Star date: 22nd March 2012


As the Queen and Prince Phillip are due to arrive at Salford MediaCityUK, local graffiti artists recently left a right royal image on Ordsall's infamous graffiti wall just across the road from where the visit is to take place.

Click here for more details…

click image to enlarge

With the Queen and Prince Phillip due to open MediaCityUK and the Media City University of Salford campus on Friday, local graffiti artists recently created a special mural, maybe to commemorate the visit.

With a nod to the contrast between the glitz at MediaCityUK and the Ordsall estate across the road, the scene shows Prince Phillip with a speech bubble coming out of his mouth with the phrase `Do you lot still chuck spears at each other? Bloody hell!'

Another image shows a blonde aristo girl carrying a `Twot Shop' bag saying `Daddy's such a bore! He's bought me last year's Ferrari! Simply frightful!' Also sprayed onto the wall is the phrase `Too many posh tw*ts!'

We don't think the Queen will be making a detour to open this exhibition, even if it is along Salford Council's wannabe riverside `aspirational walkway' between MediaCityUK and Manchester city centre!

Unfortunately Salford Star hasn't got a press invite to the MediaCityUK bash, so we'll have to make do with reporting on this free outdoor art exhibition…

* For further details on the Graffiti Wall and the controversial `aspirational walkway' click here


Liz and Phil Windsor wrote
at 22:25:50 on 30 March 2012
We are worth every penny you ordinary people are forced to fund us with . Why should we have to live like common people . Pass the caviar and champers ..At least we are not real spongeing parasites like your MPs and MEPs.
Nachtschlepper wrote
at 20:22:39 on 30 March 2012
Mo we would not end up with a president. The monarch has no power so what's the point of having one? You site the American system as though it is in some way similar to ours. There are similarities, there is one major difference, the yanks get to vote on who is head of state. I personally don't see any need for a president or monarch. Sovereignty should be with those who represent the people ie Parliament. As for the charity thing, it is totally irrelevant to this argument. I didn't say the Queen was a dictator, just a waste of time, energy & money.
Anon. wrote
at 19:05:43 on 30 March 2012
A president has similar powers to a Prime Minister and that is what we would be left with should the royal family be abolished. In America, the president cannot declare war, however they can declare a state of war and send troops to other countries anyway. Also laws need to go through the congress which is a similar process to the Houses of Parliament/Lords/High Court. Losing the monarchy would not really change anything in that respect. The Queen has no real power other than dissolving and creating parliament, so by definition she cannot be a dictator. Finally, they are still the founders of certain charities and by having a royal name attached the charities become far more credible than one endorsed by a daytime TV presenter and enables more people to get involved.
Nachtschlepper wrote
at 15:01:38 on 30 March 2012
Ok, to begin with as long as there is a monarchy there will be royal prerogative, which means the the Prime Minister can declare war without a vote in Parliament. There are other things, the Crown in Parliament, which means that Parliament can & does pass any law it likes without the people's consent, if this does not affect your freedom I don't know what will. As long as there is a monarchy there will be no written constitution to guarantee freedom. You know that if an unelected head of state remained in power for 60 years & then handed that on to his/her family we would call it a dictatorship. As for the charity stuff, do you really think they turn up & help out or chuck a couple of million in the kitty? No all they do is put a name to it.
Anon. wrote
at 18:58:18 on 29 March 2012
But what are the massive arguments counteracting the weak supporting points, other than the weak arguments of general dislike or saying they're outdated? Also, I forgot about the obvious charitable organisation in Salford until I drove past it today which may help people living in a council flat in Orsall or the Precinct. The Princess Royal Trust on Salford Crescent, the place for young carers. They do a lot of good work helping young people in the area, and its a foundation established by Princess Anne. There isn't really anything else of its kind in the area and is a lifeline to many young people in Salford.
Nachtschlepper wrote
at 13:07:21 on 29 March 2012
What identity do I share with the Saxe Coburg Gothas? I'll tell you in one word, none. As for the point about Versailles, who the hell visited Buck house or any other of the parasites pads in the 18th/19th c? The arguments made for keeping the monarchy are so week I really can't see why you bother trotting them out. Unless you work for the BBC of course.
Anon. wrote
at 21:40:45 on 28 March 2012
To the completely anonymous writer with no name at all, its ironic that you suggest you support preserving Salford heritage but not British heritage. As you said, only the mindless need an identity so maybe Salford Council are right to get rid of all of Salford's heritage and culture if its cheaper for them to sustain. After all, its only silly sentimentality that clings on to the things such as the cranes at Salford Quays or Victorian housing in Higher Broughton. Just to touch upon your comment about Versailles, the situations are completely different. The French Revolution is a fascinating piece of history and thats why people like to go and visit it. Do you really think it was so popular in the 18th and 19th century? The abolition of the UK monarchy wouldn't generate anywhere near the same amount of interest or tourism for at least a hundred years, and even then it would be dependent on a gritty story which wouldn't happen. Also I'm not saying that tourism would stop because it wouldn't, but much of the tourism industry economy comes directly through the royals. Its also unfair to stigmatise all of the family based on the dealings of one member who is far from the forefront. Finally, there is the Princes Trust issue which I see you have already picked up on. They may do very little for such people but it works both ways and they rarely do anything to impact them negatively either. William, Harry & Kate also run funds which help various charities which could benefit aforementioned people, and they also help worldwide organisations and children in third world countries, people living in actual poverty where living in an Ordsall council flat would be very luxurious. Please clarify your reasoning that they cause more harm than good. There are bad aspects to the monarchy, however from my perspective they are a very harmless organisation causing no real problems and generating a lot of good for the country and world.
Winston Smith wrote
at 18:33:53 on 28 March 2012
Nachtschlepper - I agree with you, a total reform is what's needed. Obviously, not everyone in the UK can fit in a room to vote, so I suggest what we need is some way of sending a local representative down to a big meeting house in the capital. This representative would then *represent* the people by voting how the people would vote if they could all be there. How's THAT for radical reform?!?
at 18:33:18 on 28 March 2012
I vote Stephen Kingston! As for Mr Smith. I see what you are getting at, and would just say - see the comment by Nachtschlepper. Just because they (they royals) are constitutionally unable to do much harm - and because one of them tried to do a little bit of good, and because the Princes Trust hands out a very few bob of that which it helps businessmen write of at tax time - does not make them worth keeping. The harm is greater than the good. Yes Salford council are destructive to our heritage. Yes it is currently populated by very short sighted men and women who cannot (or will not) look beyond the length of their own employment, much less forward a few generations, but not being as bad as some does not make you good. I say, if they are appointed by God, which I really believe some of them still truly do believe themselves, then let God pay their bills. We are broke.
Nachtschlepper wrote
at 15:06:02 on 28 March 2012
Winston, you are right the monarch has no powers. You make it sound like it's either, or. It isn't, we have a monarchy, but still have a corrupt Parliament, we have a monarchy, but still have a council in the pockets of big business. A total reform of the system of government is what is needed & as long as you have an unelected head of state, though he/she is appointed by God that reform can never take place. Maybe we need Ian O'Brien, Stephen Kingston or even Dennis Skinner as an elected head of state. Now that might shake things up a bit.
Winston Smith wrote
at 11:59:32 on 28 March 2012
OK, I'll have a go at defending the monarchy for the sake of argument and because they're much prefereble to Parliament or Salford Council: The monarchy are constitutionally not allowed to make 'executive decisions', so the short answer is 'no' they don't (and can't) directly benefit people in Salford flats. The Council, who represent Peel and Tesco, are happy to demolish Salford heritage wherever they find it. Contrast this with Prince Charles who gets slapped down by the politicos and their big business friends when he speaks out about UK heritage and preservation. Compare Princess Diana's work with AIDS victims with Parliament's current 'work' on the NHS. Also, the Prince's Trust has helped many young people from deprived backgrounds - what's the council doing for them these days?
at 06:43:08 on 28 March 2012
@ Anon. I would say 'I hate to burst your bubble', but I don't. So, allow me to. First of all, the tourism excuse - let me shoot that myth down in flames first of all. Ready? Okay. Here goes. The most visited royal residence is Versailles, where they haven't had a monarchy for a looooong time mate. And, so, still the tourists come and the French do not have a bunch of inbred charity cases with zero skills to support to the tune of hundreds of millions per year. As for representing the UK and giving us identity - only the mindless need to have an identity thrust upon them, or defined for them by others. The royals certainly don't give me my identity. And representing us abroad, without malice or 'other intentions'? Need I remind everybody that Andy, as trade representative for the UK, used his position to travel for free while hanging around with a known and convicted predatory paedophile, at the same time as using his 'trade missions' to flog one of his private residencies to an Arab billionaire - very patriotic. But, all that is just why I believe the monarchy is a waste of time and money. It also proves that your reasoning is based purely on silly sentimentality and a misplaced sense of patriotism - the last refuge of the scoundrel, if I am not mistaken? What I would like you to tell me is one single thing that the existence of this family, the nations most famous dole scroungers, what their existence has ever done for a single person bringing up kids in an Ordsall or Precinct council flat? Not what they may have done as some big, bullshit, abstract notion of trade and industry and identity and all the other crap you are talking - ONE SINGLE THING their existence has ever done for a single working, poor person in this country. Can you clear this up for me? Please, take your time.
Nachtschlepper wrote
at 06:43:02 on 28 March 2012
Oh come on if somebody paid me £36m a year I wouldn't bother fiddling expenses either. The fact remains that this institution is an anachronism. In the 21st century a monarch will be crowned & anointed with holy oil because he/she has been chosen by God to lead this country. For fuck's sake people wake up. I know Parliament is corrupt, most politician are corrupt by nature, but please don't pile that on as another excuse. As for the money the Saxe Coburg Gothas bring in, does anybody with a modicum of intelligence really believe that tourists would stop coming to Britain if the monarchy was abolished? Of course not, Westminster Abbey, the Tower of London St Paul's, Hampton Court, Stratford upon Avon would still be awash with tourists.
Winston Smith wrote
at 13:40:32 on 27 March 2012
Thanks Ian (your William and Kate T-Shirt is in the post!) :)
Ian OBrien wrote
at 05:36:01 on 27 March 2012
Never let it be said that Ian O'Brien will not see reason. I hereby declare that Winston Smith has a bloody good point and one i hadn't thought of. And it only goes to show just how bad things are when the British - German, Greek, whatever they are - royal family look good by comparison!! Anyway, a big thumbs up to Winston for that one. Good comment mate :)
caroline wrote
at 05:35:43 on 27 March 2012
i am lost for words ..i hate sudways and high rise flats.. to much harm has come of them ....as for the crown they bring money in..so fine.We need this...Taxing the rich will only make them leave.Like it or not we need them...now
Anon. wrote
at 05:35:12 on 27 March 2012
The "tourism excuse". Would that be the same excuse where, if the monarchy were to be abolished, an already weak economy would be made much weaker? The money has to come from somewhere, so that would mean even more cuts or higher taxes, none I'm sure you'd be happy with. As for representing the UK and giving us an identity, of course they do. They're 'positive' figures that go from country to country representing the UK in foreign countries with no malice or other intentions. The Queen is the head of state and has been doing that for 60 years as Queen, even longer as Princess Elizabeth. There is a degree of continuity with her. You'll get a Prime Minister or a President doing the same, but they only last about 5-10 years and are generally disliked. The Royal Wedding last year also, it was an extremely patriotic event and was the most watched broadcast of 2011 with almost 20m viewers in the UK and a billion around the world. The Diamond Jubilee this year will also increase patriotism, ahead of the Olympics which the Queen is set to open to a global audience.
Ian OBrien wrote
at 13:38:19 on 26 March 2012
@ Anon. Scuse me guvnor. Is this your forelock I have just found on the floor? :))
Winston Smith wrote
at 13:38:15 on 26 March 2012
If you want to see the monarchy in a much better light, just stand them next to parliament. The monarchy do a better job of representing the people, they're pro-UK and they're not demolishing the NHS. They've not been caught wholesale swindling expenses, as far as I know they're not controlled by News Corps and you can't buy a seat at the Queen's dinner table (as per our 4th rate Prime Minister). They even pay more tax than the businessmen (such as the Murdochs) who own our MPs. So - down with Parliament and up with the Monarchy! (At least until we get a democracy)
Nachtschlepper wrote
at 10:53:20 on 26 March 2012
I love the way the monarchists always come up with the tourism excuse for holding on to an anachronistic, irrelevant institution. "Strip hierarchy away & you end up with communism". Do you really believe that or is it just another way of justifying the unjustifiable. Not that I see anything wrong with communism. As for identity, how can anybody argue that one family gives a country a sense of identity? I nearly choked on my bread & dripping a couple of weeks ago when I saw a BBC news item about how hard one of the junior members of "the firm", as they call themselves, was working. This report was given with pictures of said junior member dancing with some people in the Caribbean. Nice work if you can get it. Ohh for a 21st century Cromwell.
Anon. wrote
at 09:59:08 on 26 March 2012
Whatever I choose to call myself on a website is nobody’s business other than mine. Even if you put your name, you’re still faceless because I don’t know you so what difference does it make? That swipe was completely irrelevant and shouldn’t disregard my opinion, and the way you “call me out for being an idiot” basically shows you have nothing else to back up your point. The talk of being a reverse snob is just lingual-logic, again just showing me you have no other points to back up what you’re saying but its logic that has no presence in the real world. Let me clarify, I do not like snobbery or prejudice of any kind, whether ordinary or reverse; however I do find that the ones inverting snobbery and calling ‘posh’ people do have one heck of a chip on their shoulder (go on, criticise me for that and say I’m contradicting myself). Perhaps this is something you have if you’re not happy about the existing ‘status quo’. Strip hierarchy away and you have communism, you have no aspirations. Some people are born into status, but a lot of people also have to earn it and you’re not going to get that by constantly moaning about how hard off you are or how it’s unfair that you’re so low down, without attempting to do anything about it and expecting opportunities to come to you. And finally let me just finish off with the reasons why I’m not an anti-monarchist (wouldn’t exactly call myself a royalist, but I do like them). They’re a British institution and represent our country around the world, it’s just patriotism (just how people are proud to be from Salford, yet we don’t really have anything to represent us in the UK). Stripping them away leaves Britain without an identity, and the identity it gives us rewards us through tourism, with 10% of British income coming through the Royal Family. Many countries around the world are envious of our monarchy, so we should be proud of what we have. Posters on this website bang on about heritage in Salford, so why should British heritage be any different? I assume that over the 4 day bank holiday weekend later in the year, the anti-monarchists amongst us will just be going about their day to day activities and not taking advantage of the extra days off?
Ian OBrien wrote
at 18:17:41 on 25 March 2012
Wooops. Ha ha. The response to Anon, calling him/her our for being, well, an idiot mainly, was by me. Ian OBrien. I forget to add my details. I do not want to be an 'anon' ha ha
at 18:17:27 on 25 March 2012
Anon. Please can you clear something up for me? What kind of snobbery would you prefer? You see, when you start falling for the idea that 'reverse snobbery' is an actual, valid concept, you are chasing your own tail mate. It is not. If you are going to talk about reverse snobbery, then you are being it all over again. You are being a reverse reverse snob. You see, and I call you that and I am being a reverse reverse reverse snob. So, stop talking utter bollox and get off the fence. If you are a royalist and think that the status quo is fine, then that is okay. But ffs, at least investigate why you actually feel this way. Take a look at your own belief system, untangle it all, and then don't hide behind anonymity. If you have something to say, then say it for god sake. This kind of cowardly behavior would not go down well in the officers club!!!
Brian F Kirkham wrote
at 08:22:09 on 25 March 2012
Logged on today, to read the progress of this report and see what the locals think. I grew up in Ordsall, and yes, I'm still living here. In relation to the Ordsall Undercover Mag (I3) I provided the photography of the park and wrote the poem on the back page. Which leads me nicely onto Mr Foxall's comment - I think he May have picked up the wrong end of the stick here (Particularly, as I have zero input of the work of the graffiti artists). From what I am aware (if I am mistaken, I apologise) the area designated (known as the "Graffiti Palace") was an area where those into Graffiti art could express themselves and it not be spread all over the neighbourhood. Now, sometime between the final developments on Peelville (sorry, The Quays) taking place other developers started springing up all over the shop at the expense of Schools and Other Local Amenities (LPC are currently flogging a shopping mall next door - that's how I kind of know) - Council moved people out and either relocated them financially or stuck them in another area of the city (Pendleton, Weaste, Broughton) - Newcomers came in - Perhaps you were one Mr Foxall, fantastic. But there's been no consideration to those who've been here long term . LPC and its associate companies views of what's good for an area have been IMHO - Way off the mark - No Clear plan (There is a plan - but you'd need a degree in Town Planning to decipher it) . No thought to what something looks like or any Social aspect whatsoever. I walked over to Hulton Square (the flagship of this strategy) recently - It looks fantastic, but then look about and spot unfinished works on its perimeter. Old folks home? Gone (unless you talk of Mt Carmel Court) in its place Candy colored housing - again not built up - thrown up. And even now - the developers are chucking up high-rises like we're In New York. Evidence can be found on Broadway, Trafford Road, Phoebe St, West Park St - Big signs and Big Money Prices (Was that what Mediacity was meant to bring to the area?) Where is the Opportunity for the young in this district - Growing up I've seen schools levelled, parkland sold off, and a message conveyed by the new occupiers as if to say "We're here now!.." (i'll spare you the rest of what I was thinking!) And Furthermore, I've lived in Ordsall for all of my life - I studied at its schools and colleges I've read in its libraries and (for two brief times) I've worked for the council. I've also worked in this area for companies the other side o' Trafford road. If you find something offensive Mr Foxall - don't bottle it up, and vent on here - Mr Merry has done his five (ten?) year visit to Ordsall and it may bear fruit, then again it may not - speak to the neighbourhood team and they'll sort it out for you (or find someone who can!)- they are human you know ! :) P.S - My View? Mr Carter is of an Ex-Crown Building falling to bits as the new owner doesn't know what to (legally) do with it.
Anti-monarchist wrote
at 20:10:31 on 24 March 2012
Mr and Mrs Windsor are obviously interested in how the oppressed, shafted , shat-on , and ripped-off 'survive' in this dead-hell city of despair and hopelessness . Must be like a day at the zoo for the 'royal' parasites. Hope one brought the beluga and cucumber sandwiches.
Archibald Heavitree wrote
at 05:45:59 on 24 March 2012
Did the Royle Family meet those rare specimems , the 'Salford Few' who the BBC deigned to employ , amidst all the clowncil-generated bullshit about ' 'jobs for Salford' ?
Anon. wrote
at 05:41:56 on 24 March 2012
Reverse snobbery makes me sad and ashamed to be from the area. The Queen visiting is a huge thing for Salford, and I genuinely don't think people with a massive chip on their shoulder realise how lucky we are to have a monarchy. I wonder what Prince Phillip has to say about Salford?
Michael Foxall wrote
at 10:36:09 on 23 March 2012
The artwork is marvelous but what a pity on such a happy occasion as the Queen's visit the artist couldn't join with the majority of Salfordians and Mancunions and do something pleasant and welcoming. Why should the people of Ordshall have to look at something they might not want to see or find offensive every day, after all Mr Kirkham would you want to open your curtain's in the morning and find offensive messages painted outside your home!!
Brian F Kirkham wrote
at 06:49:07 on 23 March 2012
Hi All, Tis I, Brian the guy who provided the Poem & Artworks for the piece on the park in "Ordsall Undercover" - Given the royal visit today (its friday as i type) check out my facebook notes page on how another visitor might view the home of BBC/ITV in the Northwest - It's a little piece i call "A Martian Landed at Mediacity" - tell us what u think!
caroline wrote
at 06:48:25 on 23 March 2012
yet again salord star tells it as it is..we need a sence of humour to keep going.an keep on with the creativity...
Heather Rawlinson wrote
at 21:48:12 on 22 March 2012
you know what, whoever did that has some talent and it is to be hoped that they will be able to tap into the creativity that media city was touted as bringing to Salfordians. More likely is that they will be condemned for this and hardly any local would-be artists will find work or training here.
adrian purdy wrote
at 21:47:21 on 22 March 2012
At least we still got a sence of humour in salford ,10 out of 10 to the artist,s involved !
Please enter your comment below:
Salford Star Hoodies
Salford Star contact
Deli Lama
Contact us
phone: 07957 982960
Facebook       Twitter
Recent comments
This is all good BUT what has he done? They wouldn’t just suspend someone for nothing! Having a protest is good if you know all th... [more]
Over Here, Use your real name, Coward. That way we'll all know what rock you've crawled fom under, You deplorable UKIP right wing ... [more]
I am a grandparent of 2 of Harrop team pupils Drew povey and his team do excellant work they turned this school away from being th... [more]
He is a brilliant head teacher... [more]
Mr Povey has turned this school around with dedication and hard work,the school would not be how it is today without this,it's a d... [more]


Help the Salford Star...

all donations welcome


More articles...


Star date: 15th July 2018


After Salford City Council suspended Harrop Fold School Head, Drew Povey, and three other staff members last week, supporters have launched a petition to reinstate them, while pupils and parents are planning a protest at the school this Thursday.

Full details here...


Star date: 15th July 2018


Fangirl by Quina Chapman
Thursday 19th and Friday 20th July
Kings Arms 7pm £6

Do you go the extra mile in pursuit of an icon? Fangirl, at the Kings Arms this Thursday and Friday, deconstructs the 'condition' through songs, rhymes and laughs. A Greater Manchester Fringe must-see, enthuses Ian Leslie.

Full details here...


Star date: 14th July 2018


Thousands of people packed Albert Square in Manchester last night to voice anger over US President Donald Trump's visit to the UK. Groups from every section of society that Trump has dissed were represented on stage – from Mexican dancers to an ex-US soldier, to trade unions, peace, climate change, refugee, LGBT and women's rights campaigners, plus spokespeople for youth and children. 

To kick off the evening, Manchester councillor, Pat Karney, called Trump "The most dangerous leader since the 1930s...we have to stop the ideas of Trump going across the world..."

Full details here...


Star date: 13th July 2018


A red open top double decker bus toured Salford this morning covered in slogans reading 'Trump Go Home'. It stopped off at Salford Precinct, Salford Royal Hospital, Langworthy Road and the Civic Centre before heading off to Manchester.

The bus was sponsored by Swinton-based Mary Monson Solicitors, and Mary Monson told the Salford Star that "the idea that he'll come and be feted like a respectable person is appalling". Meanwhile Paul Kelly, President of Salford TUC, called Donald Trump an "ultra-capitalist maniac".

Full details here...


Star date: 12th July 2018


Many of the actions used by protesters at the Barton Moss anti-fracking demonstrations in Salford were outlawed by a judge at Manchester Civil Justice Centre yesterday, including slow walking, lock-ons and any obstruction of the highway.

The judgement, in relation to Cuadrilla's fracking site on Preston New Road, Lancashire, has implications for all anti-fracking protests... "This is an incredibly sad day for the right to protest peacefully" said Jonathan Bartle, co-leader of the Green Party.

Full details here...


written and produced by Salfordians for Salfordians
with attitude and love xxx