SOME 105 candidates have put their names down to stand in next month's all-out local elections in Hartlepool.
There are 33 seats up for grabs across 11 wards and the Mail can today reveal the names of all those runners and riders that hope to be elected on Thursday, May 3.
Nominations for the Hartlepool Borough Council local election closed yesterday lunchtime and dozens have put themselves forward.
The Labour and Conservative Groups and the Putting Hartlepool First party have fielded candidates in each of the new wards.
In total, there are 33 Labour candidates, 22 Conservative candidates, 19 Putting Hartlepool First candidates, 11 Liberal Democrat candidates, 11 independents, eight UK Independence Party candidates and one British National Party (BNP) candidate.
Who is standing in your area?
Burn Valley Ward
Maria Blades, Liberal Democrat;
Jonathan Brash, Labour;
Michael Corrigan, Local Conservatives;
John Coward, Local Conservatives;
Alec Gough, Putting Hartlepool First;
Ged Hall, Labour;
Jean Kennedy, Liberal Democrat;
John Lauderdale, Independent;
Sarah Maness, Labour;
Ray Pocklington, Local Conservatives.
De Bruce Ward
Rosie Allison, Putting Hartlepool First;
Rob Cook, Labour;
Sheila Griffin, Labour;
Suzzi McKenzie, Local Conservatives;
Michelle Plant, Liberal Democrat;
Barry Rayner, Liberal Democrat;
Sylvia Tempest, Labour;
Ronnie Whitlock, UK Independence Party;
Edna Wright, Liberal Democrat.
Fens & Rossmere
Allan Barclay, Labour;
Steve Gibbon, Putting Hartlepool First;
Trisha Lawton, Labour;
Alison Lilley, Putting Hartlepool First;
Geoff Lilley, Putting Hartlepool First;
Mike Ludgate, Local Conservatives;
Ann Marshall, Labour;
Angela McKie, Independent;
Elizabeth Parkinson, Liberal Democrat;
Dave Pascoe, UK Independence Party;
Arthur Preece, Liberal Democrat;
Bill Reeve, Local Conservatives;
Howard Smith, Liberal Democrat;
Helen Wells, Local Conservatives.
Foggy Furze Ward
Christopher Akers-Belcher, Labour;
Fred Corbett, Putting Hartlepool First;
Kevin Cranney, Labour;
Phil Fenn, UK Independence Party;
Dennis Loynes, Local Conservatives;
Pat Rayner, Liberal Democrat;
John Ringwood, Putting Hartlepool First;
Kaylee Sirs, Labour.
Hart Ward
Bob Addison, Independent;
Sandra Allison, Putting Hartlepool First;
Paul Roderick Beck, Labour;
Christine Blakey, Independent;
Moss Boddy, Labour;
Keith Fisher, Independent;
Tom Hind, UK Independence Party;
Shane Moore, Local Conservatives;
David Nin, Independent;
Jean Robinson, Labour.
Headland & Harbour Ward
Jim Ainslie, Labour;
Stephen Allison, Putting Hartlepool First;
Christopher Broadbent, Local Conservatives;
Kate Erskine, Putting Hartlepool First;
Peter Jackson, Labour;
Steve Latimer, Putting Hartlepool First;
Andy Loynes, Local Conservatives;
Robbie Payne, Labour;
David Young, Local Conservatives.
Jesmond Ward
Reuben Atkinson, Local Conservatives;
Keith William Dawkins, Putting Hartlepool First;
Mary Fleet, Labour;
Linda Shields, Labour ;
Stephen Thomas, Labour.
Manor House Ward
Stephen James Akers-Belcher, Labour;
Ronnie Bage, British National Party;
Peter Davis, UK Independence Party;
Marjorie James, Labour;
Mandy Loynes, Local Conservatives;
Elizabeth Smith, Local Conservatives;
Mick Stevens, Putting Hartlepool First;
Jayne Wells, Local Conservatives;
Angie Wilcox: Labour.
Rural West Ward
Les Coverdale, Labour;
Andrew Gough, Putting Hartlepool First;
Brenda Loynes, Local Conservatives;
Mike McKie, Independent;
George Morris, Local Conservatives;
Robert Steel, Labour;
Ken Thompson, Labour;
Ray Wells, Local Conservatives;
Eric Wilson, UK Independence Party.
Seaton Ward
Terry Allen, Putting Hartlepool First;
Kelly Atkinson, Putting Hartlepool First;
Sandra Belcher, Labour;
Cath Hill, Independent;
John Maxwell, Labour;
Jean McKenna, Local Conservatives;
Stuart Shields, Labour;
George Springer, UK Independence Party;
Paul Thompson, Independent;
Mike Turner, Independent.
Victoria Ward
Amanda Campbell, Local Conservatives;
Pamela Hargreaves, Labour;
Kath Hill, UK Independence Party;
Kelvin Mayson, Local Conservatives;
Paul Mitchinson, Putting Hartlepool First;
Carl Richardson, Labour;
Jane Elizabeth Shaw, Independent;
Chris Simmons, Labour;
Maaija Sinclair, Putting Hartlepool First;
Margaret Sneddon, Liberal Democra;t
Barry Keith Thompson, Putting Hartlepool First;
Jim Tighe, Liberal Democrat.
Overall or ward specific predictions anyone?
What a switch around!
Good number from the Conservatives. What does local conservatives mean?
Just means they are pretending they have no ties with the national party..
Quote from: testicles on April 06, 2012, 02: AM
Just means they are pretending they have no ties with the national party..
So does that mean its just the local Labour party they have ties with.
Reuben Atkinson, a tory! Now that's a good un.
And Hartlepool first say I'm the troll.
Such a shame that each new discussion turns into the same off topic and petty dribble.
Now, perhaps we could get back on topic? Anybody have any thoughts or predictions on any particular ward or the outcome in general?
Quote:"Good number from the Conservatives. What does local conservatives mean?"
It means they vote with Labour in the Council Chamber.
As I understand it, the person who gets most votes gets elected for 4 yaers, the 2nd most for 3 years and the 3rd most for 2 years. That bit I get.
Now the bit I don't get. Do people get three votes or just one?
Quote from: marky on April 06, 2012, 10: AM
As I understand it, the person who gets most votes gets elected for 4 yaers, the 2nd most for 3 years and the 3rd most for 2 years. That bit I get.
Now the bit I don't get. Do people get three votes or just one?
Everyone gets three votes, as there are 3 'vacancies' in each ward.
Thanks Lucy, but will people understand that they have 3 votes?
Quote from: marky on April 06, 2012, 11: AM
Thanks Lucy, but will people understand that they have 3 votes?
From what I've noticed in the past, it's usually made clear inside the polling station, so all voters should be aware of this before marking the ballot paper (even those who hadn't twigged before). I would, however, imagine that there will also be some HBC publicity about 'what's what' in the lead up to the election, so voters are likely to be aware of the number of votes they have well in advance of May 3rd.
Burn Valley Ward
Jonathan Brash, Labour
Ged Hall, Labour
De Bruce Ward
Rob Cook, Labour
Edna Wright, Liberal Democrat
Fens & Rossmere
Steve Gibbon, Putting Hartlepool First
Geoff Lilley, Putting Hartlepool First
Foggy Furze Ward
Christopher Akers-Belcher, Labour
Fred Corbett, Putting Hartlepool First/Kevin Cranney, Labour
Hart
Keith Fisher, Independent
???
Headland & Harbour Ward
Stephen Allison, Putting Hartlepool First
Robbie Payne, Labour;/Steve Latimer, Putting Hartlepool First
Jesmond Ward
Linda Shields, Labour
Stephen Thomas, Labour
Manor House Ward
Stephen James Akers-Belcher, Labour
Marjorie James, Labour
Angie Wilcox: Labour
Rural West Ward
George Morris, Local Conservatives
Ray Wells, Local Conservatives
Seaton Ward
Kelly Atkinson, Putting Hartlepool First/Mike Turner, Independent
Cath Hill, Independent
Paul Thompson, Independent
Victoria Ward
Pamela Hargreaves, Labour
Carl Richardson, Labour
Chris Simmons, Labour
It's difficult to believe that, with each voter having three votes, they will choose a variety of candidates from different parties. I should think that many, if not most, will decide on a party and then vote for whoever represents it.
A very interesting set of predictions notinshadow.
Quite a few of them are how I would call them but there are also a few there I am suprised by.
Anybody else care to join in this grown up discussion? Maybe one or two more and I'll give my own predictions & opinions
Which are the few there you are suprised by Shadow and why?
Maybe point out who is a no hoper and why.
I personally don't know many of them so cannot really say.
All are brave to stand though, so good luck as it is very much like the Grand National.
Wonder if the Bookies will be setting bets for it?
Quote from: notinshadow on April 06, 2012, 07: PM
Which are the few there you are suprised by Shadow and why?
I was suprised you thought Edna Wright would take a seat in De Bruce to be honest. It was a gutsy for her to move from Hart, though there is still Hart Station from her old ward. I just think that the core labour vote in the rest of the ward will prevail and she will sadly lose out.
Quote from: The Shadow on April 06, 2012, 07: PM
Anybody else care to join in this grown up discussion?
A grown up discussion with a sitting Councilor who used a false name to send a letter with completely bogus claims to the other councilors and the Mail?
A Councilor who knows he can not get re-elected under the name 'Conservative' (toxic in Hartlepool) and invents a bogus party name to try and fool the voters into electing him?
Can you actualy reconcile the phrase 'grown up' with your actions?
(http://img842.imageshack.us/img842/8016/rayshad.jpg) (http://img842.imageshack.us/i/rayshad.jpg/)
[quote author=The Shadow link=topic=19.msg200#msg200
I was suprised you thought Edna Wright would take a seat in De Bruce to be honest. It was a gutsy for her to move from Hart, though there is still Hart Station from her old ward. I just think that the core labour vote in the rest of the ward will prevail and she will sadly lose out.
Of course this fish has moved to another pool.
I think her actions regarding the hospital march will help her a great deal.
Quote from: mk1 on April 06, 2012, 08: PM
Quote from: The Shadow on April 06, 2012, 07: PM
Anybody else care to join in this grown up discussion?
A grown up discussion with a sitting Councilor who used a false name to send a letter with completely bogus claims to the other councilors and the Mail?
A Councilor who knows he can not get re-elected under the name 'Conservative' (toxic in Hartlepool) and invents a bogus party name to try and fool the voters into electing him?
Can you actualy reconcile the phrase 'grown up' with your actions?
(http://img842.imageshack.us/img842/8016/rayshad.jpg) (http://img842.imageshack.us/i/rayshad.jpg/)
spot on mk1 cos he thinks he as plenty of dosh he is a cut above
Quote from: mk1 on April 06, 2012, 08: PM
Quote from: The Shadow on April 06, 2012, 07: PM
Anybody else care to join in this grown up discussion?
A grown up discussion with a sitting Councilor who used a false name to send a letter with completely bogus claims to the other councilors and the Mail?
A Councilor who knows he can not get re-elected under the name 'Conservative' (toxic in Hartlepool) and invents a bogus party name to try and fool the voters into electing him?
Can you actualy reconcile the phrase 'grown up' with your actions?
Mk1 me owld china, you really are convinced I'm Mr Wells aren't you? Bless
I will, however, gladly discuss the points you have made.
1. You claim that I wrote to the Hartlepool Mail with bogus claims. There is already a discussion about this under the topic "A weed by any other name". I'm be happy to discuss this with you there.
2. A quick check on wikipedia shows that the tories got around 25% of the vote in the general election under the name Conservatives so I'd hardly say it was toxic. Especially in the park.
3. Another quick check on the electoral commission website shows that Local Conservatives is one of the registered party descriptions. Just as Putting Hartlepool First is for Hartlepool Independents - Putting Hartlepool First.
If you spent half as much time checking your facts as you did on photoshop (as amusing as some are) our conversations would be much more fruitful.
Since you seem convinced Mr Wells won't be re-elected, who would you say is likely to be elected in Rural West? How about any other wards?
I would think you are George or Shane!
Neither.
So why change the Party name?
Allow me to answer for you:
"The national party is so unpopular we have to take steps to distance ourselves from it.
We still are conservatives and fully support the tax cuts for millionares and the granny cash grab but it would be suicide to say it out loud.
Therefore we have tried to give the false impression we are not fully behind the party line in the hope we can keep out vote at its previous level.
We hope this subterfuge can help us survive."
They have not changed party name. Simply using one of the official party descriptions.
Now, perhaps you could come back on topic and enlighten us with your predictions of who will win where?
Quote from: The Shadow on April 06, 2012, 10: PM
They have not changed party name. Simply using one of the official party descriptions.
Now, perhaps you could come back on topic and enlighten us with your predictions of who will win where?
I would rather stay on the subject of the local Conservative Party feeling the need to change the brand in the hope of giving the impression they do not really agree with the granny tax.
A bit like hoping a change of name from 'Windscale' to 'Sellafield' will solve the problem of the contamination in the ground.
MK1/Shadow, you are both great posters, so why not just have a debate without the sillyness, as that's why we log on. You two have so much to offer, especially up to the elections.
Have your own Purdah period until after the 3rd May
Well in Rural West I think the Conservatives will take three seats.
In other wards, there will be a good number of labour colleagues.
Independents and Hartlepool First will have the greatest chance despite the above.
Liberal Democrats may get a couple as is the case now.
So that at least gets this back on track as the "hare is on the move"! Make sure you don't miss it, place your bets now!
A lot of the regular posters here are hamstrung by the fact they are seeking election and thus have to be careful what they say. The forum will be a bit tame until the results are announced. I see myself as a placekeeper!
The only way to get around this (if you are a candidate) is to invent another identity and post as if you were someone else...............
Well said mk1, I myself have tried to keep off the forum as I am in the election in Hart as is David.
I do not want to, and will not see this as a competition.
It is good to see the site back on as no matter what people say, there is very useful information here and research can help to see what is rot and what is not.
People I talk to are now aware of HTH and I hope this is good for the town in getting a little bit more to chew over when deciding if to vote and who for.
I am happy to discuss anything to do with David and I standing as Councillors.
Quote from: notinshadow on April 06, 2012, 10: PM
MK1/Shadow, you are both great posters, so why not just have a debate without the sillyness, as that's why we log on. You two have so much to offer, especially up to the elections.
Have your own Purdah period until after the 3rd May
Well said.
I don't think the Cuckoo is the Shadow, Wells doesn't have an axe to grind with Allison.
Not only that, he's not a writer, i know him he's a bit more devious than that.
I would guess Edna sees herself as representing Hart Ward so has stuck to the new ward which contains her home turf, so to speak.
Quote from: testicles on April 07, 2012, 01: AM
I don't think the Cuckoo is the Shadow, Wells doesn't have an axe to grind with Allison.
Not only that, he's not a writer, i know him he's a bit more devious than that.
Shadow has used this alias for at least 10 years.
From another discussion board in 2001:
Shadow:My appologies. Shadow has always been short for (I delete his name).
I assumed "again I delete"
at the bottom of my previous message would suffice, from now on I will include my full name in the headers of the post.moderator:I saw that and didn't know if you were havin' a bit of fun with us, or not. Go ahead and use Shadow in the header if you like, just make sure somewhere in the post you include your name.Seems to have retained both his alias and his sense of humour over the years. I like his style (sometimes).
We want to see a bit more proof than that!
You're a rabbit, so rabbit!
Together, forever, whatever..
Love is
http://www.hartlepoolmail.co.uk/news/local/sign_up_to_get_vote_on_mayor_1_3710670
"We want to see a bit more proof than that!"
Why?
A simple Google search will bring the details up.
Steve L gave us the name on his first post on "A weed by any other name" and The Shadow is not keeping much secret.
Apart from his real name and I am not revealing it here. That is up to him or for anyone to work it out, if they wish.
http://www.livesoundint.com/lab/lab/messages/archive4/106384.html
Let me promise you Stephen Haddow is not his name!
Come on give him some credit.
Not Steven Hadow either?
Nothing to do with LURK?
Are we playing "I Spy," if so, let me go and find someone to help, as I am rubbish.
Just as an aside, for the moment. When we were canvassing people's opinions on the closure of A&E, George Morris told us that his friend, Jim Allen, had told him that the A&E wasn't closing - it was just moving to the One Life Centre.
If you're not scared by someone using Mr Allen as their personal Oracle then you're not scared by anything . . . :-\
Thank you
So Shadow are you Jim (Tell us a story) Allen.
Right who's next
MK1 are you C.A.B. or Sylvia Tempest?
Jim Allen is the original turkey that voted for Christmas and then TOLD everyone it was inevitable and for the best of the people of Hartlepool.
We now have a 1st aid station in Park Road to service the emergency needs of 90,000.
I don't like to bring football into any form of discussion but Fabrice Muamba (the Bolton player who had the heart attack) survived because there was a cardiac surgeon in the crowd and both teams had doctors. He was receiving treatment within seconds of his heart stopping. Thus proving that seconds count in these critical situation!
I know that even with an A&E in Hartlepool it would take several minutes for a similar level of medical intervention, but by putting the only A&E resource in Stockton it must surely lessen the chances of anyone from Hartlepool surviving a similar misfortune especially after 07:30 hours on any working day, because if you go down in rush hour rigor mortis will have set in before you get the North Tees!
People will die, no question, wonder how Jim will pass that one off. Having said that, he is not the youngest person around, he might be wishing we still had an A&E right here in the pool at some point. ;)
Hi All this is the first time iv`e logged on to this site, i am very interested in the local elections, nice to see a range of views also interesting predictions on the result, the predictions may or may not be correct but hats off for having a go, both for the predictions and the candidates. An observation of my own is the full house of labour candidates shows they are worried the people of Hartlepool may have joined the dots and figured out the Labour party at national level have put the country into so much debt it is a scandal. Hartlepool council is a service but it follows the labour party line so by nature it is a tax and spend council. So for reform and change to happen the people of Hartlepool need to cut the food chain.
Hi, Beanzontoast; 'Julie's' new too.
I agree entirely with your point..'cut the food chain'. With over 50 years of labour running Hartlepool and 15 years of labour running the country, how come Hartlepool never seems to move forward? :(
It's amazing how they all come running out of the woodwork to blame the coalition for all of our current ailments...how come they didn't have the answers when they were in power? ???
We need a change from the status quo, here in Hartlepool.
labour and tories are in bed together (and share the spoils), so we need an alternative. 8)
I did think UKIP, or Independants. However, I am going to put my neck out and vote for 'Putting Hartlepool First'. :-*
They CAN'T be any worse than the self servers we have at the moment....and if it turns out I'm wrong..well THEY will be out at the next election. :'(
However, we have GOT to change what we have at the moment.
Think the hospital fiasco and blatant lies;
think about the lack of respect in the council chamber to residents;
think about the fiddle with the chief execs pay rise;
think about the dubious accounts at kilmarnock Road;
think about the dubious accounts at the Phoenix Centre...it goes on and on....we NEED a clear out. >:(
A warm welcome on board to Julie Noted and Beanzontoast - totally agree that it's time that this town saw some changes being made - as the old saying goes 'new brooms sweep clean'!
Welcome to Beanzontoast & Julie noted!
Well thank you kindly Lucy Lass, A broom may sweep clean, I prefer nature abhors a vacuum, so should the labour control council be seen to unravel, would the people who step up to the plate,have what it takes to stop the patient going into withdrawal.
And a kindly thank you to you Shepherd, how say you to the local elections will you vote, or just look at your blue skie`s if so will it be fair weather.
Julie noted but not very accurately !
Labour have not been in charge for 50 years but it seems like it.
You may remember but obviously don't that in 2000 an alliance led by Stephen Close-Conservative and John Lauderdale- Lib Dem formed a political party that defeated the Labour Party for the 1st time in 22 years and guess what happened ???
In 2002 the intelligent public of Hartlepool decided to vote for a man in a furry suit to run their affairs :((
So cast your vote carefully and be careful what you wish for. :o
What a waste of time they were!
Well testicals why nit pic about a few years, there is no need to vote carefully, nor be carefull what you wish for, If they have a Manifesto then it is for the wise to read,then can an informed decision be made, if you vote for those that dont have a manifesto then they don`t have a mandate to make change. A labour controlled council for a millenia is still one step removed from a communist party, and remember Stalin didn`t have many who could read in the end.
The Alliance were honest and had to pick up Russell Hart's debt of £478,000, it doesn't matter who takes control you wouldn't like them anyway.
I have no issues with the alliance nor with yourself. Russel hart may have been a good person if he was then it is right we pick up his debt, it`s a moral duty but through out history there have been such men and women, Shindler was one
and many more in england, but there was one such lady who i will not mention died recently in england who lived a comfortable life all expences paid by the british government. Because of their sacrifices you should vote on may 3rd it dosent matter who, others have paid the price the least you can do is honour the part they playe`d in giving you a choice. Iwish you well.
You are right i may not like those who take control of Hartlepool council but if the residents wish it so then that is Democracy, anything that isn`t you should be worried very worried.
The worrying thing is turnout, I cannot understand people being dissatisfied with how the town is run and then not using their hard won right to vote to say something about it.
I fear we will see only low percentage of the electorate actually turning out and the same old faces back in the chamber displaying the utter contempt for those who put them their that we have seen so manifest of late :(
Hartlepool desperately needs to churn it Councillors, a failure to do so will see the town in exactly the same place it is now come the next election; depressed, high unemployment, poverty with the great and the good shamelessly feathering their own nests and putting their interests and those of their families and crony's 1st.
Boss Tweed and Tammeny Hall writ small.
Sadly people do not turn out because they are confused, especially with Purdah where some people get more publicity than others.
So many Councillors say what people want to hear, but then do nothing until the time of the next election. Publicity drives people to vote for some though the candidates may do nothing to address needs. Publicity then covers this up.
We all need to urge people to look into who they should vote for, and to vote as a low turn out is what is wanted.
If we could resolve the above, we would have much more done in the town to our liking.
My predictions.
Burn Valley Ward
Jonathan Brash, Labour / A Local Conservative
Ged Hall, Labour
John Lauderdale, Independent;
De Bruce Ward
Rob Cook, Labour
Sheila Griffin, Labour
Sylvia Tempest, Labour
Fens & Rossmere
Steve Gibbon, Putting Hartlepool First;
Alison Lilley, Putting Hartlepool First;
A Labour Candidate
Foggy Furze Ward
Christopher Akers-Belcher, Labour
Kevin Cranney, Labour
Kaylee Sirs, Labour.
Hart Ward
Keith Fisher, Independent
Shane Moore, Local Conservatives
Jean Robinson, Labour.
Headland & Harbour Ward
Jim Ainslie, Labour;
Stephen Allison, Putting Hartlepool First / Peter Jackson, Labour
Robbie Payne, Labour;
Jesmond Ward
Reuben Atkinson, Local Conservatives / Keith William Dawkins, Putting Hartlepool First;
Mary Fleet, Labour
Linda Shields, Labour.
Manor House Ward
Stephen James Akers-Belcher, Labour
Marjorie James, Labour
Angie Wilcox: Labour.
Rural West Ward
Brenda Loynes, Local Conservatives
George Morris, Local Conservatives
Ray Wells, Local Conservatives
Seaton Ward
Cath Hill, Independent
Paul Thompson, Independent
Mike Turner, Independent.
Victoria Ward
Pamela Hargreaves, Labour
Carl Richardson, Labour
Chris Simmons, Labour
Reuben Atkinson, Local Conservatives, getting elected, never in a month of Sundays.
You know, I know, every man and his dog knows he'll be last.
That is probably true, however my prediction for that ward highlighted that I believe Labour will lose one and the result could be a suprise. He was a former councillor in that ward.
Can I assume you agree with my other predictions then?
While you've got the crystal ball out what do you reckon for this afternoon's 2 p.m. at Redcar? :)
At 3/1 'Song Of Parkes', looks good. Personally I'll keep my money in my pocket. The Shadow, seems to prefer long odds on outsiders.
I think the Tory's in Hartlepool will be reduced to two Councillors after May and they'll still vote with the Labour group.
So where do you think the conservatives will lose out? Which ones will go? And who will they be replaced by?
Come on people, let's have a discussion about this.
He doesn't want to enter into that with you Shadow. You obviously pis*ed him off with your predictions. if you don't say P.H.F. is going to win everything the normal suspects will be on your case.
Anything on the tele today?
Yes, Watership Down..
You read the book, you have seen the film, not eat the cast!
Bright eyes burning like fire..
Later there is
Who do you think you are?
Silent Witness
Do Nothing
Embarrassing Bodies
and
Ultimate Police Interceptors
All relevant to the town?
No Playschool?
Wallace and Gromit - A Close Shave - all about sheep being lead to slaughter, Sheep being the Hartlepool Public, wonder who Wallace and Gromit could be representative of?
Whilst looking round the chamber, I am always reminded of the Addams Family.
They're creepy and they're kooky, Mysterious and spooky, They're all together ooky, The Addams Family. Their house is a museum Where people come to see 'em They really are a scream The Addams Family.
just watched the remake of deep throat,been a few councillors into that...........so i hear :o
I believe we have wandered off topic again.
I did not post my predictions to upset anybody or get a few digs in. I posted them because I believe that the outcome will look similar to that when you look at all of the factors.
HIPHF have got a fight on their hands in Fens and Rosmere. Steve & Alsion are the incumbents and already known so even if HIPHF manage to keep Labour from getting all three seats, it'll be at Mr Lilleys expense as he's the new face.
Mr Allison has a better chance than he did since Tim Flemming isn't standing, I assume because of ill health. But even with Mr Flemming not standing, Labour are going all out and drew the boundary to suit them. Peter Jackson is probably the weak link but ultimately people will still just vote labour and HIPHF may lose out altogether.
They have a better chance than the tories in Jesmond, but it all depends on the effort put in. Steve Thomas is the weak link in Labours chain, so he'll go if any of them do.
I would find it difficult to predict the result for each and every ward in the election.
It is hard to predict what impact the new HF candidates would have on the normal voting pattern, without the complication of new boundaries!
As a guess, with the current national situation, the voters here will back their usual suspects.
So overall, Labour will see an increase in the percentage of seats they have in HBC, although they will suffer a reduction in their total numbers.
Lets say down from current 29 to 23/24, which out of a 33 total would give them an even better majority than now.
Who the labour councillors will be who fail to be elected I have no idea.
It`s all very interesting the predictions and all, i`m not so sure the labour party had much say in the new boundry changes, the main point is Hartlepool it`self it has for a very long time a Labour controlled council and many over the years have thought the Labour party as a whole were for the working man but they have not been that type of party for thirty years or more it is now a party for those on welfare and it is their core voters, so by it`s nature it is a tax and spend party, which has been much more in evidence as the Labour party had until last year been in government for 13 years, and on the desk at no 11 was left a note for George Osbourn, sorry there is no more money left that wasn`t the parents of a family saying that it was an outgoing Labour party and the note refered to the finances of the whole country. Any Labour controlled council will follow the same dogma it will be a tax and spend council. 3 points,
1. H.B.C. Audits it`s finances itself by itself this in itself is bad because you will always see the council is doing well
( any big business has by definition to appoint outside auditors.)
2. Many council`s employ expensive outside consultants for instance to identify how to cut WASTE. any
manager should be able to do that but it`s only taxpayers money
3. This year H.B.C. Did NOT have to put up the council tax BUT IT DID.
I agree with much of what you said beanzontoast.
HBC did not however put up council tax this year. The mayor, his cabinet and the majority of the labour group wanted to put it up instead of "accepting the government bribe". In fact they would have put it up (just like in labour Stockton and Middlesbrough) if it weren't for the all out elections next month.
The police and fire brigade put their precept up which is why there is still an slight increase. They did this despite being offered a similar grant from the government to freeze it as councils did.
Elections in Hartlepool look really interesting this year - with an ideal opportunity for the town to get rid of some of the long time incumbent Councillors across all parties who don't do the "job" for their party or the people of the wards they represent; but enjoy the ego stroke they get (and of course the cash). Those who appear in the local press at every opportunity showing their inflated ego's (and waist lines- at our expense) are some of the worst culprits.
However, these individuals will be re-elected without any problem. This will be mainly due to the bullying of electors to get out and vote in those wards by party activists on the run up and on the day of election.
My advice - put a poster up in your window of the direct compertition - as there is nothing like putting off even the most hard faced activist than an assumption they are wasting their time !!
I know I have been the activist coming down your path - but no more I'm retired and now an armchair observer :'(
Quote from: Bunsen Honeydew on April 09, 2012, 07: PM
My advice - put a poster up in your window of the direct compertition - as there is nothing like putting off even the most hard faced activist than an assumption they are wasting their time !!
I know I have been the activist coming down your path - but no more I'm retired and now an armchair observer :'(
as a manor house resident Im in the direct firing line....would love a 'putting hartlepool first' poster for my window and all my family/friends/neighbours windows....anyone got any ideas where I can get one?
I stand corrected on some of your points Mr Shadow, however the coalition government did give all councils the choice my point being that because the coalition in government, has tories in it a labour controlled council will have nothing to do with any help off them thank you very much. and yes i agree with you if it was not for the local elections they would have put your council tax up, it`s what they do can a leopard change it`s spots. Also the police are always asking for more money to reduce crime, or for faster cars to get where they are going faster, or some such thing, they come to the council chamber with their uniform on with a batch of pie charts and numbers and the council always gives it to them no questions, and thats the trouble no-one asks are they cutting crime, or are those numbers and statistics from previous years, and again as you say it`s local election time. The fire brigade some years ago were going on strike for more pay etc when it was published many had other jobs or businesse`s some even lived abroad and flew into england to start work they stopped the strike action and pay demands, so it looks like they have teamed up with the police to get an allowance increase it all has to be paid for from somewhere. The council is a service provider but they have took on the roll as a multinational corporation, and they pay themselves accordingly.
The poster for my window ...
If you didn't walk beside me on the march to save the A&E, don't come knocking for my vote.
Gets the point over quite nicely, methinks
I think Lilley might get Rural with 2 tories.
Hi Stig of Seaton and Steval, I agree there is some important issues to be dealt with, and i take it that you both may be voting on may the third if so good on you, you are becoming thin on the ground. It was said if people keep doing the same things they get the same reresult, Bowie sang about the same thing in one of his songs cant remember title but he was always crashing in the same car. The point is to ALWAYS look at a party`s manifesto if they havent got one they will only create hot air. However there is one party that has a manifesto which will address your concerns regarding A&E in hartlepool, as always look and you will find, i can`t remember where that came from either.
Quote from: testicles on April 10, 2012, 12: AM
I think Lilley might get Rural with 2 tories.
He isn't standing in Rural West. He abandoned Greatham to try in Fens and Rosmere.
"abandoned Greatham " . . . LOL . . . so subtle. ;D
The old ward has been split and, whichever ward he was now contesting, I'm sure you'd be there saying that he's 'abandoned' that part of his old ward not included in the one he's decided to contest.
It does not matter what ward, as after all, there has been a major switch around within the political parties.
I just think we need to concentrate on what ambitions there are in each candidate to speak up for the ward and the town?
I wonder how many people are standing who post on here?
Why and why not?
One of the reasons Hartlepool Post is not populated by more posters including those who are standing, is because of stupid but damaging catfights. Please think about the issues that matter. It is not about getting one over on here, it is about standing up for the town. That is what this forum is about, isn't it?
I was simply replying to a comment someone had made earlier.
Perhaps "abandoned" was too strong a word to use in hindsight.
My comments were in general on this really important topic. not directed at any one poster.
I respect individual comments but just want to focus on what the people want and who the people need to get it.
Quote from: christine blakey on April 10, 2012, 10: AM
It does not matter what ward, as after all, there has been a major switch around within the political parties.
I just think we need to concentrate on what ambitions there are in each candidate to speak up for the ward and the town?
I wonder how many people are standing who post on here?
Why and why not?
One of the reasons Hartlepool Post is not populated by more posters including those who are standing, is because of stupid but damaging catfights. Please think about the issues that matter. It is not about getting one over on here, it is about standing up for the town. That is what this forum is about, isn't it?
"I think we risk becoming the best informed society that has ever died of ignorance".
Reuben Blades
Sadly you might be right!
oops i didn't realise that :(
George Galloway, has taken Bradford West it being a labour stronghold for 30 years, U.K.I.P. are now level if not above the Liberal Democrats as the peoples choice for the third national political party. The people of the country are getting restless for change, or is history repeating itself and we are going back to the Crusades. It was always said politics is war without the bloodshed.
That's not going to help Hartlepool with the unrest between Dave and Eric.
That needs sorting out first before UKIP have a chance in this town, as they are not given themselves a chance to start with.
Fight the rest, not each other, if your in the same party with the same goals.
I dont know of any unrest with a Dave and Eric, I refer to an earlier comment of mine in that when it comes to a vote in local elections if you vote for a candidate who has a national party behind them with a ( Manifesto ) then that candidate or candidates have a road map, and you the voter can see what they stand for, you don`t say what this unrest is with Dave and Eric you assume all know who they are, unrest and confusion with any party can only effect that party if it does not a) Promote a national identity. b.) Have a manifesto.
If Dave and Eric are part of the Independants, or Hartlepool First, any unrest therefore would have a damaging impact that is why if Hartlepool wants change from a labour controlled council voters would be wise to pick candidates with a national identity that way you not only effect the town you send a shockwave to the national government to listen, as is what happened in Bradford west that was a Labour stronghold for 30 years you can bet the labour party are listening NOW.
sorry Beanz but I don't follow your logic at all. You seem to be saying that people should vote for a national party simply because they are a national party and though you may not like or see the relevance of their policies to local elections, you should still vote for them.
In other words, they may be crap but at least they're consistently crap.
Personally, I don't think either of the two main parties have done much for the town and therefore neither deserve my vote.
Sorry Marky I have explained myself badly, i was trying to put things into perspective, and as an example used the local elections to do this.
To clarify local councils have the mandate from central government, to Raise / lower business rates, carparking charges, community charges, etc. The National government make policy for many others, my point was if you want small changes like lower car parking charges, any candidate will do if they campaign for it, but if it`s a good thing if you are part of a national party it will be in their manifesto and you have a much better chance of lowering car parking charges accross the country, and in the hartlepool closure for instance this has been taken at a national level and to get a decision like that reversed can only be done from a party that has a national identity, hope that explains.
So BOT please enlighten us on George Galloways manifesto, did he win because he promised to bring employment, better schools, businesses, better health care to the people of Bradford. He is a nutter who will bring nothing because no one in power will listen to him
Hi Vincent, Can you let me know what BOT means,
in reply to your question, you are mistaken if you think G Galloway is a nutter, has no manifesto, and no-one will listen to him. I agree he has no manifesto as in the way i meant it, re political partys and the Hartlepool local elections. But he does have a manifesto, in fact everyone weather interested in politics or not has a manifesto, in my last reply it was to a point made about a Dave and Eric who are not seeing eye to eye, in such cases my point was that a party who has a manifesto has a solid foundation, and possibly the way to change a country and two people who dont see eye to eye would not be of seriouse concern to the party as a whole, whereas two people in a party of 6 say probably would be a disaster. If you would like to know about Mr Galloways manifesto and who will listen to him i`m happy to ablige then you can decide if he is a nutter, if you don`t want to know ok but i will leave you with two points, which Portays george as a nutter but things are not what they seem. 1. when george was campaigning he had a beard, george dosent as a rule have a beard. 2. when george won the election, within minutes he sent a text to the papers saying it was a great victory for the people of Blackburn.
B.O.T. beanzontoast.
Geoge is a raving lunatic, everyman and his dog knows that much.
Eric and Dave locally need to sort their issues out. I am told Eric is leaving in June, which in my view is too late to stop the rot.
If his going.. go..now..
as for Georges beard when thats handy then ::)
Wasn't he the nutter who went and had tea with Gaddaffi or some other raving lunatic?
There is a word I can think of to compare him with but Geoff will moan about it.
He's a clever lunatic, Whitehall is full of them as well as *****, liars, fraudsters.
edited my admin
There are some things that only national Governments can deal with but Government's can also apply too wide a brush when attempting to address what are essentially local issues. I don't want to wander off into the parking charge issue too much but, as an example, I'm sure there are some local areas in the UK where parking charges would be a good thing to restrict traffic in certain areas. In contrast, in Hartlepool, parking charges are simply an additional tax to support excessive and wasteful spending habits. A national Government with a national policy on parking charges would result in chaos and such things should be left to the local authority. Parking charges is only an example so let's not swing the thread into a debate about them cos that wasn't my intention.
There is a lot of speculation going on at the moment and U.K.I.P. seem to be the target for much of it. First of all we were told ,from a good source, that U.K.I.P. weren't going to contest this years local elections. Wrong. Then there was much speculation that Hartlepool First was really U.K.I.P. in disguise ,again wrong. Now we are told that Dave and Eric, of U.K.I.P, are at loggerheads and their dispute is damaging U.K.I.P. locally. The first two rumours were proved to be incorrect so maybe Notintheshadow can provide some solid proof to justify his comments. If not retract them.
It seems to me that U.K.I.P. have got somebody worried ,hence the need to produce damaging rumours. One thing that is true about U.K.I.P. is that it did not create the mess that this town is in .Only the Labour Party, aided and abetted by the Con/Lib party are to blame for that.
Ok Marky we wont swing the thread into a debate about parking charges as it was only an example of to demonstrate how a few councillors, without a national party behind them will find it an uphill struggle to influence hearts and minds.
This brings me to George Galloway, this piece is how he did it and why he did it, some may find it to follow,some may find it daft but it willl prove to be accurate. First George did indeed visit Gaddaffi, i believe he visited Sadam, but to find out what is going on we have to go back in Georges history.
George Galloway aka. Georgeous George is by his birth scottish, George is very, very, clever, and an equally good orator. The scottish people are or were made up of clans, and by their very nature are socialist in nature and naturally gravitate to the Labour Party as is their custom. ( the Labour Party as you know it is not what it would have you believe ) so true to his roots and his birth George WAS A MEMBER OF THE LABOUR PARTY i believe an MP no less.
Wow congratulations Ryehill, you have it spot on
I think BOT means nothing more sinister than Beanz OnToast but I could be wrong? I often am? Maybe it is a subtle put down or comment that went over my simple head?
Anyway, national parties have national and international agendas. I think that is a fairly self evident statement? National Parties also have local election manifestoes which they campaign on in local elections. I think I'm on safe ground here so far? However, the local election manifestoes inevitably address national issues which the party in power at local level cannot ever implement. A local election manifestoe for example that includes a pledge to end uncontrolled imigration, introduce elected hospital boards and build more grammar schools is promising something that can never be delivered in the local council chamber. At local level it should be about issues that local people can influence and control. I don't want to send any messages to Westminster, the time to do that is at a General Election. Local elections should be about local issues, not about sending national messages. Of course there would be no bigger message to send at the next general election than to tell all the national parties that the people of Hartlepool want a representaive in Westminster who will really be there to represent us in Westminster and not just represent the Labour Party.
As George pointed out to the US Senate Committee that tried to frame him with forged documents (boy did they get a Tiger by the tail, he wiped the floor with them!) he met Saddam exactly the same number of times as the hawkish ultra right wing Donald Rumsfeld, the US Secretary of Defense The difference George pointed out was that Rumsfeld met Saddam to sell him bombs and guns so he could kill his own people more effectively.
Beard Galloway at your peril!
Hi N.S.H., thank you for pointing it out B.O.T. i mean i didnt see it but you are right and i didnt`even before it was pointed out thing it was derogatory.
you are also right with national party`s, local party`s and manifesto`s however to take immigration it was introduced as an open door policy by the last labour government, that has put a great strain on local councils and services, ie schools, hospitals, and social housing, as an example in london the cost for interpreters per year runs into the millions of pounds, which you the taxper will have to pay for ( London of course ) but because this open door policy was allowed by Labour the national government at the time, the local councils if they are Labour controlled must agree with it, and in effect put up your taxes to pay for it all. My piece on George Galloway on this forum will complete the picture.
Wow another one who is seeing it well done M.K.1.
just to throw something else into your comment have you noticed why everyone callls the arms trade the defence industry, or why the local council call speed and tax cameras Safety camera`s, Follow the money, also when the poll tax was brought in it dosent matter by who whoever was in opposition and said it was nasty, again it dosent matter who. They didn`t get rid of it they just changed it`s name and carried on.
Ryhill, Firstly let me say that what happens nationally doesn't bother me to much at all, as for the rumours, there are better people to talk about them than me.
Now lets look at what I think is the facts.
I was in two minds who to vote for, I wanted to vote Tory but Ray Wells turned us over in my area last time round, so that made me look elsewhere at who to vote for.
I put a shirt and tie on, turned up to the UKIP meeting at the pub (The Woodcutter)..
Dave Pascoe was in good humour along with a couple of other guys that were there.
Eric and Dave clearly don't get on as well as you think..they spent the whole 90 minutes I was there digging at each other.
I walked away thinking "what a tool Eric was" to think that his constant digs went unnoticed to me and others there. Erics conduct in my view was simply shocking.
Dave Pascoe has a clever mind for politics and his not childish as Eric was and is a natual born leader..but has image issues ..so sort the image issues, build a team for next time round and I would be delighted to vote for a UKIP party with Dave Pascoe at the helm.
That's my view, I hold it dear and if you don't like that's very sad.
P.S.
Come May 3rd UKIP will come bottom of the pile sadly..that is my honest opinion.
If only 6 people tuned up to the meeting, when 8 are standing, that speaks volumes to me also.
If UKIP couldn't get all the 8 there, what chance will they have at the polling station.
The guy standing in Hart ward has a sporting chance, the rest havn't got a hope in hell and a blind Stevie Wonder, blind folded with a sack over his head and locked in a basement could see that, so why you can't is a shock to me.
You clearly must be in the circle, so you need to take one step back and then look!!
UKIP might get one seat but if you expect more of the 8 to gets seats, forget it, Going back to Stevie Wonder, you have more chance of him driving down York Road than UKIP have of getting more than two seats come May 3rd, so yes, I think UKIP have major issues locally in this town.
Dave Pascoe made a major screw/f*c* up by standing where his standing, against guys that will clearly get more votes. If it had been me, I would have pushed my luck elsewhere and given myself a sporting chance followed up with plenty of door knocking to drag votes out.
It makes me sad to think that come May 3rd the poxy BNP will do better than UKIP in this town.
Quote from: Ryehill on April 14, 2012, 07: PM
There is a lot of speculation going on at the moment and U.K.I.P. seem to be the target for much of it. First of all we were told ,from a good source, that U.K.I.P. weren't going to contest this years local elections. Wrong. Then there was much speculation that Hartlepool First was really U.K.I.P. in disguise ,again wrong. Now we are told that Dave and Eric, of U.K.I.P, are at loggerheads and their dispute is damaging U.K.I.P. locally. The first two rumours were proved to be incorrect so maybe Notintheshadow can provide some solid proof to justify his comments. If not retract them.
The evidence that is there for everybody to see clearly shows that UKIP did indeed have something to do with Hartlepool First. An objection from Eric Wilson does not constitute proof that there is any link.
Perhaps you will now retract your statement as it is incorrect.
In support of the post by"Testicles" he is dead right. I am sure most people on this forum remember the famous words of the then Minister of Health,under the Blair(wash my mouth out!)Gov.Dr.John Read ..."As long as I am Minister of Health Hartlepool will not loose its Hospital." Any guesses as to what his qualification to use the initials DR. come from? He wrote a paper "On the history of the Palm Oil industry of West Africa" I leave the rest to your imagination, but I feel it was another Whitehall deception at our expense.
I accept this post is slightly "off topic" but suggest he may be able to land a job at the One Life Centre.!!!!
I will reply to The Shadow post 109 and the quote from Ryehill on the same ticket, interesting, I will find out the truth of the matter and post it here. I will not ever reveal my sources. I will remain totally objective, game on
Quote from: The Shadow on April 14, 2012, 10: PM
The evidence that is there for everybody to see clearly shows that UKIP did indeed have something.......................
Do I detect the sound of slapping on the flanks of a long deceased Equus caballus?
So on the basis of one meeting Notheshadow condemns U.K.I.P. to oblivion. Can I ask him how did he get in to the meeting. Was he invited? If he was invited then it is a pretty low blow to criticise people who I assume made him welcome at the meeting. I don't think you will be invited again.
Quote from: The Shadow on April 14, 2012, 10: PM
Quote from: Ryehill on April 14, 2012, 07: PM
There is a lot of speculation going on at the moment and U.K.I.P. seem to be the target for much of it. First of all we were told ,from a good source, that U.K.I.P. weren't going to contest this years local elections. Wrong. Then there was much speculation that Hartlepool First was really U.K.I.P. in disguise ,again wrong. Now we are told that Dave and Eric, of U.K.I.P, are at loggerheads and their dispute is damaging U.K.I.P. locally. The first two rumours were proved to be incorrect so maybe Notintheshadow can provide some solid proof to justify his comments. If not retract them.
The evidence that is there for everybody to see clearly shows that UKIP did indeed have something to do with Hartlepool First.
Does anyone of any consequence really care ......?
Quote from: Ryehill on April 15, 2012, 09: AM
So on the basis of one meeting Notheshadow condemns U.K.I.P. to oblivion. Can I ask him how did he get in to the meeting. Was he invited? If he was invited then it is a pretty low blow to criticise people who I assume made him welcome at the meeting. I don't think you will be invited again.
This time round not oblivion, I think you are over egging it somewhat.
I had rang up as I had a question or two and was invited along by Dave and then Eric when he rang ten minutes, after I had put the phone down to Dave.
They were looking for councillors, I was looking for a couple of answers to a couple of questions I had.
That I guess is why they put a phone number on the leaflet, so people can call them with questions they have.
I did not expect Eric to continuely dig out Dave Pascoe at the meeting, had I known that I would have stayed at home.
If they don't want to invite me back that's fine, I will lose no sleep over it either.
Hi All There are some who have made predictions, for the local elections, and those that have had a moan and groan about Hartlepool councillors in particular the length of time it has been Labour controlled. A newspaper article today has confirmed UKIP has overtaken the Lib Dems to be the third most popular national party in the country. I wonder if those with predictions, and those who want a change within the council will vote for change, or will it stay as it always has. Predictions please.
Good luck to UKIP. However I think they are ejaculating far too prematurely if they believe these polls will represent results at the ballot box in May. My two pence worth.
Beanz how do you think UKIP will do locally in Hartlepool on May 3rd??
Hi Notinshadow, It`s not easy to predict, considering the unique circumstances to this election, it`s unique in that the whole council is up for election, the reason for this as you know is the boundry changes, these changes have reduced the amount of wards, but made them twice the size to do this they have not only changed the the natural voting patern of the old wards eg you would expect manor would go to labour as would the brus, but the brus ward now includes King Oswy drive all the way up to hart station, because of the boundry changes i would not think labour would not be happy with any of the changes, but they as well as the tories, and lib dems are national party`s and have a brand, ( people know who they are ) so they by tradition have less work to do to get a vote. There is a lot more to put in the mix UKIP have the hardest work to do as they should have worked harder to get themselves known, The turnout i think will be higher than usual but not fantastic, the postal voters are the key they are more likely to vote. So i think UKIP will get 3, tories 1, Independants 4, HPF, 5 Labour to get the rest overall though labour will not dominate the council, even if labour have more councillors as there will be much tactical voting.
Thanks Beanz I liked reading your view on it..
So who is next..MK1 how do you think it will turn out?
Just reading tonights Mail and I may have to make an alteration to my prediction.
I now thing the Lib Dems will take a seat in the Brus. Probably Barry.
Quote from: beanzontoast on April 18, 2012, 06: PM
Hi All There are some who have made predictions, for the local elections, and those that have had a moan and groan about Hartlepool councillors in particular the length of time it has been Labour controlled. A newspaper article today has confirmed UKIP has overtaken the Lib Dems to be the third most popular national party in the country. I wonder if those with predictions, and those who want a change within the council will vote for change, or will it stay as it always has. Predictions please.
Sorry to throw cold water on the lap of any Kippers reading but todays YouGov poll has put you back behind the Lib Dems by two points. Lib 10 - UKIP 8
Well it`s good to know you are looking, however the word is UKIP are aiming to be the third national party overtaking the Lib Dems by 2015, I only mentioned it because some are running in the Local elections,as are Independants, HPF, torie`s, and even a BNP candidate. The mood seems to be changing in the views they once had in Hartlepool, and the voters have a selection of candidates to choose from this time around, and Hartlepool may not have a Labour controlled council, even if it was if their is a good number of others i would expect them to give Labour a hard time.
This reminds me of the fight between Roy Shaw and Lenny McClean where Roy takes about 30 punches, gets knocked about out on his feet and when his head clear, he doesn't even realise what's happened and want to fight on ..
He can't understand why his manager is saying "Roy it's over" "it's over Roy" and in the end has to tell him he done Lenny to calm him down..
Roy went on to be a great fighter but not that night..I think he blamed training on Ginsip is it..some natual herb product..
What natual herb product will UKIP blame this time round..even if I think they will be good fighters next time round.
Nationally, no one is reflecting what the British people actually think of Europe better than UKIP and the Tories, for one, are worried sick. I was watching an item on the BBC today that had no problem finding Tories ready to say so.
Hi notinshadow, if UKIP dont get a single councillor i bet they won`t blame anyone thats not the way foreward. No the main blame game will be if Labour has overall control again as a council, Hartlepool will have been given a unique chance on May 3rd to change its a mini revolution in a way. for it to happen though the voters need to throw off prejudice, and party dogma and go for it, if NOT well i wouid hope there to be no more problems ever with Hospital gone, buses gone, higher taxes accross the board and more till your pips squeak. Dont forget when you vote for councillors in Hartlepool or anywhere else for that matter, or for politicians YOU ARE NOT VOTING FOR THE PERSON, YOU ARE VOTING FOR THE POLICIES, in other words Labour for instance is for, high taxes,large goverment, mass immigration, and the human rights act. The Lib Dems are just Labour without the Unions, will you never learn, or did you really hang a monkey thinking it was a spy. May 3 is Hartlepool`s future dont waste it, and good luck to anyone who is willing to challenge Labour.
Surely, through the pages of HTH, people in this town can see what YEARS of labour domination has brought to the town?
Our useless MP is now banging on about lack of job opportunities in the town because of the coalition cutbacks....doh. :'(
labour had 15 years in power to do something about jobs in Hartlepool, why wasn't he banging on about lack of jobs then?
We will NEVER go back to 'full employment' because of technology, mechanised mass production and the fact that we all want to pay £5 for a dress, £5 for a pair of jeans and £8,000 for a car.
Who can supply those items, at those prices? Asia and the Far East.
Don't give me the hoary old chestnut about the miners. Even when we had functioning coal mines, the labour & Tory govts. were buying it from Poland etc. because it was cheaper.
Shipyards? Both govts started ordering from the Far East (mainly Korea) because they were so much cheaper.
Computers have replaced thousands of jobs in the UK....previously you would have required office blocks of typists, order clerks and other admin to keep a company going. Now all you need a couple of staff and computers.
The car industry in the UK employed tens of thousands more than today. Intense mechanisation has reduced that to thousands.
Prior to labour and its 'open door policy' (which they have admitted was to spite the Tories), we could just about cope with the ratio of jobs and job hunters.
Now this tiny island of ours has people from all over the world chasing a diminishing number of jobs in the UK.
We ALL wanted 'something for next to nothing', be it jeans or ships and we are now paying the price.
Excuse me while I go to Matalan, they have some shirts for hubby at £3.....made in Sri Lanka. 8)
got to agree with julie noted on all points, for our MP to be banging on about lack of jobs in Hartlepool when we have been a labour town since god was a lad is a complete p**s take!
Judging by the content of the party political broadcasts on behalf of the the Lib/Lab/Con parties, the elections on May 3rd are not local elections but a practice for the next G.E.
Very true. The real purpose of local elections has been pushed into touch and the whole process has been reduced to the level of a giant opinion poll of the national parties to be fed into their focus groups.
Typical central government, using local elections as a barometer on how the national party is faring in the publics opinion.
Hopefully the electorate wont fall into the trap on May 3rd
Quote from: kipperdip on April 19, 2012, 03: PM
I hope our resident DJ Lucy is reading this thread as I have a request.
Could you work your magic and locate the classic Peter Sellers monologue "Party Political Speech" it's late 1950's/ early 60's.
Readers of this thread might like to be treated to a a perfect example of how nothing has changed. The political establishment are as 'identikit' now as they were 50 years ago.
It's absolutely hilarious no matter what political persuasion you are. Peter was my hero a true genius, this track proves it, I defy anyone not to laugh.
Can you oblige Lucy?
As requested Kipperdip! ;D
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GxBtGuu9BVE
http://youtu.be/1xc5c-pwf8o
I prefer this one Kipperdip
May be a tad passe, but this was the one that amused me...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tmI4BNA6vsg
Quote from: kipperdip on April 20, 2012, 05: AM
Thank You Lucy for posting up the Peter Sellers sketch.
I was using that classic bit of comedy to prove the utter pomposity and vaccuous nature of the present political establishment.
What was that? Nigel Farage shamefully plunders over £2m in expenses to fund UKIP? Yes you'd know all about the present political establishment. http://m.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/may/24/mps-expenses-ukip-nigel-farage?cat=politics&type=article (http://m.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/may/24/mps-expenses-ukip-nigel-farage?cat=politics&type=article)
The spin in Rossmere & Owton is some nasty people are putting information about the wrong doings of certain Councillors in the Labour Party, all of which is complete nonsense and untrue.
If residents want assurance then they can come and discuss their concerns with Cllr Wilcox at the centre, she will be happy to explain that thes are lies being spread by Independent Candidates to get their vote.
Labour have been doing a magnificent job in Hartlepool for the 24 years and they will continue to do so for the next 25 years.
I believe it, I believe it.
Why only residents??
My mrs was up at 6am this morning to get ready to go to work to help fund them!!
I myself work 10pm until 6am to help fund them..in truth though I was in bed by 3am, as I had wasted so much time on HTH yesterday, I was knackered so copped off work early.
It's our money and we want answers to how it is being spend, if they don't want to give the Hartlepool people answers in general then stop stealing our money.
Quote from: dangerman on April 20, 2012, 07: AM
The spin in Rossmere & Owton is some nasty people are putting information about the wrong doings of certain Councillors in the Labour Party, all of which is complete nonsense and untrue.
If residents want assurance then they can come and discuss their concerns with Cllr Wilcox at the centre, she will be happy to explain that thes are lies being spread by Independent Candidates to get their vote.
Labour have been doing a magnificent job in Hartlepool for the 24 years and they will continue to do so for the next 25 years.
I believe it, I believe it.
I thought Dangerman was being ironic.
Will the residents who turn up for a tete-a-tete with Ms Wilcox to discus the Accounts, receive a cup of tea & a free Greggs pasty curtesy of Manor Residents Asc ?
My only comment was the part in bold lettering all the rest was from Rossmere residents being brain washed by the the Belchers.
I Dont Believe it might have been more appropriate.
Was it a clever move by the Hartlepool Conservative Asssociation to change their name and logo for the local elections?
Judging by the fiasco of the budget, this weeks handling of the Abu Qatada deportation case and the announcement that George Osborne has sanctioned another £10 billion to the I.M.F. the answer must be a resounding yes. On the other hand will it just confuse their supporters.
Quote from: Ryehill on April 20, 2012, 05: PM
Was it a clever move by the Hartlepool Conservative Asssociation to change their name and logo for the local elections?
I think you will find "Local Conservatives" is a nationally registered party description that the constituency parties are told to use by Conservative Party Head Office and not one that Hartlepool Conservatives came up with on their own. An ironic twist wouldn't you say.....lol.....
Thanks for that information, Not Stephen Haddow, it does seem a strange thing to do. On the subject of the Conservatives has anyone received their very glossy leaflet on the subject of council tax. I know that nobody likes to pay inflated council tax , but when there are so many other contentious issues bothering the local electorate, it does seem a waste of a quality leaflet to devote it to that one subject.
I noticed SCAB2 boasting about working 'in the voluntary sector' and I presume he means he has a fully paid job with non-waged people working under him that do all the work.
Anyone know where he works and the bung wage he gets (nearly said earns!)
Quote from: Not Stephen Hadow on April 20, 2012, 05: PM
Quote from: Ryehill on April 20, 2012, 05: PM
Was it a clever move by the Hartlepool Conservative Asssociation to change their name and logo for the local elections?
Blah, blah, blah, [insert made up story about a party I know nothing about here].
Lots of love and kisses,
Hartlepool Independents Putting Hartlepool First AKA Hartlepool First AKA Putting Hartlepool First AKA Hartlepool Independents AKA UKIP First (Yes all registered party descritions. Ok maybe not the last one as that would give the game away wouldn't it)
Fixed it for you Mr Allison. Ohh and BTW what happened to posting under your real name because you don't agree with hiding behind a fake name?
Quote from: The Shadow on April 20, 2012, 08: PM
insert made up story about a party I know nothing about here....................
Ooopps........you mistakenly posted your covering email to Mizz Yates, the one sent with the fictional expose they printed!
Fictional? Let me quote something from that article.
"Mr Allison confirmed that the [His] email was genuine".
http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020/107516/enote-rp2d.pdf
https://pefonline.electoralcommission.org.uk/Search/ViewRegistrations/Profile.aspx
Regulated entity profile: Conservative and Unionist Party
Date registered: 14/01/1999
Financial year end (dd/mm) ?: 31/12
Party address: 30 Millbank
London
SW1P 4DP
United Kingdom
Party Leader: The Rt Hon David Cameron
Nominating officer: Mr Alan Mabbutt
Treasurer: Mr Norman Green
Campaigns officer: None
Other officers: Mr Matthew Lane
Mr Mark McInnes
Party administrators: Mr Simon Day
Emblems
47 Emblem 1 Conservatives Emblem
48 Emblem 2 Scottish Emblem
49 Emblem 3 Welsh Emblem
Descriptions
Conservatives
Scottish Conservative and Unionist
Scottish Conservatives
Local Conservatives
David Cameron's Conservatives
Ceidwadwyr Cymreig Welsh Conservatives
Conservatives: Vote blue, go green
Conservatives: Stop the hospital cuts
The Conservative Party Candidate
Conservative Party Candidate
Welsh Conservative Party Candidate Ymgeisydd Plaid Geidwadol Cymru
Conservative Party Plaid Geidwadol Cymru
Quote from: The Shadow on April 20, 2012, 08: PM
Fictional? Let me quote something from that article.
"Mr Allison confirmed that the [His] email was genuine".
I believe you.................
All that proves Mr Allison is that "Local Conservatives" is a registered party description, something I don't think anybody is denying. Can you please give evidence that shows they were told to use that description by their central office?
I found this information interesting.
https://pefonline.electoralcommission.org.uk/Search/ViewRegistrations/Profile.aspx
Primary name: Hartlepool Independents - Putting Hartlepool First
Party address: 13 Beaconsfield Square, Hartlepool, TS24 0PA, United Kingdom
Date registered: 28/09/2011
Party Leader: Mr Geoff Lilley
Nominating officer: Mr Stephen Allison
Treasurer: Mr Stephen Gibbon
Descriptions:
Hartlepool Independents - Putting Hartlepool First
Hartlepool Independents
Hartlepool First
Putting Hartlepool First
___________________________________________________
The email you sent out to me and other members of UKIP after the July NEC meeting:
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 20:47:09 +0100
From: steve.allison107@**********.com
To:
Subject: NEC DIGEST – July 2011
(Let us skip to the interesting bit)
Doug Denny then gave a brief report on Double nomination. This is sometghing I have been trying to push for a while and the NEC accepted the proposal to co-operate formally with residents' associations and local independents using the "dual candidate" route now available to registered political parties (NB Registered parties NOT individuals). If for example an organisation called "Hartlepool Independents" or "Hartlepool Residents" was registered with the Electoral Commission then UKIP could reach an agreement to field joint candidates. The ballot paper could say "Hartlepool Independent and UKIP Candidate" or "Hartlepool Residents and UK Independence Party Candidate" It costs £250 to register a political party and I've suggested to my branch committee that it might be a good move politically to get "Hartlepool Independents" or "Hartlepool Residents" registered and under our control. We could then maybe attract people to stand next May who are not going to join UKIP but who would like to join an "Independent" or "Residents" Party. At the very least, we should consider registering these names to deny them to others!
______________________________________________
I believe you then 'left' UKIP in November 2011. so lets look at those dates shall we?
14 July 2011 - Sent email suggesting UKIP registers "Hartlepool Independents".
28 September 2011 - Registered Hartlepool Independents - Putting Hartlepool First.
November 2011 - 'Left' UKIP.
Anybody else see the gaping hole in their defence?
do you know how to whistle any other tunes, Shadow?
I think the Shadow has a point, if Mr. Allison has confirmed the original email is genuine then why try to deny the outcome of it.
Clearly Putting Hartlepool First or Hartlepool Independents are in someway connected to UKIP
Have you ever considered the possibility that the Hartlepool branch of U.K.I.P. thought that dual candidatcy was a bad idea?
Apparently not. UKIP did have a say in this and I guess they didn't go for it which they were perfectly entitled to do.
This obsession with Lilley and Allison reflects pretty much the same obsession that Labour has shown to the two in the Council Chamber over the last few years. People who speak 'off mesage' disturb the herd and are attacked constantly for being 'different' because of it.
The herd needs to 'disturbed'. Actually, the 'herd' needs to be put out to pasture.
Quote from: Ryehill on April 21, 2012, 11: AM
Have you ever considered the possibility that the Hartlepool branch of U.K.I.P. thought that dual candidatcy was a bad idea?
At last someone showing a different viewpoint, that actually accepts what Mr. Allison proposed and moves on.
@Perseus. At the moment, I only see one group of people, perhaps two, organised enough to achieve what's required.
Perseus, I've read your posts, from a number of hours ago to now and can sense your frustration.
However, that is the nature of politics...the arguments and counter arguments.
It's the same with arguing about religion..you're on a hiding to nothing.
As for the lack of response on HTH to various posts, I've been out for days delivering leaflets and knocking on doors on their behalf and so has everyone else involved with PHF. There has been no time to sit at a computer for most of them..I would think especially so for the 'leaders'.
I think most people on here agree that there is something fundamentally wrong with the way the labour party run this town AND OUR MONEY!
The tories, indies etc. have proved they, in the main, sign up to anything labour demand of them.
Therefore, to my mind, none of them are worthy of re=election. >:(
We need a complete change of direction and that is why I am going to stick with 'Putting Hartlepool First'.
Yes, I can see some 'muddied water' in relation to Steve Allison. However, he was one of the few Cllrs to ask questions about the cost of the tall stories.
G. & A Lilley may have blotted their copybook (in the eyes of some on here) but hey, is anyone perfect? ???
I am trusting my vote to Putting Hartlepool First this time around. You will find that quite a few of their prospective candidates are new blood, keen to put Hartlepool first.
You already know a number of them from their letters to the Hartlepool mail.
Those letters indicate to me that the likes of Fred Corbett are genuine 'Hartlepool First' people, and not wanting to line their own pockets. :-*
The way I see it is simple. We can all see what labour and their cohorts have achieved in this town over a 50 year period. The 3rd highest council tax rate in the UK and money flooding to spurious concerns. :'( >:(
We now have to give someone else a chance.
I'll be the first to throw stones at them if they fail but we have to remove the labour luddites from the town.
Quote from: perseus on April 21, 2012, 06: PM
Julie, overall on balance i agree that they are the party with the chance do get a few in and a few labour out. however, i stand by my belief that you/they/we wont turn the mind set of the voters without a conserted effort to get a non party affiliated, honest and legal synopsis of the key issues this site has drawn attention to. if you HAD that it could be converted to and pdf, a one screen website, hyperlinked via text message, facebooks and twitter feeds, a visual 'story telling' video video version on youtube and you could get it round this town in viral form within literally hours. you could get SOME glossy paper versions, bung the fast food leaflet lads a few quid, 'rick roll' it to any e mail address you can get your hands on etc etc repeat to fade. . . Your cause in trying to be the sollution is noble, but TRUST ME you need to draw attention more to the problem. then people will follow you.
perseus......... i would love to be able to utilise the internet as you describe, but for a lot of people, its a bit of a mystery on using the full capabilties of the modern world, i have to say, i am impressed with your opinions on the issues that are confronting Hartlepool & in generaal i agree with them.
There have been several offers of a financial nature offered in the pursuit of the common goals you mention & i am more than willing to make a contribution.
I, like a lot of older people are unaware of how best to use the the modern media, but i`m sure we would all appreciate your contribution to make the people of Hartlepool aware of the present situation that currently exists.
I feel sure that lots of HTH member would support any contributions that you could offer in getting the points across to a wider audience.
Thanks to HTH we have a clearer idea of what goes on in this town and how certain cllrs try to justify the alleged misappropriation of funds and sheer profligacy of labour cllrs.
I leads me to think that cllrs should only be a cllr for a given term; similar to the American presidency system.
Every 4 years we ought to have a clear out of cllrs and 'new blood' brought in.
That would (hopefully) put an end to the scams.
Yes, I know it wouldn't be easy but I believe if people found faith in cllrs and the system once again (the faith people used to have, when cllrs didn't simply join up to fill the pockets of themselves and family members---allegedly; they became cllrs because they wanted to serve the community without reward), then more people of the right calibre would want to serve the town again.
Oh, you sneer...but 'Putting Hartlepool First' has existing cllrs.
True..but the majority of prospective cllrs in PHF are 'new blood', people that have watched from the sidelines as this town has been left in the doldrums by 50 years of labour control and now want to do something about it.
We've had the 'Arab Spring'...we now need the 'Hartlepool Spring'. :P
Quote from: Julie noted on April 27, 2012, 10: AM
Yes, I know it wouldn't be easy but I believe if people found faith in cllrs and the system once again (the faith people used to have, when cllrs didn't simply join up to fill the pockets of themselves and family members---allegedly; they became cllrs because they wanted to serve the community without reward), then more people of the right calibre would want to serve the town again.
Oh, you sneer...but 'Putting Hartlepool First' has existing cllrs.
True..but the majority of prospective cllrs in PHF are 'new blood', people that have watched from the sidelines as this town has been left in the doldrums by 50 years of labour control and now want to do something about it.
We've had the 'Arab Spring'...we now need the 'Hartlepool Spring'. :P
I don't object in principle to the Putting Hartlepool First idea, but I also don't think that ALL of the existing councillors are bad eggs. For example, in my ward, I'm happy with our existing councillor as I don't believe that he falls into this category and will therefore be voting for him again. I do hope however that this won't be the case in every ward and that a lot of the existing labour councillors who appear to be nothing other than self serving, building their own empires and feathering their own nests are chucked out on their arses and left scratching their heads as to what they'll do next.
Great result last night Kipperdip. So that takes UKIP to how many councillors now? 32 or 33 nationally?
Quote from: Donkey Kong on April 27, 2012, 10: AM
Quote from: Julie noted on April 27, 2012, 10: AM
Yes, I know it wouldn't be easy but I believe if people found faith in cllrs and the system once again (the faith people used to have, when cllrs didn't simply join up to fill the pockets of themselves and family members---allegedly; they became cllrs because they wanted to serve the community without reward), then more people of the right calibre would want to serve the town again.
Oh, you sneer...but 'Putting Hartlepool First' has existing cllrs.
True..but the majority of prospective cllrs in PHF are 'new blood', people that have watched from the sidelines as this town has been left in the doldrums by 50 years of labour control and now want to do something about it.
We've had the 'Arab Spring'...we now need the 'Hartlepool Spring'. :P
I don't object in principle to the Putting Hartlepool First idea, but I also don't think that ALL of the existing councillors are bad eggs. For example, in my ward, I'm happy with our existing councillor as I don't believe that he falls into this category and will therefore be voting for him again. I do hope however that this won't be the case in every ward and that a lot of the existing labour councillors who appear to be nothing other than self serving, building their own empires and feathering their own nests are chucked out on their ar**s and left scratching their heads as to what they'll do next.
That seems fair enough but the problem is that the Councillors you speak of are the ones presently controlling the Labour Group while the others cower in the corner in fear of deselection if they make waves. You can bet real money where the main election resources are being targeted.
Donkey kong is right, if you have a 'good' cllr why not keep voting for him/her. However, the way I see it is that even the 'good' cllrs are rolling over and voting with the labour lot.
I would like to know WHY Wilcox hasn't responded to queries about the alleged discrepancies at the residents assn.?
She owes it to the ratepayers of this town.
How can people still vote labour (and for the tories that support them) when we have this situation going on?
2 years of accounts apparently photocopied and signed off by an accountant. Unbelievable.....or at least it once was, now we CAN believe it. >:(
How can any of the current lot be worth their salt when they failed to mount a decent protest against the closure of our A&E.
It is time for a sweeping change.
She doesn't owe it to anyone..
Once her grant and incomes streams are in place every year, she doesn't see that we can just pop in there for answers.
By all accounts she's anti-social, so someone waltzing in from HTH can f*c* right off in her eyes.
I would have the same view with that aproach, trying walking into my work place telling me how it's going to be..you would told to jog right on..so what's the diffrence, she's the head of a business and it matters not what type of business it is or where the money is coming from.
Ray H has done the right thing, he ordered/asked the council auditors to come in and go through the books, they are in the best place to look.
What I have been told is that Ray H has no problem with people seeing the books, mistakes have been made but not the mistakes that are being made out on this site.
I don't support or defend them either way but one of the family used to work for me, his a friend that I hardly see but is nice to see him when I do, he came to my house the other week and ofcouse Manor Res from my point of view was towards the top of the chat..
He said his dad had received unwanted mail making threats that they are all going to jail and various other comments and his rightly upset and I don't blame the fella either..
Now going back to my friend.. his late mother built Manor Res from her kitchen, so rightly his upset at the way this is all playing out.
His wife was on the list that HTH chucked on it's front page as being paid staff but clearly forgot the small fact she had been there 15 years as a volunteer before she worked there. Who better to employ that someone who had been there 15 years free of charge.
Perhaps 'Ray' should reveal how much he pays himself-and how much the Manor Mafia pay themselves?
Once we see how little they take out then we will all say sorry.
Quote from: perseus on April 27, 2012, 02: PM
Labour has also done a great job keeping our council tax nice and low too. I say 'low', I mean technically it's less for a multi million pound mansion in London than for a semi-detached on the Fens, but that's more to do with the Tories keeping rates low in London than it is to do with Labour making them high in Hartlepool.
The Truth about Westminster and Council Tax
In England, homes are put into a valuation band based on their value on 1 April 1991, not what the property is worth today:
Band House Values Hartlepool pays Westminster Pays
A up to £40,000 £1,113.68 £456.34
B over £40,000 and up to £52,000 £1,299.28 £532.41
C over £52,000 and up to £68,000 £1,484.90 £608.46
D over £68,000 and up to £88,000 £1,670.51 £684.52 (this is a reduction of £3.10 on last year)
E over £88,000 and up to £120,000 £2,041.74 £836.63
F over £120,000 and up to £160,000 £2,412.95 £988.75
G over £160,000 and up to £320,000 £2,784.18 £1,140.86
H over £320,000 £3,341.02 £1,369.04
Band D is used as the national comparator between authorities
There are a lot of houses in London that are worth more than £320,000 but they still pay at Band H.
Westminster
London and its boroughs have a re-evaluation of property values every 5 years and the last one was in 2010. For those ratepayers who would otherwise have seen significant increases in their rates liability, the Government has put in place a £2 billion transitional relief scheme to limit and phase in changes in rate bills as a result of the 2010 revaluation
That is why the Tories and the Putting Hartlepool First bunch like to use Westminster's figures but what they don't tell you is they are heavily subsidised by the Government.
Westminster is paying less than Hartlepool because they are heavily subsidised, indirectly we are all helping them to pay their Council Tax via a Government subsidy.
It's called being selective with the truth – Geoff Lilley and Ray Wells are choosing to tell you only enough to get you to see what they want you to see.
Check it out, smell the coffee – you are being lied to and you don't even know it.
You can only fool all of the people all of the time if they want to be fooled.
Hartlepool rate payers subsiding Westminster. Pull the other one.
It will be interesting to see how people decide to allocate their three votes. I will probably spread my three votes across more than one political party but then I have the problem of knowing which candidate to vote for. I'm on the Fens/Rossmere ward, say I want to use one of my votes for PHF, which of their three candidates do I plump for? Is there any pecking order? If not surely you could get into a situation where single votes are spread evenly over three candidates but none get enough to be elected.
Quote from: The Shadow on April 27, 2012, 04: PM
Hartlepool rate payers subsiding Westminster. Pull the other one.
You might not like it, but the facts are that despite telling the rest of the country that we had to tighten our belts,
one of the first things that the incoming Tory/Lib Dem coalition did was provide £2 BILLION to keep down the rates in London.
Check out the Governments own website if you don't believe me Shadow.
Quote from: Sunken Ships on April 27, 2012, 04: PM
It will be interesting to see how people decide to allocate their three votes. I will probably spread my three votes across more than one political party but then I have the problem of knowing which candidate to vote for. I'm on the Fens/Rossmere ward, say I want to use one of my votes for PHF, which of their three candidates do I plump for? Is there any pecking order? If not surely you could get into a situation where single votes are spread evenly over three candidates but none get enough to be elected.
Well that's the risk all the POLITICAL PARTIES take when standing 3 candidates for 3 places.
They might be called Independent, but they are a registered POLITICAL PARTY.
The gov put money aside to keep rates down nationally.
There is also the small fact that the difference in rates between Westminster and Hartlepool has not occured since Labour lost power. But that doesn't fit into your half story ;)
Quote from: Straight Talking on April 27, 2012, 04: PM
Quote from: Sunken Ships on April 27, 2012, 04: PM
It will be interesting to see how people decide to allocate their three votes. I will probably spread my three votes across more than one political party but then I have the problem of knowing which candidate to vote for. I'm on the Fens/Rossmere ward, say I want to use one of my votes for PHF, which of their three candidates do I plump for? Is there any pecking order? If not surely you could get into a situation where single votes are spread evenly over three candidates but none get enough to be elected.
Well that's the risk all the POLITICAL PARTIES take when standing 3 candidates for 3 places.
They might be called Independent, but they are a registered POLITICAL PARTY.
You are correct, of course they are. But like you say the element that PHF are promoting (and what appeals to me) was its independence, which presumably means each candidate has different views and polices, but I'm struggling to find any details about what each individual candidate supports or believes, meaning if I do vote once or twice for them I'm going to just have to pick a candidate at random in the voting booth.
Quote from: mk1 on April 27, 2012, 03: PM
Perhaps 'Ray' should reveal how much he pays himself-and how much the Manor Mafia pay themselves?
Once we see how little they take out then we will all say sorry.
I can tell you P.H. earns under a grand a month, he is in charge of 6 people!!
ST writes;
"The Tory/Lib Dem coalition provided £2 billion to keep rates down in London".
I wonder if anyone else saw the irony in your relentless sycophancy to the labour party? :P
For your info., the Tory/Lib Dem Coalition also offered Hartlepool Borough Council over £1 m to keep OUR rates low.
What did our labour cllrs do (assisted by their buddies, the tories et al), they refused the money and put up our council tax. :(
Just so they could say what a nasty Coalition, look at the trouble it is causing you.
I hope people in this town are going to wise up to your lot on Thursday......Vote 'Putting Hartlepool First' and use ONE vote only...why give votes to someone else!
Quote from: The Shadow on April 27, 2012, 04: PM
The gov put money aside to keep rates down nationally.
There is also the small fact that the difference in rates between Westminster and Hartlepool has not occured since Labour lost power. But that doesn't fit into your half story ;)
You can bluff and bluster all you like but £2 BILLION for the London Boroughs including Westminster is a hell of lot of money in my book.
So I might be telling only half a story but Ray Wells and Geoff Lilley are telling a whole Lie.
Quote from: Julie noted on April 27, 2012, 06: PM
ST writes;
"The Tory/Lib Dem coalition provided £2 billion to keep rates down in London".
I wonder if anyone else saw the irony in your relentless sycophancy to the labour party? :P
For your info., the Tory/Lib Dem Coalition also offered Hartlepool Borough Council over £1 m to keep OUR rates low.
What did our labour cllrs do (assisted by their buddies, the tories et al), they refused the money and put up our council tax. :(
Just so they could say what a nasty Coalition, look at the trouble it is causing you.
I hope people in this town are going to wise up to your lot on Thursday......Vote 'Putting Hartlepool First' and use ONE vote only...why give votes to someone else!
Actually Julie YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY WRONG - The Council in Hartlepool accepted the Government money and froze council Tax for the second year in a row. The only reason that yours and my council tax has gone up - is because the Police Authority and the Fire Authority put up their part of the Council Tax.
CHECK IT OUT - Hartlepool Borough Councils meeting minutes are on their website.
ST, I do apologise, you are absolutely right. :-[
That will teach me to have the pans boiling away on the cooker whilst trying to use the site!
Apology accepted, I wish others on this website were as quick to correct errors.
Or the councillors f*c*ing the town now you mention it.
Do you want to say sorry here or in The Mail.
Westminsters rates are low because the amount of income tax raised there is high. Only 30% of Hartlepool residents pay council tax whereas in Westminster 80% pay it..
Again you've been listening to the lies and 1/2 truths spread over the years.
EVERYBODY PAYS COUNCIL TAX - those who can afford to pay all of it do so.
Those who have a concession ie 25% off if you live alone - the other 25% is made up by Government subsidy
Those who receive Council Tax Benefit from part to the whole amount again the money is made up by Government subsidy.
So Hartlepool receives the whole of the Council Tax due, regardless.
Yes but Hartlepool puts very little back into the economy compared to Westminster because so few work and pay income tax, you can't have your cake and eat it.
When the Police and Fire Authority, asked the council for an increase in their budget, could the council have refused to increase it and thereby not increasing the council tax at all. Also one thread on the forum stated what i think was a good point in that in voting for H.P.F. or Independents, you did not know what they stood for / Believed in and to vote for same made for a difficult choice, I agree but i have mentioned before on this forum how to resolve the problem and that is to support only those candidates who have behind them a national party with a Manifesto, the Manifesto will at a stroke tell you what that candidate stands for and believes in. The Candidates from U.K.I.P. have just such a national party and the Manifesto, you can view it on their website. The Labour controlled council is affiliated to the Labour party and when in government are a party for mass immigration, and the human rights act, it is also a believer in a big state machine, to name only three policies, so a labour party is for those on welfare benifits, it must therefore constantly raise taxes, U.K.I.P. dissagree with all three of Labours core policy`s, at a local level U.K.I.P. are the best choice to reduce the tax burden on Hartlepool residents.
Hartlepool has seen what a Manifesto has done for it over the last 50 years.
Would beanzontoast care to enlighten readers of this forum just what benefits were brought to Hartlepool by the last Labour government ? can he explain just what our current MP Ian Wright & his predecessor Mr Mandelson, have brought to the town ?
They couldn`t even keep their word on the retention of the Hospital.
As for the present LibCon government, we have the choice of 2 manifestos with them & they can`t even agree amongst themselves what to do, apart from one U Turn after another.
Local problems require local solutions, National Politicians quite frankly have lost touch with the ordinary working person, hence the recent local election result in Bradford.
BOT and others are STILL referring to national policies and 'manifestos'. ???
Putting Hartlepool First HAS such a manifesto....it is called 'Putting Hartlepool First'!!
No matter which Govt. is in Westminster, PHF will do its utmost to ensure the requirements of the people of Hartlepool come first.
That is their guarantee to you and to me. 8)
Should they fail in their DUTY to the population of Hartlepool, they will be out rather rapidly at a later date. :'(
But hey, I would rather take a chance on a new team, than stick with what we have endured for far too long. :(
I am reminded of the Texan battle cry; 'Remember the Alamo'.
For us, it is; 'REMEMBER THE HOSPITAL'
Their councillors can't even answer straight forward questions, so what chance do we have with them.. :(
Quote from: brassed off monkey on April 29, 2012, 01: PM
As for the present LibCon government, we have the choice of 2 manifestos with them & they can`t even agree amongst themselves what to do, apart from one U Turn a
You say that like it's a bad thing. Personally I think it shows that they are prepared to listen to the public and change course instead of being stubborn and refusing to lose face like the Blair & Brown.
". . . only those candidates who have behind them a national party with a Manifesto, the Manifesto will at a stroke tell you what that candidate stands for and believes in. . . "
And there you have it in a nutshell.........if you really believe that a manifesto published and printed in London by any of the national parties truly tells you what every one of their Councillor believes then you are living in Wonderland.
It does no such thing - it TELLS them what to pretend they believe and how they should vote. In that respect, it doesn't really matter what your friendly local Labour Councillor believes because in the council chamber it becomes irrelevant.
Council Tax.
The last figure I saw was that 37% of households in Hartlepool pay Council Tax from their own earned income (that's households not people). The rest have it paid for them by Central Government. The point being that Hartlepool having a high level of unemployment doesn't mean that it receives less Council Tax; it receives the same whatever the level of unemployment is.
However, there is an issue here that needs to be considered.
A large part of Labour's core vote comes from those receiving council tax benefit which pays their council tax for them. The actual level of council tax therefore doesn't bother them too much as they won't have to pay it themselves. This to me explains why the level of council tax in Hartlepool has been allowed to reach such dizzy heights - by and large, a high level of council tax doesn't affect many of Labour's own voters. As a result, in spite of being in the worst recession for 60 years they continue to spend, spend spend.
Drummond got it right in saying that the only reason HBC took the Government money to freeze the council tax this year was because there was an election round the corner. Just wait till next year and the bumper 'catch-up' rise about to hit the town - Labour are pulling at their leash.
It`s good to have debate, essential in fact, so let us see how this can work out, in England`s history we had Charles 1 because he was king, and the devine right to rule he did so, Oliver Cromwell gave us the parliment we have today, while that is history it is where we are today, my point and some may have missed it, to change a council you only need to have a majority of councillors from one particular party, they will of course do what they can, but based on their alliegience to the party they belong, after all you are not voting for the person you are in essence voting for their policies. So to make it quite simples to change a country you need a popular national party. Many people do find it bad that we have lost the hospital and comment about it do you know we only have 2 ambulances for the town,but we have a new life centre, this coalition government has only been in power for some 18 months to 2 years, so if you join the dots who is it that got rid of the hospital, well we hung a monkey so i will have to tell you, LABOUR DID IT, of course you have a vote on May 3. Many good people died in two world wars to give you that choice.
Quote from: beanzontoast on April 29, 2012, 12: PM
When the Police and Fire Authority, asked the council for an increase in their budget, could the council have refused to increase it and thereby not increasing the council tax at all.
Unfortunately not, the Police and Fire Authorities have tax raising powers, they just don't have the means to collect it, therefore HBC like other Councils acts on their behalf as collecting agent, with monies collected being allocated to the respective authorities.
Hope this helps?
...In his weekly article in the local rag Mayor Drummond openly stated that he would have liked to increase council tax instead of taking the "hand out" from the Gov. if they didnt increase it....His logic being that once applied an % rise lasts for ever.Therefore a similar rise next year cuts deeper. Who needs friends like that. I wish I had kept the article however we give the Mail to an elderly neighbour although I could have copied it.This was printed during the troubles with his desenting cabinet.
the same was said by the Labour Group who described it as a 'bribe'.
There was a vote to accept the Fire Brigade and Police Force precepts so I can only assume that it could have been voted down
Hi straight talking, the police and fire departments, DONT have tax raising ability, only National governments Have that both fire and police can only go cap in hand to the local council for extra money, they are none the less powerful, ie they know your registration number so ( this is hyperthetical ) if you where caught drunk driving well, but realistically both departments depend on gov money which is yes you guessed it TAX PAYERS, they will always want more they will always be wedded to the Labour Party, god forbid someone says to them no more.
Vincent, It has always been this way i have mentioned it before, Police and fire debts always want more, i know i have been there, when they turn up at council meetings, they only turn up for more resourses, they are intimidating, many councillors disagree with their demands, but a Labour controlled council will always agree. Tke the fire brigade as an example, Labour got booted out at the last election, the fire brigade were going on strike for more pay and no change in their work patterns, they called it off because the newspapers published data which said many were running buisinesse`s, one an undertakers, some were living abroad ( you heard it right ) and were flying in to London start their shift, life was so good it could only be dreamed of, but of course they only vote Labour because those nasty U.K.I.P. or tory`s would stop it all.
Mark`s GOT IT, simple isn`t it I would like to expand on this i propose people who have paid in through work in the national insurance stamp, for 45 years ( they have retired ) dont pay council tax, tv licence, and should they need care they dont have to sell their homes to get it, What an incentive, what a change, for the better you decide.
POLITICS IS WAR WITHOUT BLOODSHED, WAR IS POLITICS WITH BLOODSHED, can some of you bean counters out there tell me what is ONE of the top 6 industries for export is for Great Britain,( Clue ) David Cameron took them to china recently, Tony Blair was also similar, same as same as.
Quote from: beanzontoast on April 29, 2012, 04: PM
So to make it quite simples to change a country you need a popular national party.
...... Many good people died in two world wars to give you that choice.
Hitler was the head of a "popular national party" and in fact the world wars were not fought to give people the vote, the first one was to keep world order ie. The Rich to retain their position and the masses to accept their lot, the second was to rid the world of a fascist dictator namely Hitler.
Don't even flirt with this stuff, you might get what you wished for.
Quote from: notenoughsaid on April 29, 2012, 04: PM
...In his weekly article in the local rag Mayor Drummond openly stated that he would have liked to increase council tax instead of taking the "hand out" from the Gov. if they didnt increase it....His logic being that once applied an % rise lasts for ever.Therefore a similar rise next year cuts deeper. Who needs friends like that. I wish I had kept the article however we give the Mail to an elderly neighbour although I could have copied it.This was printed during the troubles with his desenting cabinet.
The issue about the Council Tax and whether to take the Governments money or not is much more complex.
Each year the Council Tax is set (if I describe it as a row of bricks in a wall) it remains part of the wall forever. What the Government has done over the last 2 years is to provide the equivalent of a 2.5% increase last year for 4 years and this year for 1 year. What that means in practice is that next year the row of bricks for this year disappears 2 years after that the row of bricks for last year disappears too.
What you end up with is a pile of bricks, not a wall.
Of course you could always examine the profligate way HBC spends its money rather than simply blame the Coalition for the next 2/3 years. Heaven forbid eh?
F.F.S. Why blame anything nobody should, every five years you have a choice to vote, well for a national party, i dont know who you are or your what you believe in, but i respect you and your view ( at this time ) but there are local elections soon, u must vote
Quote from: Straight Talking on April 29, 2012, 05: PM
Quote from: notenoughsaid on April 29, 2012, 04: PM
...In his weekly article in the local rag Mayor Drummond openly stated that he would have liked to increase council tax instead of taking the "hand out" from the Gov. if they didnt increase it....His logic being that once applied an % rise lasts for ever.Therefore a similar rise next year cuts deeper. Who needs friends like that. I wish I had kept the article however we give the Mail to an elderly neighbour although I could have copied it.This was printed during the troubles with his desenting cabinet.
The issue about the Council Tax and whether to take the Governments money or not is much more complex.
Each year the Council Tax is set (if I describe it as a row of bricks in a wall) it remains part of the wall forever. What the Government has done over the last 2 years is to provide the equivalent of a 2.5% increase last year for 4 years and this year for 1 year. What that means in practice is that next year the row of bricks for this year disappears 2 years after that the row of bricks for last year disappears too.
What you end up with is a pile of bricks, not a wall.
All in all you're just another brick in the wall.
CAN ANYONE EXPLAIN WHAT IS REFERED TO AS A ( RED FLAG OPERATION )
The arguement that freezing CT for 2 years will mean we have a shortfall after the freeze and will need to double the increase to catch up simply doesn't work. That is a lazy, lazy tax grabbing socialist way of looking at things.
Despite 'all these savage cuts' HBC managed to achieve a £4m underspend last year (roughly the same amount the year before too). A £2.5% increase in CT equates to a smidgen over £1m right?
Then we take public sector pay freeze, reduction in managers and other outgoings so we don't need to increase CT to cover those inflated costs.
Could someone explain to me exactly why we NEED to increase CT after the government grant ends?
Shadow I think your taking the p, but I will again try to explain.
Beanzontoast can also be flippant but I think may come to realise like others when it is too lat.
The wall analogy is actually quite a good one.
In 5 years time the last 5 years bricks will have gone, which means those years above the gap will fall if not maintained by increases locally. At best it means that in a real sense the Council will be trying to deliver services to a population that is increasingly elderly and at the same time dealing with family breakdown due mainly to poverty amongst our younger population, all this will have to be done on finances equal to or less than they had in 2010.
Quote from: beanzontoast on April 29, 2012, 04: PM
Hi straight talking, the police and fire departments, DONT have tax raising ability, only National governments Have that both fire and police can only go cap in hand to the local council for extra money, they are none the less powerful, ie they know your registration number so ( this is hyperthetical ) if you where caught drunk driving well, but realistically both departments depend on gov money which is yes you guessed it TAX PAYERS, they will always want more they will always be wedded to the Labour Party, god forbid someone says to them no more.
Sorry but you are WRONG - Both the Police Authority and the Fire Authority have the power to raise income via the Council Tax, they are authorities in their own right, they do not go cap in hand to the Council. Yes they get a large slice of their income directly from Government but they also raise local monies via the Council Tax.
I don't know the answer so asking the question..
Why do councillors vote it through then?
If you work it out, Labour have had 25 years out of the last 50 when they had a Labour Council, a Labour MP and a Labour Government - everything they needed to improve the town's lot if the motivation and imagination was there. But here we are, still with the same high unemployment, poor health and high levels of deprivation. Why would anyone believe that a few more years of Labour will make the slightest difference?
Quote from: testing times on April 29, 2012, 08: PMWhy would anyone believe that a few more years of Labour will make the slightest difference?
Well a Devil's Advocate could at least say
'think how much worse it would be if you had Conservatives in permanent Office"?In truth the argument is silly.
Is it being claimed that everyone who votes Labour or is Labour has no brains and are incapable of rational thought?
Get serious. The only check we have is the threat of being voted out and if one party felt they no longer had the need to (at least) pretend they are listening to public opinion then we really are in the s*it.
The bulk of posters here are (in the main) hystericaly anti-Labour and thus lessens the impact of something that can be portrayed as just another whiney partisan right wing site
The point I was making is that Labour have had plenty of opportunity to put their retorick into action and yet haven't; they could have done far more to switch the balance of the country from the South East to regions like ours - but didn't.
The only real change of any significance we've seen in Hartlepool is the Marina and the surrounding area which resulted from a Tory initiative - how ironic is that?
What will Labour do if they retain the balance of power next Thursday?
- They'll channel resources into their own pet projects and 'community groups'
- They'll blame the Tories for the maximum hike in council tax we're all destined for next year.
- They'll continue to spend money like confetti on a 'buy-now-pay-later' basis
- They'll do everything they can to keep up the numbers of UNISON staff employed in the Civic Centre.
- They'll sit back and shrug their shoulders when it's announced that the hospital is closing and North Tees is to receive a major refurbishment.
We, the people, will be in their somewhere too - round about number 27.
Quote from: testing times on April 29, 2012, 09: PM
- They'll channel resources into their own pet projects and 'community groups'
- They'll blame the Tories for the maximum hike in council tax we're all destined for next year.
- They'll continue to spend money like confetti on a 'buy-now-pay-later' basis
- They'll do everything they can to keep up the numbers of UNISON staff employed in the Civic Centre.
- They'll sit back and shrug their shoulders when it's announced that the hospital is closing and North Tees is to receive a major refurbishment.
We, the people, will be in their somewhere too - round about number 27.
The nail on the head!!
I can Shadow, THERE is nor will be any need to increase the CT its dogma from a certain party. ( red flag )
TT,
Hartlepool will never amount to anything whilst we have people in this town that are only interested in self enrichment. That includes the £200,000 a year (with on-costs) senior managers, as well as profligate cllrs. :o
We have to change what has held us back for so many years, before we can ever progress.
Otherwise my children have no future in this town, and that makes me very depressed. :'( :'(
Testing times Labour is about deprivation, unemployment, big government, it relies on this, its their core voter. let`s look at this, ED Milliband, brother David Milliband, Both never had a job in their lifetime, father Marxist interlectual member of the london school of economics, ( think tank ) still no job as we know it. A Marxist is a COMMUNISTIC IDEAL, Labour preferes the Russion model, they love Stalin you see, he called it the people`s party, you follow, he killed more people than hitler, continued prison camps in peacetime, and all subjects thereafter were peasants, this was the time when Neil Kinock went to shake the hand of this regime. CAREFUL
On the Thatcher 'revival' for the Teeside area-am I the only one who remembers the Ron Norman/TDC scandal?
The one where assets were made to vanish or ended up in the hands of his mates for a pittance?
Graft is not confined to your political enemies!
Quote from: beanzontoast on April 29, 2012, 09: PM
they love Stalin you see, he called it the people`s party, you follow, he killed more people than hitler
To all those not in the loop. This claim is a staple of far right loony forums like Stormfront. In short the people making this claim need careful watching.
Quote from: LookslikeTORYagain on April 29, 2012, 08: PM
I don't know the answer so asking the question..
Why do councillors vote it through then?
Councillors don't vote on the Police and Fire Authority precepts, what they vote on is to agree the aggregated figures which then produce the Council Tax amount charged to households.
I have copied sections from the minutes of the meetings to carry out the process this year that show this.
Meeting 23rd February 2012
145. POTENTIAL CHANGE OF DATE/ADDITIONAL COUNCIL MEETING
It was reported that as Members were aware, the budget process each year
was not concluded until the Council had approved the necessary statutory
calculation of the overall level of Council Tax, including precepts to be levied by
the Police and Fire Authorities. Council usually completed this task in a
separate meeting after the Council had set its own budget and Council Tax at
an earlier meeting.
A Council meeting had been scheduled for 23 February to approve the overall
Council Tax level on the anticipation that the Police Authority would have set its
budget and Council Tax by this date.
Members were advised that the Council had been informed that the Police
Authority would not be determining its budget and therefore its Council Tax
precept until Wednesday 29 February. This was a week later than in previous
years, although it was within the statutory timescales for Police authorities
setting the budget and Council Tax. Accordingly, there would be a requirement
this year to hold an additional meeting of the Council on Thursday 1 March to
approve the necessary statutory calculation of the overall level of Council Tax,
including the Police Authority precept.
Meeting 1st March 2012
Report of: Chief Executive
Subject: FORMAL COUNCIL TAX SETTING 2012/2013 –
INCORPORATION OF FIRE AND POLICE AUTHORITY PRECEPTS
1. PURPOSE OF REPORT
1.1 To enable Council to set the overall level of Council Tax follow ing the notification by
the Police and Fire Authority of their Council Tax levels for 2012/2013.
2. BACKGROUND
2.1 At your meeting on 23rd February, 2012, Members reconsidered the proposed
Medium Term Financial Strategy and this Authority's own 2012/2013 Council Tax
level, including Parish Council Tax levels w here applicable.
2.2 In accordance with statutory requirements the Council then needs to approve the
overall Council Tax, inclusive of the Police and Fire Authority precepts.
2.3 Both the Fire and Police authorities are eligible to receive the Council Tax freeze
grant if they determined to maintain their individual Council Taxes at the levels set
in the current year. The Fire Authority set its precept with a 3.95% increase in its
Council Tax on 10th February, 2012.
2.4 The Police Authority is scheduled to set its precept and Council Tax on the 1st
March, 2012. It is currently anticipated that the Police Authority will increase its
Council Tax by 3.5%.
2.5 The Council Tax bills for Hartlepool residents w ill clearly show that Hartlepool
Council froze its own tax and will show the relevant percentage increases for the
Police and Fire Authorities.
3. DETERMINATION OF OVERALL COUNCIL TAX LEVELS
3.1 The determination of the overall Council Tax level is a statutory function, which
brings together the individual Council Tax levels determined by this Council,
Cleveland Fire Authority, Cleveland Police Authority and where applicable Parish
Councils.
Quote from: beanzontoast on April 29, 2012, 09: PM
Labour preferes the Russion model, they love Stalin you see, he called it the people`s party, you follow, he killed more people than hitler, continued prison camps in peacetime, and all subjects thereafter were peasants, this was the time when Neil Kinock went to shake the hand of this regime. CAREFUL
Get real, Stalin Died in 1953 and Neil Kinnock was born in 1942, so unless he went to Russia before he was 11 years old he could never have met Stalin.
I also think your post shows that you see the Labour Party as one person, there are I am sure many in the Labour Party who do not agree with Stalin. I am also sure that there are those in the Conservative Party who did not agree with Thatcher.
Thanks for the reply S.T.
Quote from: mk1 on April 29, 2012, 10: PM
Quote from: beanzontoast on April 29, 2012, 09: PM
they love Stalin you see, he called it the people`s party, you follow, he killed more people than hitler
To all those not in the loop. This claim is a staple of far right loony forums like Stormfront. In short the people making this claim need careful watching.
I agree with you MK1 - the same people deny that Hitler used Gas Chambers during WWII - ask those British Soldiers who went into the Concentration Camps towards the end of the war. They know the truth, they saw it.
Straight Talking, i never said he met Stalin, read carefully what i said was he shook the hand of those in power at the time, his time. My father in law was a union man i got on with him very well in the end, but his lady wife said he invited two russion union men to come over and stay in the house, the Labour party are COMMUNISTS, and want, need to keep people in poverty, and they always deny the Labour Party is Stalins mentor. come on staight talking tell me Kinnock didn`t go to Russia ( the homeland. )
I am not going to deny that Kinnock went to Russia, if that makes him a Stalinist not sure about that either.
I think it is too simplistic to try to pigeon hole people rather than accept that we all try to do the right thing most of the time.
Posters on this site, in general have a clear Anti-Labour slant, they have stopped looking at individuals, I think this is narrow minded and wrong.
There are some very good Labour Councillors, MP's and MEP's. You can find bad apples everywhere even amongst Independents.
straight talking, i dont have an opinion one way or another, im a floating voter who to make an educated opinion when i vote i read a Manifesto. being a floting voter gives me some latitude when i communicate on these matters, also i am not a spring chicken, and i am very interested in history, so when i say that the Labour party is only one step removed from a Communist regime you can be sure it`s a correct assesement, where i will agree with yourself is that there are indeed many good councillors of all persuasions, the difference is in the history of their choosen party, in this case the Labour Party which they may not be aware, you can rest assured however, the leaders of the Labour Party throughout history know it only to well. In the days when a film called Rosemary`s Baby was depicted there was indeed place and time for unions, but today what does a union which is the Labour Party do for a working man or woman. In fact all 3 major political party`s membership, has been in such decline, that at the present day, there are more members in the caravan club than all 3 party`s put together.
To ST....you are trying to do a good job to "Keep the Red Flag Flying High" however Tony Blair aided and abetted by Mr.Mandleson and Co. pulled it down years ago. In former days the likes of Michael Foot ,Mr Wedgewood Benn were clear in who/what they stood for and appeared principled. ...The act of re-branding the Labour Party as "New Labour" was an act of deception and fooled a lot of their electorate as their behaviour and greed has shown. To me, along with the election leaflets I have received from the Conservatives and the second from the " Local Cons" it appears as locally they are trying a similar trick. I know a lot of people who religiously vote Labour who havent realised their vote has been stolen from them under the new name. Remember the words of the Prince of Darkness.... "I have no problem with people making loads of money.!!! What he failed to say was "as long as it includes me" PS. " and Tony."
Another point straight talking, at Labour rallies, they sing the red flag which is a Russian anthem, favorite colour RED.
Hartlepool council offices, colour RED, ruling council for fifty years Labour, HOW IN YOUR FACE IS THAT.
Barking!
Beanz, it's almost like talking to the big ginger fella, that got pushed down the ladder last year..
What was his name ..big, overweight lump with silly glasses and image issues..
The name slips my mind..talks with a moody Scots accent and the grannies love him down Burn Valley..
I think he makes sandwiches for a living and hangs about where his dad works..
Quote from: mk1 on April 30, 2012, 12: AM
Barking!
Maybe just too 'barking' ....... a sort of caricature, are you a Labour voter really?
Quote from: mk1 on April 29, 2012, 08: PM
Quote from: testing times on April 29, 2012, 08: PMWhy would anyone believe that a few more years of Labour will make the slightest difference?
Well a Devil's Advocate could at least say 'think how much worse it would be if you had Conservatives in permanent Office"?
In truth the argument is silly.
Is it being claimed that everyone who votes Labour or is Labour has no brains and are incapable of rational thought?
I've never had a party, because I never vote for a party, I vote for the people in the party.
I don't see much connection with the Labour Party of Nye Bevan and the freeloading carpetbaggers within the town's current Labour Group.
You can say what you want Steve, but none of the Labour Councillors have been done for benefit fraud.
Maybe Mr. Lilley would like to explain how he was quietly allowed to pay it back.
Wouldn't have had anything to do with the fact that he was a Councillor, would it????
As far as none of the Labour Councillors 'never been done for benefit fraud'; if I was you, I would take a rain-check on that one and watch this space.
As for the comment about Lilley, there are two ways of looking at this:
If it's true, then it doesn't say much about your own understanding of confidentiality and we should all be glad, therefore, that you no longer work in that department.
If it's not true, then it is what it is - a nasty little slur during an election when your whole party appears to be s**tting a brick - not for fear of losing seats but of the risk of all of your parasitic activities being revealed.
My own experience of the tax/benefit system is that it is so bloody complicated errors occur quite frequently and unless you're one of those few people who has chosen the benefit system as a career option then there is a good chance of some sort of c**k-up being made. In such cases, when things are properly explained, it's not uncommon for people to pay back any over-payments over a period of time. Such instances are not regarded as benefit fraud but as an unavoidable consequence of operating an overly-complicated system - which, I guess, is where Ian Duncan-Smith comes in.
I don't think this site should dwell on peoples benefit claims unless they have been prosecuted for
such a crime. The admin of HTH could easily be sued for Libel.
Quote from: Riddler5 on April 30, 2012, 06: AM
are you a Labour voter really?
Asked and answered many times.
Still the same answer-I have never voted Labour in my life.
Now you can say I am a liar!
I don't think your a liar.. It seems to me you are consistant with all the parties..
I think I remember a post by you, that said words to the effect of, if they put a target on their ar**, it's there for you to kick it or something simular.
Quote from: mk1 on April 30, 2012, 02: PM
Quote from: Riddler5 on April 30, 2012, 06: AM
are you a Labour voter really?
Asked and answered many times.
Still the same answer-I have never voted Labour in my life.
Now you can say I am a liar!
Sorry, I wan't asking the question of you, but of beanzontoast, who comes across as a caricature pantomime type tory invented to add a bit of smoke to the proceedings.
I am surprised how few electioneering leaflets I have received considering how close we are to the elections.
I guess that is a reflection of how little people care.
I did receive one from Hartlepool First but if they are the way to change in this town I would be
concerned at their lack of impact (good or bad) on the man in the street, which is a shame.
(I am in Seaton ward.)
I am really sorry to hear you have not received much information. I would hope that people who are in your ward, read this and ensure this is changed.
Do not be surprised if your leaflets have been taken out of the letterbox etc. Sometimes this happens.
Maybe get contact details for them all and email/ring them.
I got everyones through my door, well apart for Thompson who lives across the road.
Jean Mckenna it is..
(I work from home, so can virtually guarantee that leaflets have not been taken out of my letterbox.)
Quote from: christine blakey on April 30, 2012, 06: PM
Do not be surprised if your leaflets have been taken out of the letterbox etc. Sometimes this happens.
Can you get something from the doctor for paranoia nowadays?
Quite an interesting article, but why does the BBC always seem to precede the word 'cuts' with 'savage'?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tees-17892926
Read it again. It's not the BBC saying it but quotes from the candidates.
You're right FFS - sorry to have leapt in so quickly, but I do tend to get irritated by some BBC reporting, considering it to be rather biased - I believe that it should be politically impartial. In this case the quotes were, as you say, attributable to individuals. :-[
The 'savage' cuts are the inevitable result of the whole country thinking it could live on 'tick' whether it's individuals or groups like the current labour group. Max out on your credit cards then remortgage the house to pay them off before starting the whole process again. Or alternatively, shift the debt burden to the next generation.
It was always going to end in tears - and it did.
The worrying thing is that the local labour group are still at it with the difference being that they spend the money and we end up paying for it. Bet you all can't wait for next year's council tax rise. ;)
Time 23.30 hrs. Noticed that the forum has gone quiet. It has been an interesting ride with many points of view being discussed. Some pleasant ,some bordering on nasty,buts thats politics.I have been disappointed with the lack of information posted by candidates in my own ward(Hart) and no literature at all from the people I wish to vote for with a view to change.They seemed to have relied on the "pen picture" depicted in the local rag.Having witnessed the blatant lies issued by Carl Richardson I cant believe that that was the only way prospective candidates thought they could get their message across. I accept that independents pay their own expenses but a few more knocks on the door would have been more welcome. The only person who ventured as such I dismissed with short thrift only to tell him a few minutes later (that is the way that I am spade / shovel etc)I thanked him for his effort but at least he came. If change doesnt happen tomorrow dont bame the electorate.
Not enough said, could I venture to suggest that the candidate that knocked on your door was LABOUR?
Given
them their due, whether you agree with them or not, they do still knock on doors and they are prepared to talk to people.
So we get three votes, yes? I've only got one who I've decided to vote for, if I decide that I don't want to vote for numbers 2 and 3 does that invalidate my ballot paper, i.e. do I HAVE to cast three votes?
I might decide who else to vote for yet like and actually use all three, I was just wondering if it was mandatory.
From Seaton ward ...guy in front of me asked how many wards he was voting for.
He was confused because of the addresses of the candidates.
Quote from: kipperdip on May 03, 2012, 09: AM
Donkey Kong
You most certainly DO NOT have to vote for 3 candidates.
You are allowed to vote for UP TO 3 candidates.
Stick with your plan to vote for the 1 candidate you prefer, you are well in order.
Thank You.
Quote from: Stig of the Seaton Dump on May 03, 2012, 09: AM
From Seaton ward ...guy in front of me asked how many wards he was voting for.
He was confused because of the addresses of the candidates.
My new ward seems ridiculous and is far from a local representation, as one of the Independent candidates is from Greatham which is over 5 miles from where I live in Hartlepool.
How did they come up with this rubbish? I can picture some scribbles on a map done by my 3 year old.
Blame the Boundaries Commission - another unelected body that insists on telling us what's best for us and that the opinion of the local population is irrelevant.
Called into the Polling Station in Sandringham Road 1.00pm only 61 votes they said it was very quiet maybe it would pick up later. But 61 votes not a lot is it?
Some of the polling stations have been moved which is confusing those who turn up at the 'normal' place. It's questionable how many of those turned away will bother to walk to the alternative. I think it traditionally picks up after tea-time but we'll have to see.
Quote from: steveL on May 03, 2012, 01: PM
Blame the Boundaries Commission - another unelected body that insists on telling us what's best for us and that the opinion of the local population is irrelevant.
Blame the Mayor, aided and abetted by Geoff Lilley and a few of his independent mates on the council.
They have been lobbying hard for almost 10 years to reduce the number of Councillors to 32, eventually the Electoral Commission took notice.
But instead of doing exactly what they had been asked to do which was 10 Wards + Elwick and Greatham - so preserving Geoff's seat and what was at the time Stan Kaisers seat (currently Hilary Thompson) they decided that 11 Wards of 3 Councillors should be instigated on the Town.
So the wards are big, in some cases unwieldy and contain many different communities.
Hi Riddler, you say you dont vote for a party, you only vote for the people in a party, if that comment means you only vote for people in a party because, you like the colour of their eyes, or hair or something else, can you explain. My view on the subject is that when people vote for anyone in any political party you are not really voting for the person at all you are ALWAYS VOTING FOR THE PARTY`S POLICIES. as an example if you vote for a Labour candidate, you are voting for mass immigration, the human rights act, and a large government, which is what you have been getting for the last 13 years when labour was in government, no surprise there then.
Just a quick update in the new victoria ward voting it looks as though it's going to be a very low turn out, ex councillor steve wallace was standing on the corner of topcliffe street shouting vote labour drivel through a hand held megaphone.
The number of voters at the sandringham road polling station was at 8.45pm.
Only 210
300 all day at Warrior Park.
About the same as last year they told me.
To Straight Talking.....Yes he was a Labour chap and I did give his him due. But I must point out the"postman "knocks at my door and he did not get my vote.!!!!Credit to your man in any event.
Now we know where S.T. is..
You guys want to see the pictures of the two of the three Labour people wanting votes in Seaton...bless em..
John Maxwell
Stuart Shields
One of them looks like they shout "The Bells" "The Bells"..the rest of the year.
..........and theyre off, its mad dog at the front followed by a cuckoo with sore aching-backside right up his rear then morris 1000 and ginger spectacles and photoshop pam followed by chris angry butthole then 20 yards behind is ugly ged and jowells wilcox and the lilley twins..........and over the 1st fence its deaf aid wright, reverend lauderdale and the bearded chairman closely followed by arthur lugosi, reuben vorderman and at the back the tw*t from trimdon, now its over to you at the paddock...................
Quote from: perseus on May 03, 2012, 10: PM
Just had a text saying rays hanging around with the labour lot like a bad smell. shaking hands with wrighty, the whole lot.
I didn't see any of that and I was taking an interest in who was shaking hands with who!!
Ray spent most of the night upstairs..
Wrighty blanked me when I asked him about the hospital and walked away like a good boy does..how do people vote for him is beond me..
Well it`s all over now Labour retain control of Hartlepool, country in financial meltdown due to Labour, Hartlepool has voted for more of the same Mass immigration 2014 Bulgaria and Rumania, can join the EU and come here for work, and benifits, Well done Hartlepool.
why should jack stih vote when he is on fcuikng good benefits thats how labour gets there vote.
Hi Stokoe, I dont know who jack is but you are correct in your view, the Labour Party is the party for those on welfare, it`s their core voter, it didn`t start out like that welfare was for those that found themselves on hard times but it is now a career choice for many, in the words of one lifelong labour voter in Hartlepool not worked for 30 years, and i quote
IT`S A MATTER OF SURVIVAL i think that is really good it tells you all you really need to know if he stops voting for the Labour party his benefits might stop, and he wont survive, if all unemployed get jobs with good money buy their own house etc, the Labour party wont SURVIVE. So the Labour party play the class card. can you see now why the mass immigration, and the human rights act brought in by Labour, all is easy to spot if you can see all the pieces in the jigsaw. Now im not anti labour far from it im just showing you the core beliefs of that Party, and where it is ultimately heading, it disguises it`s purpose, but if you know where to look its easy to see, but remember you are in the middle of a WAR and millions don`t know its going on, isn`t that just awesome.
Nothing wrong with the Human Rigts Act
Your human rights are:
•the right to life
•freedom from torture and degrading treatment
•freedom from slavery and forced labour
•the right to liberty
•the right to a fair trial
•the right not to be punished for something that wasn't a crime when you did it
•the right to respect for private and family life
•freedom of thought, conscience and religion, and freedom to express your beliefs
•freedom of expression
•freedom of assembly and association
•the right to marry and to start a family
•the right not to be discriminated against in respect of these rights and freedoms
•the right to peaceful enjoyment of your property
•the right to an education
•the right to participate in free elections
•the right not to be subjected to the death penalty
If any of these rights and freedoms are breached, you have a right to an effective solution in law, even if the breach was by someone in authority, such as, for example, a police officer
Pity you only see that rights apply to yourself, but can be limited by you for others.
I'm sure they've just put some large boulders on the beach at Seaton.
It is an old joke but worth repeating.
A human Rights champion is a politician (usualy Tory) under investigation for corruption!
PS.
Nice of Ray to lend SCAB 1 a suit for last nights count.
I was wondering why all the local supermarkets were out of Bacofoil and now I know why!
L.L.T.A. Come on you know what i am talking about ARTICLE 8 of that very act, so you agree that immigrants can come to this country not be insured for a car etc go and run over and kill children and not be sent back home, or commit other crimes and because they have a cat they have a family life and cant be deported.
I don't remember having a conversation about runing kids over or cats.
Are you verballing me up..you must be a police officer or C.B. or the slink from Seaton.
I remember the cat thing and upon further reading of the hysterical headlines it turned out a Judge has given a several page verdict on that persons claim to have established a family life in the UK.
The judge mentioned in passing that the fact he had owned a cat for several years was another indication he had a settled life in the UK.
The xenophobic right wing rags (Sun/Daily Mail) ran with this and the EDL types have not the wit to understand their error.
All p**s and wind..........
Thats the one MK1 i remember the newspaper only told it as it was, there was however a comment, by a chap called Littlejohn who said, YOU COULDN`T MAKE IT UP. its ok though its` only taxpayers money, can you remember yhe one about the illegal immigrant who when caught was put into a detention centre until they processed his country of origin etc, he said it was against his human rights they had to let him out and gave him £17,00 quid for his inconvienience, all this from a guy who had no right to be here anyway, he`s still here and on benifits, YOU COULDN`T MAKE IT UP.
That should have been £17,000 quid sorry.