the payment of the appropriate fee.)


The last wedding I went to was that of (Labour) Councillor Mike Olley at Birmingham's CoE Cathedral (St Philips). This was attended by one Labour MP, about four Labour Councillors and three Lib Dem Councillors.


I can understand that people who would wish a civil ceremony would be pleased to have the opportunity of The Council House*.

* In Birmingham "The Council House" is not "a Council House". It is the headquarters of the City Council. There is also a Town Hall.

Thanks to Birmingham Picture Library for the images.

Comments

Stephen Booth said…
There's a town hall? Is it the building that's been under renovation for as long as I can remember? :-)
robinclarke said…
John, why isnt the council house a council house? What else should it be than the hq of the council?

Oh, hang on, do you just mean it isn't one of those suburban semis from the 1950s? But surely that's why it is THE C H in caps?

!

Popular posts from this blog

Statement re false allegations from Esther Baker

Statement by John Hemming
I am pleased that the Police have now made it clear that there has been a concerted effort to promote false criminal allegations against me and that the allegations had no substance whatsoever.
I would like to thank Emily Cox, my children, Ayaz Iqbal (my Solicitor), my local lib dem team and many others who supported me through this dreadful experience. There are many worse things that happen to people, but this was a really bad experience.
It is bad enough to have false allegations made about yourself to the police, but to have a concerted campaign involving your political opponents and many others in public creates an environment in which it is reasonable to be concerned about ill founded vigilante attacks on your family and yourself. Luckily there was a more substantial lobby to the contrary as well, which included many people who were themselves real survivors of abuse, which has helped.
I am normally someone who helps other people fight injustice. …

Homelessness vs Selling Books

Candidates in elections tend to find themselves very busy with lots of things to do.  It is, therefore, necessary to prioritise things to ensure that the important things are dealt with.

To me the issue of homelessness and rough sleeping is an important issue.  Therefore, when Birmingham's Faith Leaders group contacted me to ask me what I would propose and whether I would work with them to make things better I was pleased to respond with my views and indicate that I would work with them after the election.

The Faith Leaders Group (Bishops and other religious leaders in Birmingham) have now sent out their report.

Sadly, according to their report,  I was the only candidate for Yardley to respond.  The group in their report said:

"Particularly disappointing was the lack of response from some of those candidates seeking re-election as MP for their respective constituencies."
It is worth looking at the priorities of my opponent.
Interestingly today she has decided to be at th…

R v SUSSEX JUSTICES ex p McCARTHY [1924] 1 KB 256

I have only just found this one which I think is accurately reported below (but if it is not please give me an accurate report).

KING’S BENCH DIVISION

R v SUSSEX JUSTICES ex p McCARTHY [1924] 1 KB 256

November 9 1923

Editor’s comments in bold.

Here, the magistrates’ clerk retired with the bench when they were considering a charge of dangerous driving. The clerk belonged to a firm of solicitors acting in civil proceedings for the other party to the accident. It was entirely irrelevant that there had been no evidence of actual influence brought to bear on the magistrates, and the conviction was duly quashed.

LORD HEWART CJ:
It is clear that the deputy clerk was a member of the firm of solicitors engaged in the conduct of proceedings for damages against the applicant in respect of the same collision as that which gave rise to the charge that the justices were considering. It is said, and, no doubt, truly, that when that gentleman retired in the usual way with the justices, taking with him the…