This is in marked contrast to the January Cabinet meeting
and perhaps is explained by the length of time this Labour administration has
had to bed in. They seemed to have nailed down a distinct process at Cabinet
now where the Cabinet Member will do a spiel cribbed from the prepared report,
the Shadow asks a few questions, the Officer responds, and they move on. No
real challenge to it.
Chris Wells had a college try at challenging but as above,
the Officer replied and there wasn’t much more to be said. A bit flat tonight.
Perhaps the energy was being saved for the last item on Royal Sands, which did
go ahead!
Thanet Lab has already reported on the Pierremont Park item
timed at 7.15pm, which only serves to underline my point about the lack of
challenge in Cabinet. It’s already a done deal with the press release ready to
roll. TDC similarly has already published a press release.
Tonight also marked the second time fellow blogger Tony
Flaig left early after being challenged over the use of his phone in
the public gallery. Given this, perhaps he might pick up pen and paper instead?
Tony was using his phone to take notes on a WordPad type program, something
that was shown in his defence. He was doing the same last time. He was not
Twittering.
Sadly this all started with the Gay marriage debate and the Twitter
comments about Councillors and has been a sticking point for a while. Some
thought really needs to be put towards solving this because at the moment,
Council staff are coming on rather a bit strong, however understandably. The
claim that you aren’t allowed your phone on in the Chamber is absurd, not to
mention not true.
Simple solution as I’ve said time and time again. Audio recordings…I
bet it would have cross party support.
28 comments:
Im sorry that I had to leave the meeting, I was unaware that the use of phones was completely forbidden previously I've understood that twittering was allowed.
I believe that Labour members and council officer have a complete contempt for freedom and democracy, Clive Hart and Labour should hang their heads in shame if this is how members of the public are treated.
sounds like same old same old. TDC wont change they dont like the public and think that life is easier if the public are ignored at best and worst treated with contempt.
It is a basic core belief of all socialists that governance is best left to them and the rest of us need not get involved. Hence strike ballots based on 20% turnouts, etc. Regrettably there are also elements within the Conservative Party, especially the Old Guard of the Thanet version, that are showing distinct signs of following suit.
If democracy is to mean anything then it needs to be seen. The only reason Hart and Co don't want audio recordings - or in fact any recordings at all - is because the people would see their childish behaviour for themselves.
Tim, just the old guard? If Cameron represents the new he is not slow to show contempt, or totally ignore, his backbenchers, party grandees, the rank and file members, the church and public because he also knows what is best. It is the failing of many politicians for the ego that propels them to such office, takes them over when they get there.
Tom. Cameron is just a PR frontman, just as Bliar was. Osborne is the power behind the throne, just as Brown was.
What we need is a return to One Nation Conservatism, where it is possible for a Tory to be elected as MP for Stockton on Tees and where the default setting for the disaffected is not always Labour. I'm afraid that Westgate showed that a muppet can be elected, and this will be repeated unless the local Tories sort themselves out.
I really hope that the alleged miscreant in the Margate bar wasn't a Tory - many more shameful incidents and the Party will be unelectable - we still have the trial to endure.
Westgate were electing muppets prior to the recent by-election, Tim Clark, so perhaps it says something about the choices they have been given. I am just trying to recall which, if any, muppet had a pilot's licence...
Tim, at the rate the party is losing members nationally, that is the actually workers bees, it is not just locally we have to worry about.
The ace of all muppets, Milliband, must now have a fair chance of being our next prime minister, thus completing the sorry demise of the once Great British nation at the hands of sundry PC, minority hugging political leaders. Real Tories no longer exist.
Well if your last comment is true, Tom Clarke, thank goodness for that.
Perhaps you'd better hope for another Falklands-style war - worked for the demented old bat who used to lead your Party.
Same as invading Iraq and condemning hundreds of thousands to death worked for Blair, 20:37. At least I can see when our political leaders are failing whereas you Labour types would support anything in a cloth cap and red Y fronts.
Cllr Scobie, or should I call you Anon 1304? Westgate were presented with the choice of an experienced local political observer or a single mother, whose previous claim to fame was a declaration regarding drunkenness on Twitter, who would not state her views regarding the proposed Sainsburys development (probably because she didn't know there was one) and who knows so much about the ward that she thought Minnis Bay was part of it. Now you see why she's a muppet.
Oh and I thought socialists disapproved of arranged marriages - we'll doubtless get the announcement regarding your engagement shortly before the KCC election.
I am sorry to disappoint you, Tim Clark, but your assumptions are as unfounded as many of your comments are ridiculous. The posts of 13.04, 20.36 and 20.37 are mine. I am not Scobie. I am not a member of any political party. Period. It seems that those of you on the political right have found a new bloodsport - trying to "out" Labour politicians as commentators on local blogs. As pathetic as hunting with dogs is cruel.
I, and I am sure many others, would argue that several Tories (and maybe those of other colours) who have stood in Westgate - and been elected - are as much muppets as you allege is the recently successful Labour candidate. You may not agree - so be it - but it is as grounded a comment as yours.
Tom Clarke, I know you like to recast history whenever it suits, but I don't think the invasion of Iraq was ever popular, nor was it the jingoistic venture launched by Mad Maggie in 1982. It certainly didn't "work" for Blair electorally as the Falklands/Malvinas worked for Thatcher. Bear in mind that a guiding philosophy of your party is to seek out demons - whether they be immigrants, "johnny foreigners", gays or whoever - and scare the voters with them. It's what usually gets you elected, and you can witness the practice on Tory blogs locally.
I am not a member of any political party; followed by two vitriolic paragraphs attacking anyone to the right of Lenin.Nuff said I think
Tim, with you all the way with this Labour troll and I still would not mind betting your first guess was right.
Don't you just love the way it is OK to attack a foreign country for oil or regime change, but it is jingoistic to go to the aid of British subjects who are themselves invaded by a foreign power. Unreal!
Interesting that 18:45 feels his comments would somehow discredit Labour politicians. Evidently he has scant regard for his own literary skills. He also dimisses those that disagree with him as right wing yet claims no political allegiance himself. Well, you could have fooled me. I had you marked down as well to the left of Arthur Scargill.
If comments can avoid getting too personal re Councillors, it would be appreciated. Some of the comments during the by-election elsewhere were pretty spiteful and I have no wish for it to start here.
"Ren Wood", I have not even vaguely suggested that my comments might "discredit Labour politicians". That interpretation is utterly misguided. And you seem to be woefully confused between someone having political views - to which we are all entitled, though perhaps in your world, not - and being a member of a political party. Coupled with your rather snobby reference to my literary skills - which I do not claim - your contribution looks a bit silly.
Given the sources of the comments I have challenged here, it is not unreasonable for me to refer to the "political right". Or are you suggesting that the Clark(e)s and others I have mentioned are closet socialists? I am simply keen to balance the views of those who are as far to the right of Attila The Hun as they claim I am to the left of Lenin.
"Tom Clarke", why do you and others in your political grouping keep spitting out the term "troll" for anyone who challenges you? You are equally anonymous and spout your often contentious views all over the place. What makes me a troll and you not? And don't add false accusations to your armoury. I have said I am not a member of any political party, and I am not. Unless you have evidence to substantiate a challenge to that, I would suggest you shut up on that point.
James, I feel sure that Tim Clark will heed your request about his slurs against Councillor Hibbert.
Anon 08:45, in your comments you only attack those who you percieve as being on the right, but then claim that you are not a member of any political party as though that makes you an independent view. Since all your comments are of a left view point that is blatantly untrue and it is not unreasonably for others in the debate to point that out.
That stated, I accept you are entitled to your views, but then I am equally entitled to mine which, I would suggest, most certainly do not conform to those currently eminating from Conservative party HQ. Nor am I in accord with what you seem to see as the local right wing activities. Actually I am much too cantankerous to agree with anything much, but certainly never the left.
As to my drawing on the past, don't you have something of a tendency to fall back on your Thatcher attacks whenever it suits. By the way, where is your evidence to suggest Attila was right wing. Didn't he do a very socialist thing and destroy an empire, a bit like Attlee. Interesting name comparison that!
I heed James request but would point out that every one of my "slurs" is true. She is a single mother, she could not formulate a policy on the Sainsburys propoosals and she did think that Minnis Bay is in Westgate. That makes her a muppet in my book
I assume James Maskell will be deleting your comment, "Tim Clark", since it cuts across his expressed wish for this blog, but that is a matter for him. Interesting that you believe that single mothers are muppets, though.
"Tom Clarke", I do not claim to be politically independent in my opinions, any more than you could claim to be. I have said that I am not a member of a political party solely because of your friend Tim's allegation that I am Councillor Scobie, a claim parroted pathetically by you and then twisted in a most bizarre fashion by "Ren Wood". But of course you knew that; you were just attempting to score another of your cheap points.
And I did not comment on your "drawing on the past". I have no problem whatsoever with your doing so. My problem is with your frequent attempts to recast, or re-write, history. And forgive me for repeating the often-used phrase "to the right of Attila The Hun", but I think your quarrel is with wider society on that than just with me.
And perhaps one day you will attempt to justify your - and your political associates' - constant use of the term "troll" against those whom you do not like.
Anon 11:00, that I sometimes agree with Tim Clark does not make him my friend anymore than my usually right wing views mean that I have political associates. I am very frequently at variance with Conservative policy so I doubt local politicians of that persuassion would regard me as an ally.
Also, I see it is not that I draw on the past, but that I recast history. What you really mean is that I do not quote historical fact twisted to fit the socialist view point. Bit like the Falklands war which you see as a jongoistic venture whereas I regard it as something no country worth its salt could have avoided. Presumably you would do nothing if some foreign power seized the Isle of Wight.
I will, however, apolgoise for using the term "troll" in your case for I realise who you are, at least in the blogging adversary sense. It is something generally reserved for those who pop up from time to time, but never nail their true colours to the mast. I can actually sympathise with that for we are not all free to say who we are to all and sundry. At least some of us use a name so the thread of our argument can be followed.
Since you don't see her as a useful aid to education I withdraw the term muppet. The rest of my last post is true, and apolitical.
Tim, I think she is a rather clever little single mum who in quick succession has secured herself a young mayor and a councillor's allowance. Whether she will add much to the governing skills of the Thanet Labour administration remains to be seen, but then she could hardly be any worse than some of the other dinosaurs.
Did I say that she wasn't. Mind you could also read the last comment as a plaudit for her ability to jump on to the gravy train. Still doesn't take away from the fact that she knew little or nothing about the ward that she now represents.
Boring!!!! Tim and Tom and Tom and Tim. Come back Richard Card; all is forgiven.
Just think of them as Tim-Tom, a slight mispronunciation of the Little Britain character originating from the Far East. I can see them both nuzzling up to "Mr Dudrey".
Speaking of questionable characters, I see the Thanet North MP, Gale, was missing from a couple of key local events over the weekend - the local hospital fete and the carnival. Is he unwell?
Post a Comment