Britannia Coconut Dancers SAVED by 1847 Act

Burnley and Pendle Citizen: Britannia Coconut Dancers SAVED by 1847 Act Britannia Coconut Dancers SAVED by 1847 Act

A 200-YEAR-OLD traditional clog dance has been saved after Rossendale councillors invoked a long-forgotten law.

The Britannia Coconut Dancers’ annual Easter Saturday procession through Bacup and Stacksteads was under threat after Lancashire Constabulary refused to marshal the event's crowds and rolling road closures.

Lancashire County Council bosses had told the Coconutters to either appoint a traffic management company, at a cost of around £4,000, or alternatively, they would appoint one and send the troupe the bill.

To prevent the popular attraction having to be cancelled indefinitely, councillors Sean Serridge and Jackie Oakes invoked the 1847 Towns and Police Clauses Act, meaning there would be no charge for marshaling and road closures.

Neville Earnshaw, Coconutters' treasurer, said: “We are extremely pleased with the outcome, and very grateful to Sean, Jackie, and council leader Alyson Barnes.

“It’s certainly better than what we were looking at, which was the end of the processional dance as we know it.

“To ensure we’ll be able to keep the event going in the coming years, we’re going to have at least six stewards trained to county council-level standard, and marshal it ourselves.”

The cash to pay for stewarding this Easter’s dance will be taken from the Member’s Contingency Fund, which allows councillors to access money for highways, outside of the usual commissioning process.

County Coun Sean Serridge said: “I’m absolutely delighted that we’re working together with the Coconutters, and we’ve managed to ensure that the annual dance can continue.

“They are an asset to Bacup, and it’s only right that we should do all we can to ensure such important traditions are able to continue.

“Working with the leader of the borough council, Alyson Barnes, we are looking at how we can ensure the long-term future of the dance.”

Comments (24)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

10:26am Thu 13 Feb 14

Excluded again says...

Well done to the three Councillors involved. There was plenty of comment when the Coconutters' parade looked like being cancelled - no-one mentioned the 1847 Towns and Police Causes Act as a way round it.

Clearly these Councillors did some serious homework to find a solution.
Well done to the three Councillors involved. There was plenty of comment when the Coconutters' parade looked like being cancelled - no-one mentioned the 1847 Towns and Police Causes Act as a way round it. Clearly these Councillors did some serious homework to find a solution. Excluded again
  • Score: 35

10:33am Thu 13 Feb 14

Noiticer says...

Congratulations to those concerned and a smack in the face to those who only know the cost of everything and the value of nothing!
Congratulations to those concerned and a smack in the face to those who only know the cost of everything and the value of nothing! Noiticer
  • Score: 36

10:54am Thu 13 Feb 14

useyourhead says...

This may have opened a can of worms for the police, how many others will now cite this long forgotten, but nevertheless applicable law!
This may have opened a can of worms for the police, how many others will now cite this long forgotten, but nevertheless applicable law! useyourhead
  • Score: 6

12:12pm Thu 13 Feb 14

abetterblackburn says...

Could I congratulate all those responsible for overturning the original decision to ban ‘The Britannia Coconut Dancers‘. A shame on those who were first responsible for the original ban. Lancashire is fast losing it’s identity and historically important traditions such as these should be safeguarded forever!

As someone with past Bacup connections and also a life long Labour voter until ‘New Labour’ showed it’s ugly face it’s such a shame the historically working class political party does seem to have lost it’s way as this case shows only too well. However, there does seem to have been something of a recovery. Better late than never I suppose!
Could I congratulate all those responsible for overturning the original decision to ban ‘The Britannia Coconut Dancers‘. A shame on those who were first responsible for the original ban. Lancashire is fast losing it’s identity and historically important traditions such as these should be safeguarded forever! As someone with past Bacup connections and also a life long Labour voter until ‘New Labour’ showed it’s ugly face it’s such a shame the historically working class political party does seem to have lost it’s way as this case shows only too well. However, there does seem to have been something of a recovery. Better late than never I suppose! abetterblackburn
  • Score: 8

12:14pm Thu 13 Feb 14

Primus622 says...

Glad to see this tradition saved......are they still allowed to black up....
Glad to see this tradition saved......are they still allowed to black up.... Primus622
  • Score: 14

12:17pm Thu 13 Feb 14

Primus622 says...

Primus622 wrote:
Glad to see this tradition saved......are they still allowed to black up....
Oops...sorry maybe I should have said darken their skin....
[quote][p][bold]Primus622[/bold] wrote: Glad to see this tradition saved......are they still allowed to black up....[/p][/quote]Oops...sorry maybe I should have said darken their skin.... Primus622
  • Score: 8

1:57pm Thu 13 Feb 14

mysay.com says...

long forgotten? I think not, the whole of taxi licensing regime is based on the town police clauses act of 1847 and the miscellaneous provisions act of 1976, of which councillor surredge is the portfolio holder, so there was nothing forgotten about it!!

My only concern is that this farce was allowed to go on for so long given the fact that these acts are common knowledge and referred to by the council on a regular basis, maybe this was simply for publicity and support come election time.

Having said that, at least it is resolved now.
long forgotten? I think not, the whole of taxi licensing regime is based on the town police clauses act of 1847 and the miscellaneous provisions act of 1976, of which councillor surredge is the portfolio holder, so there was nothing forgotten about it!! My only concern is that this farce was allowed to go on for so long given the fact that these acts are common knowledge and referred to by the council on a regular basis, maybe this was simply for publicity and support come election time. Having said that, at least it is resolved now. mysay.com
  • Score: 13

4:52pm Thu 13 Feb 14

boynesider says...

at last some good news.these" public servants" should realise they are their to serve not dictate to the public,
at last some good news.these" public servants" should realise they are their to serve not dictate to the public, boynesider
  • Score: -5

5:36pm Thu 13 Feb 14

billy32 says...

Finally someone with a bit of common sense, to lose the dancers would be a shame and just to save a few pounds. Well done to the people who took the time to research the law,,,,,,,
Finally someone with a bit of common sense, to lose the dancers would be a shame and just to save a few pounds. Well done to the people who took the time to research the law,,,,,,, billy32
  • Score: 4

6:10pm Thu 13 Feb 14

phil kernot says...

Do other religious festivals have to pay for traffic management ie Christians chatholics Muslim. Faith etc ,, the council cannot force anyone to pay these fees pedestrians have right of way over cars it's in the Highway Code book , p
Do other religious festivals have to pay for traffic management ie Christians chatholics Muslim. Faith etc ,, the council cannot force anyone to pay these fees pedestrians have right of way over cars it's in the Highway Code book , p phil kernot
  • Score: -1

6:35pm Thu 13 Feb 14

MerlinTheVoiceofReason2 says...

phil kernot wrote:
Do other religious festivals have to pay for traffic management ie Christians chatholics Muslim. Faith etc ,, the council cannot force anyone to pay these fees pedestrians have right of way over cars it's in the Highway Code book , p
Can anybody decipher this comment? If you're able to translate it into correct English, please let me know.
[quote][p][bold]phil kernot[/bold] wrote: Do other religious festivals have to pay for traffic management ie Christians chatholics Muslim. Faith etc ,, the council cannot force anyone to pay these fees pedestrians have right of way over cars it's in the Highway Code book , p[/p][/quote]Can anybody decipher this comment? If you're able to translate it into correct English, please let me know. MerlinTheVoiceofReason2
  • Score: 7

7:47pm Thu 13 Feb 14

Loving lances says...

Primus622 wrote:
Glad to see this tradition saved......are they still allowed to black up....
I wonder if the Coconutters would welcome applications from
ethnic residents from Lancashire who want to integrate by taking part and showing they are just as daft as the English. Would they first have to whiten up before blacking up?
The counciilors concerned are morons. This is not a contingency. Floods are contingencies. If the nutters are really so popular then let their fans pay £1 each to fund the charges.
[quote][p][bold]Primus622[/bold] wrote: Glad to see this tradition saved......are they still allowed to black up....[/p][/quote]I wonder if the Coconutters would welcome applications from ethnic residents from Lancashire who want to integrate by taking part and showing they are just as daft as the English. Would they first have to whiten up before blacking up? The counciilors concerned are morons. This is not a contingency. Floods are contingencies. If the nutters are really so popular then let their fans pay £1 each to fund the charges. Loving lances
  • Score: -14

7:50pm Thu 13 Feb 14

Loving lances says...

mysay.com wrote:
long forgotten? I think not, the whole of taxi licensing regime is based on the town police clauses act of 1847 and the miscellaneous provisions act of 1976, of which councillor surredge is the portfolio holder, so there was nothing forgotten about it!!

My only concern is that this farce was allowed to go on for so long given the fact that these acts are common knowledge and referred to by the council on a regular basis, maybe this was simply for publicity and support come election time.

Having said that, at least it is resolved now.
Well said, Mysay.com. Yes the polls are only a few weeks away and we shall see all the usual nonsense from the wallies, the willies and the weasels.
[quote][p][bold]mysay.com[/bold] wrote: long forgotten? I think not, the whole of taxi licensing regime is based on the town police clauses act of 1847 and the miscellaneous provisions act of 1976, of which councillor surredge is the portfolio holder, so there was nothing forgotten about it!! My only concern is that this farce was allowed to go on for so long given the fact that these acts are common knowledge and referred to by the council on a regular basis, maybe this was simply for publicity and support come election time. Having said that, at least it is resolved now.[/p][/quote]Well said, Mysay.com. Yes the polls are only a few weeks away and we shall see all the usual nonsense from the wallies, the willies and the weasels. Loving lances
  • Score: 10

8:59am Fri 14 Feb 14

Plodder laner says...

The 1847 TPCA has nothing whatsoever to with this. County councillors are taking money out of one pot to pay for the traffic management. The problem lies in the fact that this is a one off and they can't afford nor should they pay for this out of our tax whilst closing welfare services. I agree that if they need to process along a highway they should be safe, but if they choose to do it I would rather my tax (not indiividual C.Councillors money!) be used to support other services.
It is not a long forgotten act the councils use it all the time. Look at the notices they use on the streets. C'mon Telegraph report it as it is don't make up a headline!
The 1847 TPCA has nothing whatsoever to with this. County councillors are taking money out of one pot to pay for the traffic management. The problem lies in the fact that this is a one off and they can't afford nor should they pay for this out of our tax whilst closing welfare services. I agree that if they need to process along a highway they should be safe, but if they choose to do it I would rather my tax (not indiividual C.Councillors money!) be used to support other services. It is not a long forgotten act the councils use it all the time. Look at the notices they use on the streets. C'mon Telegraph report it as it is don't make up a headline! Plodder laner
  • Score: 5

9:31am Fri 14 Feb 14

mysay.com says...

In section 21 of the act, it states that where an obstruction is present, the police shall have the powers to close the road and divert traffic around the obstruction, it does not however allow for them to insist on a private company to be appointed to do their job for them, it is a "police clauses" act which gives the "police" the power, not private companies, it also does not allow for any charge to be applied for the police to carry about their duty.

Which means that there probably wont be any charge, but I am so glad to see that someone else is fully aware that this act is used on a daily basis, not forgotten in any sense of the word
In section 21 of the act, it states that where an obstruction is present, the police shall have the powers to close the road and divert traffic around the obstruction, it does not however allow for them to insist on a private company to be appointed to do their job for them, it is a "police clauses" act which gives the "police" the power, not private companies, it also does not allow for any charge to be applied for the police to carry about their duty. Which means that there probably wont be any charge, but I am so glad to see that someone else is fully aware that this act is used on a daily basis, not forgotten in any sense of the word mysay.com
  • Score: 7

2:40pm Fri 14 Feb 14

Plodder laner says...

This is not an obstruction, it is a pre-planned event so should be dealt with outside those powers, it is the council that must agree closures, not rely on the police. From a police perspective it is more of an emergency power. But agree with my.say, its used all the time, glad they rediscovered it!!!
This is not an obstruction, it is a pre-planned event so should be dealt with outside those powers, it is the council that must agree closures, not rely on the police. From a police perspective it is more of an emergency power. But agree with my.say, its used all the time, glad they rediscovered it!!! Plodder laner
  • Score: 3

8:41am Sat 15 Feb 14

DaveBurnley says...

On a point of accuracy, it's not the Towns and Police Clauses Act, there is no such act.

It is in fact the Town Police Clauses Act because it deals with the town police and defines their powers.

Some of it's amusing parts ban the beating of carpets in the street, kite flying in the street is also banned!
On a point of accuracy, it's not the Towns and Police Clauses Act, there is no such act. It is in fact the Town Police Clauses Act because it deals with the town police and defines their powers. Some of it's amusing parts ban the beating of carpets in the street, kite flying in the street is also banned! DaveBurnley
  • Score: 0

8:48am Sat 15 Feb 14

Loving lances says...

All this nonsense could have been sorted last year.
County officials watched the event last Easter and said it was risky.
Then in May, Labour took over the county council.
Oh dear! This meant that our new Labour county councillors, sean, Jackie and Alyson could not criticise their party bosses or the officers involved.
So nine months of silence.
Now, there are local elections looming and so a marvellous solution is suddenly found. Do these Labour councillors think we are stupid?
All this nonsense could have been sorted last year. County officials watched the event last Easter and said it was risky. Then in May, Labour took over the county council. Oh dear! This meant that our new Labour county councillors, sean, Jackie and Alyson could not criticise their party bosses or the officers involved. So nine months of silence. Now, there are local elections looming and so a marvellous solution is suddenly found. Do these Labour councillors think we are stupid? Loving lances
  • Score: 3

4:21pm Sat 15 Feb 14

mysay.com says...

Thanks Dave, although I just had to scroll up and down to check, to make sure I hadn't added the word "and" to the act, it is only in the article, but thanks for the clarification, Although I know it, as do the councillors, many people may not have known.

Quite a lot of it is used to structure the whole of taxi licensing conditions, which is again a bit stupid and outdated really, since back in 1847, there were no motorised vehicles, it was all horse and carts, which is why under the act, taxi drivers could potentially still be fined for NOT carrying a bail of hay to feed the horses. a bit laughable really isn't it
Thanks Dave, although I just had to scroll up and down to check, to make sure I hadn't added the word "and" to the act, it is only in the article, but thanks for the clarification, Although I know it, as do the councillors, many people may not have known. Quite a lot of it is used to structure the whole of taxi licensing conditions, which is again a bit stupid and outdated really, since back in 1847, there were no motorised vehicles, it was all horse and carts, which is why under the act, taxi drivers could potentially still be fined for NOT carrying a bail of hay to feed the horses. a bit laughable really isn't it mysay.com
  • Score: 0

5:35pm Sat 15 Feb 14

Loving lances says...

Mysay.com uses common sense as usual. Most of the nonsense in
Rossendale is down to our wonderful councillors talking a lot of **** and Bull.
Mysay.com uses common sense as usual. Most of the nonsense in Rossendale is down to our wonderful councillors talking a lot of **** and Bull. Loving lances
  • Score: 1

6:22pm Sat 15 Feb 14

Unhappycyclist says...

Plodder laner wrote:
This is not an obstruction, it is a pre-planned event so should be dealt with outside those powers, it is the council that must agree closures, not rely on the police. From a police perspective it is more of an emergency power. But agree with my.say, its used all the time, glad they rediscovered it!!!
Plodder Laner.

Plodder Lane in Bolton?

Bolton in Greater Manchester? Not Lancashire?

Enlighten me on your right to cast criticism or comment on matters beyond your turf.

Sounds like townie mischief to me.
[quote][p][bold]Plodder laner[/bold] wrote: This is not an obstruction, it is a pre-planned event so should be dealt with outside those powers, it is the council that must agree closures, not rely on the police. From a police perspective it is more of an emergency power. But agree with my.say, its used all the time, glad they rediscovered it!!![/p][/quote]Plodder Laner. Plodder Lane in Bolton? Bolton in Greater Manchester? Not Lancashire? Enlighten me on your right to cast criticism or comment on matters beyond your turf. Sounds like townie mischief to me. Unhappycyclist
  • Score: -2

12:00am Tue 18 Feb 14

Plodder laner says...

Bolton is in the County Palatine of Lancashire, Greater Manchester only came about as a 1974 political convenience creating GMC which exists no more. By the same token Blackburn and Blackpool now unitary authorities are not politically within Lancs. My origins are Bolton, true Lancastrian and living & paying taxes to Lancs County Council for 25 yrs. I can legitimately exercise my free speech on things Lancastrian, even though historically they have a Moorish influence. ( not lancs moors!)
Bolton is in the County Palatine of Lancashire, Greater Manchester only came about as a 1974 political convenience creating GMC which exists no more. By the same token Blackburn and Blackpool now unitary authorities are not politically within Lancs. My origins are Bolton, true Lancastrian and living & paying taxes to Lancs County Council for 25 yrs. I can legitimately exercise my free speech on things Lancastrian, even though historically they have a Moorish influence. ( not lancs moors!) Plodder laner
  • Score: 2

7:08am Tue 18 Feb 14

mysay.com says...

with all due respect, this is an open blog, as such, anybody can exercise their right to freedom of speech, they can voice an opinion and make their comments.

such is the beauty of freedom of speech, many people on here comment on things they know nothing about, they have that right, some may like it, some may not, but without a difference of opinion, there would be no debate would there?
with all due respect, this is an open blog, as such, anybody can exercise their right to freedom of speech, they can voice an opinion and make their comments. such is the beauty of freedom of speech, many people on here comment on things they know nothing about, they have that right, some may like it, some may not, but without a difference of opinion, there would be no debate would there? mysay.com
  • Score: 1

8:49am Tue 18 Feb 14

Loving lances says...

Well said, Mysay.com. Some people think that taxidrivers talk rubbish but I think that as they encounter such a wide variety of people they are among the most sensible folk around.
Well said, Mysay.com. Some people think that taxidrivers talk rubbish but I think that as they encounter such a wide variety of people they are among the most sensible folk around. Loving lances
  • Score: 1

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree