Local Elections - 3rd of May 2012

[The Shadow]

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?

[marky]

do you know how to whistle any other tunes, Shadow?

[Straight Talking]

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

[Ryehill]

 Have you ever considered the possibility that the Hartlepool branch of U.K.I.P. thought that dual candidatcy was a bad idea?

[marky]

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.

[Straight Talking]

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.

[marky]

@Perseus. At the moment, I only see one group of people, perhaps two, organised enough to achieve what's required.

[Julie noted]

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.

[brassed off monkey]

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.

[Julie noted]

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'. 

[Donkey Kong]

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'. 

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.

[The Shadow]

Great result last night Kipperdip. So that takes UKIP to how many councillors now? 32 or 33 nationally?

[not4me]

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'. 

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.

[Julie noted]

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. 

[Stig of the Seaton Dump]

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.