The date for the Seaton Ward bi-election has been announced as Thursday, 25th October
Looks like HBC received the two formal written requests that this be held within the statutory 35 days...would certainly have been more cost effective to wait and hold the by-election at the same time as votes were being cast for the referendum and police role.
I think if UKIP Members had been at the meeting tonight, they would have cringed at the flack received. I do not think anyone agreed and further, that there is an aim to make Seaton voters aware that UKIP were responsible.
I chuckled when they said they could not do anything against electoral law or ignore breaches, if Members were to try and change the date. They do sometimes....
overall, for how close it is to the Police Commissioner and Referendum activities, it is a real concern that a calculation to a five figure sum can be developed for this bi-election. Maybe they could have asked Mike to hold on to his resignation for three weeks if nothing else could have been done. Could he not withdraw it and then put it in again?
There are a number of issues relevant to the voters of the Seaton Ward which deserve proper debate. If the Seaton bi-election was held on the same day as the Police Commissioner elections and the Mayoral Referendum, those issues would be buried in the general discussion about those two issues. It does not seem unreasonable to have the bi-election on a different day.
On the question of cost I doubt whether it will cost a five figure sum ,which could be anything upto £99 K. Over the past few years we have had a number of elections/referenda which have cost millions of pounds . Remember AV. Was that worth it? Democracy costs money to adminster so lets debate the issues facing the voters of Seaton and accept that any election will cost money.
Mike tried hard but was one voice against a large choir of self serving prima donnas.
He was the only Seaton councillor that responded to me about my concerns for the A&E and he was also very vocal about the landfill situation.
Cath Hill appears to be too busy but do anything other than suck up to the mayor and get platitudes published in the Mail.
No idea about Paul Thompson, maybe he has been out on a canoe.
Seaton needs to replace Mike with somebody just like him but less polite and with a massive gob.
I hope PHF has somebody lined up !
Whatever you think of those UKIP signatures triggering an earlier than expected election, we mustn't forget that they were perfectly entitled to do so - as were any of the ward residents. I would probably argue, along with everyone else, that it would have been more sensible to wait until November 15th purely on cost.
However, perhaps it is no bad thing to remind the local politicians now and then that they don't get to control everything according to their own interests - which is what all of the whining in the council chamber was really all about.
Whatever the costs, it won't come close to matching Mad Marge's £50,000 to employ one of her mates on the laughable 'furniture project' so there's a fair bit of hypocrisy going on here.
Perseus, holding the bi-election on the 25th. October does reduce the time for debate by 3 weeks but it still leaves 6 weeks for any debate. Surely this is long enough? After all a general election can be called with only 3 weeks notice. You are insulting the intelligence of the Seaton electorate.
It's not really a question of legality because clearly that is not the issue. The vote on November 15th will be dominated by the Mayoral Referendum and less so the Police Commssioner vote. There is some validity in the argument that the issues within the Seaton Ward will be swamped by both and that Seaton Ward voters deserve to have their concerns properly aired.
The Tories were telling everyone on their website two days after Mike Turner resigned that the bi-election would be held on November 15th - an asumption on their part and something of an arrogant one which ignored the electorate's right to decide otherwise.
As I said, maybe its not such a bad thing now and then to remind the politicians who's actually in charge and it is a bit absurd to hear some of the local councillors, particularly those prone to bouts of meglamania, to be complaining of the waste of a few thousand quid when they repeatedly demostrate their own ability to waste far larger amounts of money when it suits their own interests.
You might be right, but then being constrained by fallibility like the rest of us, you may also be wrong. We're still all at the 'in my opinion' stage and in stating our individual views none of us can yet claim to have achieved deity status. (although I do have plans ;))
Even if you are right about UKIP using this as a low-turnout tactic, you can't possibly claim that other parties would not do the same if the circumstances suited them. It will be a long time before any other party matches the sheer cyncism of Labour with their John Marshall ruse and when that is the sort of people you're dealing with then surely it's a case of All's Fair in Love, War and Local Elections.
All Politicians put the needs of the Party above everything else.
They will lie, cheat, steal and do anything if they think it gains them an advantage.
The error being made here is to assume UKIP are anything other than the normal double-dealing lying sh*its that passes for the norm today.
Treat any UKIP spokesman as you would the SCABs or 'Parkie' Wells.
I have just spoken to Peter Devlin, specifically about the waste of money. It seems we need to ask Parliament to start getting up to date with the recession and considering the wording, within 35 days an election SHALL be held. Maybe we need to add a sentence regarding combining elections to save resources.
This truly is rediculous and quite frankly, it seems to have backfired politically?
Quote from: kipperdip on September 14, 2012, 02: PM
Of course no one's contributions to this site can match those of that 'intellectual colossus' MK1 - such eloquence, such clarity of phrase, such reasoned debate!!!!!!!!!!!.
Be nat wrooth, my lord, though that I pleye. Ful ofte in game a sooth I have herd seye
In the Seaton by-election there is a strong possibility that there will be one or more Independent candidates. Holding the election on a different date to the Mayoral/Commissioner election will enable such candidates a chance to air their views without being submerged in the bigger elections.
The cost of elections should be only a minor consideration .If we start holding elections on the basis of cost analysis then it won't be long before elections are not held because the result ,in certain wards/constituencies, is a foregone conclusion.
Perseus, that's pretty pathetic , even by your standards.
Quote: "Steve, you generally come across as an intelligent man"
I take this to mean excepting the instances when I disagree with your good self when obviously my intelligence fails me. ;D ;D
In any case, I find that intelligence can be trumped by experience every time. Some of the most intelligent people I know have also managed to be complete prats - doh - is that one 't' or 2?
Dave, I simply sought to find out about the issue as the biggest problem for people these days is finance. Whenever the date is, there will always be the submergence into political debate because the big parties always get more publicity.
I was simply wanting to maximise the interest for local people by giving them only one day in which they have to get up and vote.
I have no problem what date the election lands on, just that I want people to feel the inclination to vote.
I see your point regarding the two main issues that will dominate in November but that is going to be the case in the run up anyway, as Police and Crime Commissioners are new and across the country and then the referendum is of topical debate.
After the meeting last night, I can see that UKIP's name is going to be mud for calling the bi-election and the fact that it is a five figure sum, it is not me who needs to be told, it is the voters in Seaton. Maybe you need to contact the Hartlepool Mail?
I am the one who said we need to consider Parliament if we want the SHALL be held rule changed as no matter what, the feeling in the room last night was that the early date was going to be an asset to the other candidates in their pursuit of Mike's shoes, and they will be hard to fill.
Does having a couple of people sat in the library for the day guarding a plastic box and then counting up a couple of hundred slips of paper really have to cost thousands ?
The expensive bit must be sending out all those thousands of voting cards that get discarded or used as coffee cup coasters.
Just had a thought, the cash every ward gets to spend at it's discretion should be paid as a percentage of the people that bother to vote.
!00% of people vote ... 100% of the money.
I take my comment back, just checked and more people actually voted than I remember.
Just over 4K votes were cast and Mike was the only one that topped 1K.
(I wonder what the average votes cast per voter was.)
Christine, can you explain to me how U.K.I.P.'s name will be mud for simply starting the democratic process to call an election?
All this talk of saving money is a smokescreen. The political eastablishment in Hartlepool has been wrong footed . As Steve L. pointed out they take the electorate for granted and they assumed ,wrongly, that it is up to them to control the agenda.
Ask yourself, would Perseus, who hates U.K.I.P., have been as critical if another party, say P.H.F.,had called the election?
I am surprised that no-one has come to the obvious conclusion that the whole business is collusion between U.K.I.P. and Putting Hartlepool First. Looking at the voting figures for May 2012. Who was 4th? The P.H.F. candidate. So, using the Perseus school of thought, Mike Turner resigned in August ,knowing full well that an election would have to be called within 35 days of his resignation. He did this to give Kelly Atkinson the best possible chance of becoming P.H.F.'s 5th. councillor. U.K.I.P. were pleased to put into motion the necessary request for a by-election to be called ,knowing full well that they would receive all the flak from people like Perseus but at the same time get the thanks of P.H.F.
Elementary my dears.
It concludes that Pascoe and his crew are a bunch of fu*k*ng half wits and cannot be trusted in power, that money could have been better spent.
Ryehill, I am just reiterating what was said at the Full Council meeting on Thursday evening.
It was made very clear that the electorate would be told at a time when people are terrified of grim days that UKIP have wasted money based on a selfish quest to win a seat in the Council.
I just think you ought to know what was said, and let us face it, money is very tight so people will be annoyed. They will not consider that they have given the opportunity to digest the information from individual candidates.
Then as I have said before, as the Police and Crime Commissioner and the Referendum are hot topics, we can see that people feel that voters will still be confused (if they can be) regarding the three choices which require their cross in a box.
It might be an idea to ensure that a member of UKIP is at Full Council meetings so that you can hear what is said at these times.
In his first reply to this thread (post #5) Kipperdip states that the objection from the Conservative and other mainstream political parties' is that we "will have to print a specific election leaflet rather than cramming all on to one leaflet covering the Mayoral referendum and the Police Commissioner vote as well." And continued to justify him calling the election early at additional cost by saying "Surely the voters of Seaton deserve a bit more respect than this."
The problem with his statement is that it is completely untrue and I would have gladly clarified the facts with anybody who had taken the time to ask. It was always the intention to produce separate literature no matter when the by-election was held. The campaign for the Conservative PCC candidate is being ran as a separate campaign altogether. Yes literature for Ken may have been distributed at the same time as that dedicated to the Seaton by-election but that is as close to "cramming it all on one leaflet" as it would have got. The PCC campaign is being headed up by an area team and paid for with separate funds, not a single line of the Seaton literature would have been dedicated to it.
As for the mayoral referendum, Hartlepool Conservatives have always maintained that we will not be campaigning for one side or the other. It is for the people of this town to decide and we are pleased to have played a part in giving the people of Hartlepool the opportunity to decide.
I would appreciate it if you could refrain from speaking on behalf of Hartlepool Conservatives in future and contact me if you would like to know our opinion on subjects. When you assume you only make an ass out of u and me.
Quote: "In May everyone cast 3 votes, that means in real terms 1500 people or so actually physically came out to vote in Seaton.
If that is the case this time UKIPs 243 votes would account for about 16% of the turnout (significantly up from the 5% in May, although technically the same number of physical UKIP supporters)."
I think there's a bit of flawed logic here. The 5.38% that UKIP received in May is a reflection of the fact that they only had one candidate when other parties fielded multiple candidates. In a situation when all parties fielded only one candidate then you would expect the UKIP vote to stay pretty much the same while other party candidates would receive roughly an average of the vote individual party candidates received in May. Transposing this has to be done on a vote basis and not a percentage basis as the percentage figures in a single vote election are quite different because the total number of votes is different.
The Labour candidates, for example, gained 274, 287 and 237 of the votes respectively. Most of those votes will have been people voting for all three labour candidates so you would expect a single labour candidate to receive an average of 266 votes - all things being equal.
Expanding that gives the following as a sort of transposition of a three-vote election into a single-vote election:
PHF 250 13.5%
Lab 266 14.3%
Con 158 8.5%
UKIP 243 13.1%
The elephant in the room is the average 940 votes (50.6%) gained by Independent candidates last time. Where those votes go and how many of them will be picked up by new Independent candidates will decide who wins the by-election.
Can I just add that the marginal increase in cost to hold a separate election is but nothing compared to the £100,000 a year paid each and every year by HBC to fund two full-time UNISON officials. While on Thursday night Labour bemoaned UKIPs action for instigating a separate election in Seaton on the grounds of costs, they also did their utmost to supress any debate on taxpayer funding of a trade union which already receives subscriptions directly from council staff, has an £18m yearly income and which, in the 2nd quarter of 2012 alone, gave £213,000 to the Labour Party.
You've missed the point. I'm saying that the UKIP vote in May, translated into that of a single-vote election, was actually 13.1% and not 5%.
Perseus, not only has your sense of humour got lost in your desire to try to discredit U.K.I.P. but also your ability to reason. On earlier threads you suggested that I was one of the two signatories of the request for a by-election in Seaton. Incorrect. You also suggested that Steve L was a member of U.K.I.P. Again incorrect. On numerous occasions Steve has indicated his opposition to U.K.I.P.'s aims without having to resort to name calling.
You read what you want to read not what is actually written. You call people unpleasant names when their only crime is to disagree with you. Any casual reader of this site would quickly come to the conclusion that you are a blinkered bigot. You cannot accept that that other people should have opinions and you attempt to belittle them , the term knuckle- dragger seems to be your latest turn of phrase.
In tonights Hartlepool Mail Dave Pascoe answers the question which you say he is dodging. I suggest that you read it , carefully.
Perseus, I think your last couple of sentences confirm everything that I wrote about you in my last posting.
Coun Wells said: "I condemn the actions of UKIP because it will cost the taxpayer thousands of pounds extra.
and this from the man who wants councillors to have more money, who pays that the expense fairy? oh no the taxpayer again.
so does he condemn himself?
I'm not sure if Mr Wells does support increasing the allowances for Councillors - I think probably not - I know it was he who asked for Drummond's allowance to be added to those being looked at by the remuneration panel after Drummond took on his second job.
Not that it will make much difference and in any case, won't Drummond's second job come to an end when the Police Commissioner thing starts? Or are they going to do away with the Police Authority and then re-invent it under another name? Yea, that would sound more likely.
Incidentally, I think the correct term is knuckle-scraper which I used to think was a reference to Neanderthals but is in fact a reference to Orangutans and the way that their hands touch the floor because of their unusually long arms. I don't mind that so much, but the red hair.....yuk! ::)
I think we should all make an effort to skip the name calling... I find it starts to make an appearance as soon as reasoning begins to break down.
Why not just follow the Mayors way of thinking and give Seaton to Middlesbrough.
"I was wrong, this clearly has NOTHING whatsoever to do with ensuring a lower perecntage turn out. His detail explanation regarding the importance of the 21 day period with only 66% council representation on Seaton has definitely convinced me. "
Right, well that's sorted then. Next topic.....
My Heads Hurting............................................ Reading this thread, it has various merits, but i have to say, its almost as entertaining as listening to Jonathon & Pammy in a full council meeting.
Whatever the argument, lets not resort to abusing each other....
anyone can throw a bucket of sh*te.... again a bit like a full council meeting.....
however unlike a full council meeting a reasoned & respectful debate can take place on HTH.
Just a thought.
November the 15th is going to be all about Drummond so yes, if I lived in Seaton I would be a little miffed that there was precious little debate about ward issues going on. I bet there are quite a few that would like to see more discussion about the landfill sites and other issues and what the views are of the different parties.
Seaton, like The Headland, is a gift to the town and should be far better utilised than it is. I never thought I'd say it but I'm with UKIP on this one. As for Mr Wells, anyone would think that UKIP was responsible for large scale seepage of members from the Tories. ;D
A bi-election should be small news compared to the big issues we have in our town.
Explains why this town is in such a mess.
Never mind the waste of money on unions, there is a 'lamp post' over the road from my house that has probably cost as much as the bi-election will do, going by the number of council departments that have been involved in it's installation and it still doesn't have a lantern on top of it after 6 months so a bulb can be fitted
(thankfully as it is not wanted).
Look at the heaps of dirt covered in dead weeds on Seaton front as a result of the supposed remodelling to give us something interesting to look at when the weather is too crap for flowers. If that is how our taxes get spent then I would rather it was 'wasted' on a bi-election than used to improve things.
It's squabbaling over the pennies as the millions get frittered away. It's a non issue compared to just about everything else going on in local politics.
spot on there, Stig
Quote from: Stig of the Seaton Dump on September 16, 2012, 12: PM
A bi-election should be small news compared to the big issues we have in our town.
Explains why this town is in such a mess.
Never mind the waste of money on unions, there is a 'lamp post' over the road from my house that has probably cost as much as the bi-election will do, going by the number of council departments that have been involved in it's installation and it still doesn't have a lantern on top of it after 6 months so a bulb can be fitted
(thankfully as it is not wanted).
Look at the heaps of dirt covered in dead weeds on Seaton front as a result of the supposed remodelling to give us something interesting to look at when the weather is too crap for flowers. If that is how our taxes get spent then I would rather it was 'wasted' on a bi-election than used to improve things.
It's squabbaling over the pennies as the millions get frittered away. It's a non issue compared to just about everything else going on in local politics.
As someone who was brought up in Seaton as a kid i have to agree with both Stig & marky, who`s comments on the town being gifted to have Seaton & The Headland are spot on.
The simple facts are that they have both been partly destroyed by poor planning & inept forward thinking management, both areas have a lot to offer both to locals & visitors.... look at the crowds that thronged both promenades in the recent good weather.
The disgraceful state of the paddling pool area on the Headland is a sad indictment of how something has been left to go to ruin for the want of a bit of maintenance.
Seaton has for many years been blighted by Coasters, it amounts to the village being held to ransom by tossers, drummonds promise to rid the town of it`s "Grot Spots" has been a complete misrepresentation of his manifesto & will go down as one of his many bullsh8t soundbites.
The Bus Shelters are screaming for a coat of paint, it took donkeys years for the council to repair & repaint the place a couple of years ago, & now instead of stopping the rot by painting it again, it will fall into disrepair & become the eyesore it once was.
Stig........... i spoke to Councillor Thompson on Thursday about the mounds of mud on the " new & improved " ( not in my opinion ) grassed area on the Cliffe...... The mounds are awaiting a pre-grown material ( Sedum ) i believe to cover them.
I also mentioned that the Prom was becoming Dogsh8t City again, more enforcement required, i do realise that Dog Muck is a town wide problem though.
Councillor Thompson said he was going to look into both points.
I realise these comments are off-topic..............
but hopefully the electorate of Seaton will send a message to the ruling group, that they want a different view of local politics....... politics for the people of the town......... not politics for the politicians of the town
In a forlorn attempt to sound like the Alan Titmarsh of Hartlepool, Sedum is one of the better known, low-level Alpine plants known for its ability to spread sideways and thwart alternative plant growth i.e. weeds. It's not so good at preventing the growth of grasses sneaking through the gaps.
(http://www.hartlepoolpost.co.uk/images/sedumjpg)
Well I think the tone has improved considerably in the last few posts.
We have one poster talking in the third person (like the Queen) berating the Council that is run by a que...........
err........better not go there.
Talking of which did you notice in yesterdays Mail that SCAB 1 chairs the Council Clap Committee?
I presume certain 'fahionable' ailments will be top of the agenda.
I have a feeling we are gonorrea a lot more about this in the future.......................
"However, at Thursdays council meeting, the public gallery witnessed 30 odd councillors all elected by the people to speak on their behalf, ALL, (seemingly) condemn this issue and voice their desire to have it overturned. Only bi-election law and the 'tied hands' of Mr Devlin stopped this.
As far as I'm concerned, if the vast majority of the 34 councillors elected by us want to make a decision, but they can't because two old men, bitter at their parties lack of success, throw a spanner in the works that is NOT democracy.
If anything, it's almost a dictatorship. "
I'm starting to have a problem with this on so many levels. The obvious one first.
This is the second time that you have made reference to 'old' men. Sometimes it's best to review your own words carefully in order to properly see what you have actually written. What is this inference that the opinions or actions of people with a few years behind them are of less worth and should therefore be discounted in some way? Within what age range, exactly, do you believe people should be entitled to have their own views and to have those views heard?
Secondly, the law, is the law, is the law. It is the notion that politicians, whenever the mood takes them, should have the option to disregard the law which leads to the road of dictatorship.
Perseus, you're not the only person on here who has fallen into the trap of believing that there are only two ways of viewing things: YOUR way and the WRONG way, but you are the first to claim such intellectual superiority at the same time.
I think your viewpoint shows a lack of maturity. When people don't go along with it, you jump up and down in the corner and call them names, bemoan their stupidity or put it down to their age. You are entitled to your point of view but always you must remember that's all it is - your point of view - and it's no more correct or important than anyone else's.
You have the makings of a politician, Perseus - note how you simply ignored your ageist slur.
...and the point is that the actual reasons don't matter - what matters is that they were entitled to do it - and I'm quite certain, if there was advantage in other parties calling the by-election early, then they wouldn't have hesitated.
Complaints about wasted money are a bit laughable in the context of hiring a coach to take Councillors from the Civic Centre to the Interchange, never mind the £1.3m overspend on the TS.
Complain about perceived cynicsm by UKIP if you like, but you can only get away with it if you thrown in the hypocrisy of those other councillors complaining. Otherwise it just looks like a personal swipe at UKIP in line with what's becoming to look increasingly like an obsession.
I reckon you're a Tory myself, pis*ed off with the large number of defections to UKIP.
Perseus the weakness in your argument is that you are assuming that a low turn out will somehow benefit U.K.I.P I don't know what you base this assumption on, but the history of stand alone, low turnout, by-elections involving U.K.I.P. in Hartlepool shows that they do no better ,or worse, than in the normal May elections.
Quote from: steveL on September 17, 2012, 10: AM
I reckon you're a Tory myself, pis*ed off with the large number of defections to UKIP.
Steve, you have mentioned this so-called mass exodus of Conservatives to UKIP twice in recent days and I would love for you to provide evidence to back this claim up. I hear lefties and Kippers alike claiming it's going on but other than a handful of party members who have always regarded themselves more as libertarian than Conservative, I've not seen anybody else 'jump ship'. In fact the small numbers in reality are probably equalled out by the UKIP defectors we see jointing our party on a regular basis.
So please, evidence or stop making this ridiculous claim.
Thats enuf for me......
Perseus, your last posting reminds me of this little quote
If ifs and ands were pots and pans there'd be no work for tinkers.
Quote from: SRMoore on September 17, 2012, 12: PM
Quote from: steveL on September 17, 2012, 10: AM
I reckon you're a Tory myself, pis*ed off with the large number of defections to UKIP.
Steve, you have mentioned this so-called mass exodus of Conservatives to UKIP twice in recent days and I would love for you to provide evidence to back this claim up. I hear lefties and Kippers alike claiming it's going on but other than a handful of party members who have always regarded themselves more as libertarian than Conservative, I've not seen anybody else 'jump ship'. In fact the small numbers in reality are probably equalled out by the UKIP defectors we see jointing our party on a regular basis.
So please, evidence or stop making this ridiculous claim.
Oh, hell. I'm too old to be wasting time recanting stuff that you should already be aware of - haven't you heard of Google?
http://www.google.co.uk/#hl=en&sclient=psy-ab&q=tory+defectors+ukip&oq=tory+defectors+ukip&gs_l=serp.3...18704.23238.0.23712.14.11.0.3.3.0.268.1447.4j6j1.11.0.les%3B..0.0...1c.1.AIVWe2jx4gk&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&fp=a2b18ffccd5cdbc5&biw=1280&bih=896
It's not what I think that you have to worry about, it's the views of your own right wing Eurosceptics who think that Cameron's pussy-footing over Europe will lead to votes crossing the wire to UKIP in the next election.
Quote: "Well given that my whole point is ABOUT the reasons, that's where we'll have to beg to differ.
Also, since we're on the subject of 'intellectual superiority' I wasn't the one who introduced a plant based metaphor into this debate. However, since it's up there, let's explore it.
You chose the Sedum, correct? Most widely used in cooking by the Haida, an indigenous tribe found off the Pacific North West coast of America."
Oh Dear, Wikipedia has its uses bonnie lad, but at your age its no substitute for a girlfriend.
Quote from: perseus on September 17, 2012, 10: AM
As i explained earlier, if the October turnout is lower than May (which I think we all agree it will be) and UKIP retain their votes from the core of supporters (240) or so, that should translate into a much bigger % overall.
Also, I base it on the FACT that the only elections UKIP typically win are European Parliament ones which attract a much lower a turnout than practically any other election.
The last European elections were held on 4th June 2009 which was the same day the last Mayoral Election in Hartlepool. This prompted a relatively higher turn out and, if I remember correctly, UKIP won the European vote in Hartlepool
Quote from: steveL on September 17, 2012, 10: PM
Quote from: SRMoore on September 17, 2012, 12: PM
Quote from: steveL on September 17, 2012, 10: AM
I reckon you're a Tory myself, pis*ed off with the large number of defections to UKIP.
Steve, you have mentioned this so-called mass exodus of Conservatives to UKIP twice in recent days and I would love for you to provide evidence to back this claim up. I hear lefties and Kippers alike claiming it's going on but other than a handful of party members who have always regarded themselves more as libertarian than Conservative, I've not seen anybody else 'jump ship'. In fact the small numbers in reality are probably equalled out by the UKIP defectors we see joining our party on a regular basis.
So please, evidence or stop making this ridiculous claim.
Oh, hell. I'm too old to be wasting time recanting stuff that you should already be aware of - haven't you heard of Google?
http://www.google.co.uk/#hl=en&sclient=psy-ab&q=tory+defectors+ukip&oq=tory+defectors+ukip&gs_l=serp.3...18704.23238.0.23712.14.11.0.3.3.0.268.1447.4j6j1.11.0.les%3B..0.0...1c.1.AIVWe2jx4gk&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&fp=a2b18ffccd5cdbc5&biw=1280&bih=896
It's not what I think that you have to worry about, it's the views of your own right wing Eurosceptics who think that Cameron's pussy-footing over Europe will lead to votes crossing the wire to UKIP in the next election.
I joined this forum following your invitation to take part in reasoned debate and discussion, not for you to attempt to talk down to me. I am not interested in petty squabling or partaking in a game of who can pee the highest. Your statement was factually incorrect as it suggested there is a mass exodus of Conservative members leaving the party for UKIP. This is not the case. As for concerning myself with upset eurosceptics within my party on a national level, I don't. My concerns lay with the issues of concern that the people of Hartlepool may have. There are enough people at CCHQ and career politicians to worry about that.
Locally it is a well known fact that UKIP get most of their votes in Hartlepool from disgruntled Labour supporters. Don't take my word for it, this came from a conversation I had with Eric Wilson last time we met.
Perhaps we can try and move the topic of discussion back onto the Seaton by-election now?
Quote from: perseus on September 18, 2012, 11: AM
and if my Auntie had bollocks she'd be my uncle...
I see that we're taking the intellectual approach today... ::)
I would disagree that grass root Conservatives have been betrayed Kipperdip. Would I like to see a referendum? Of course I would but I don't see it as being the only matter or piece of policy worth pursuing. As we both know, the country was left up the proverbial creek without a paddle and bailing us out whilst heading back to the shallows is top priority in my opinion.
Yes the EU is an important issue to many voters but it's fair to say the majority, especially in Seaton are more concerners about landfill sites, derelict eyesores, lack of transport and jobs are far more important.
. . . and there's far more chance of those issues being properly aired and discussed during a stand-alone by-election than if it was tagged on to a Mayoral Referendum and Police Commissioner's election.
We seem to have come full-circle.
I am in the correct party, I am a Conservative - Not a Libertarian. If agreeing with one policy is justification to jump ship then I'd have joined Labour a long time ago since I agree with a nationalised rail service. The gates of hell would freeze over before I'd do that!
I am no more responsible for landfill sites in Seaton than Tom is from a time when UKIP had Cllrs on HBC. Point fingers all you want KD, that doesn't help the people of Seaton now does it? Action does. I'm not getting into a slagging match over it KD, it's pointless and achieves nothing.
Please give my regards to Tom.
Do you seriously think that Ken Lupton is going to be knocking on doors in the Seaton Ward? No it's the local Smurfs that will be doing that and common sense tells you that, for their own convenience, they will try to cover the Police Commisioner's Job, The Mayoral Referendum and the Local Issues in one visit.
I have already stated once that Ken Luptons campaign is completely seperate. I will not be canvassing on his behalf during the by-election. Nor will I be campaigning either way for the mayoral referendum, we never intended to.
Quote from: SRMoore on September 18, 2012, 04: PM
I have already stated once that Ken Luptons campaign is completely seperate. I will not be canvassing on his behalf during the by-election. Nor will I be campaigning either way for the mayoral referendum, we never intended to.
You are but a shadow of your former self.
Pity about the knock-back for the car boot sale..............
Who is Ken Lupton ?
Quote from: perseus on September 18, 2012, 04: PM
So the extra 3 weeks would have been helpful in terms of meeting as many 'Seatoners' as possible? Hearing their views? Telling them your plans if elected etc?
Yes of course. I do however respect and believe in democracy so whilst I believe November 15th would have been a better date and more convenient for everybody involved, including the residents of the Seaton ward, I'll get on with the task in hand and try to get around to speak to as many residents as possible in the shorter time frame. I can only apologise in advance if I don't get to speak to everybody but would point out that all of my contact details are freely available on the Hartlepool Conservatives website which is linked at the top of this site.
Quote from: testicles on September 18, 2012, 05: PM
Who is Ken Lupton ?
He is the Conservative PCC candidate. I have linked his website in the Police Commissioner thread so as not to cross threads even more.
Now that Former Chairman of the Local Tory Party, Dave Young is to stand as an Independent then I would think the Tories may as well stay at home and watch Downton to take their minds off the split vote. Is there a level at which Parties can lose their deposit?
Yes I heard that he was standing too. Didn't he stand in the last Mayor election? He used to make decent chips - I dunno if that counts for anything and I must admit, I'm more of a FishFace person these days.
Is Lupton from Hartlepool ?
Quote from: kipperdip on September 19, 2012, 02: AM
According to Perseus, that fount of all wisdom, and paragon of all virtue
So white man speak with forked tongue when he say this about me earlier,
Quote from: kipperdip on September 14, 2012, 02: PM
Of course no one's contributions to this site can match those of that 'intellectual colossus' MK1 - such eloquence, such clarity of phrase, such reasoned debate!!!!!!!!!!!.
I bey you say it to all the girls!
Must be important this thread as there have been 111 replies and over 900 views.
Something of a record perhaps?
And still over a month to go to the bielection!
I hope the good people of Seaton (all 8,585 of them, babes and all ) will take note of the great interest shown here and make sure that all who are eligible, turn out to vote.
Ken Lupton is a Stockton Councillor and used to be the Council Leader in a coalition between Labour and the Conservatives - a bit like Hartlepool really ;D
I noticed that PHF have nominated their candidate for the by-election. Whilst I wish Kelly the best of luck, I must point out a failing on the failing in the press release. Considering PHF is supposed to be beyond petty party politics and interested solely on putting Hartlepool first, this most recent article and every other one I have read recently has shown the contrary.
QuoteIt will be interesting to see how many of the tired old faces and party hacks will be wheeled out by the old parties in this by-election. Even more interesting to see if any candidates pop up who are formerly failed party candidates but are now flying under stand-alone "Independent" colours.
Said Councillor Lilley. Come on Cllr, you're better than that. Aren't you? Resorting to petty snipes like that prove that you can't attack or fault me with my policies or commitment to serving the people of this town.
QuotePutting Hartlepool First are convinced that local councillors who dance to the tune of party bosses in Westminster have controlled our council for far too long.
Just as a point of information. The Conservative party is a devolved party which makes decisions independently of 'Westminster' so as to best form policy that fits Hartlepool. Our campaigning for a referendum on the position of a directly elected mayor is a good example, it is the national policy to encourage DEMs and keep them in place. We knew that this may not necessarily the best option for this town so campaigned for a referendum.
I thought Lilley's comment was a reference to Ann Marshall who's expected to be the Labour candidate and who sent out a sour grapes e-mail to all council staff after she got a kicking in the election in May.
Can't stand it any longer ... it's a by-election or a bye-election (US variant). Not a 'bi-election'. Sorry :(
"I think if i lived on that ward, i'd vote for Shane."
It would have been so much easier if the lad had been called Shawn....
http://youtu.be/SWdPmapuOd4 (http://youtu.be/SWdPmapuOd4)
This by,bye,bi-election is so important to the nation that it is has been whispered in the P.M.`s ear at no.10.
Not that he took any notice.
Quote from: rabbit on September 23, 2012, 07: PM
This by,bye,bi-election is so important to the nation that it is has been whispered in the P.M.`s ear at no.10.
Not that he took any notice.
You never know...the P.M. may just be considering a posse of missionaries to civilise the wild northern tribes...after all, we are in the territory of the Brigantes... :-\
There is nothing as barbaric as civilisation, best we keep away from it.
Quote from: not4me on September 23, 2012, 07: PM
"I think if i lived on that ward, i'd vote for Shane."
It would have been so much easier if the lad had been called Shawn....
http://youtu.be/SWdPmapuOd4 (http://youtu.be/SWdPmapuOd4)
Whilst I am a cracking shot I've still to master the horse ;)
It's all over, the other candidates might as well pack up as Hartlepool First have already walked it. - or that is what two HF councillors were happily telling people in the civic centre this morning anyway.
Either the said two councillors know something the others and returning officer doesn't know or it shows their absolute contempt for the electorate of Seaton and complete arrogance.
The electorate decide who represents them - don't ever forget it.
Quote from: SRMoore on October 22, 2012, 04: PM
It's all over, the other candidates might as well pack up as Hartlepool First have already walked it. - or that is what two HF councillors were happily telling people in the civic centre this morning anyway.
Either the said two councillors know something the others and returning officer doesn't know or it shows their absolute contempt for the electorate of Seaton and complete arrogance.
The electorate decide who represents them - don't ever forget it.
One simple fact which I've checked, no 'Hartlepool First' Councillors were in the Civic this morning. Easy to confirm through the security door swipe cards.
But you don't deny that's what your guys are happily telling people?
I will alter my initial posting as it turns out that you are correct and it wasn't in the civic. SG told George it on the phone last night and KD said the very same today when they spoke in the One Life Centre. The location is irrelevant really as it's still arrogance.
Perseus, I've never denied HF may well have a head start but I think they are taking the electorate for granted and it's in no way shape or form a 1 horse race. Just because someone has stood there once before does not make them the better candidate.
I've also heard that PHF have been reported for fraudulently claiming their candidate is part of a local group/organisation? And no, not by us before you ask.
You would have to speak to someone in standards Perseus, that's all I know.
Quote from: SRMoore on October 22, 2012, 04: PM
It's all over, the other candidates might as well pack up as Hartlepool First have already walked it. - or that is what two HF councillors were happily telling people in the civic centre this morning anyway.
I've seen some examples of pathetic electioneering in my time but that sets a new low.
I am no supporter of any of the people standing but I will admit a leaning towards anyone who gets up the nose of the LabCon ruling group.
If that bunch of thieving lying toe-rags are worried then I know someone is on the right road..
The 4 main culprits deserve jail but I also reserve a large dollop on contempt for the smaller parties who keep their mouths shut in return for a few chairs.
Perhaps getting a position where you can help your mates out when they break planning regulations is more important than good of the town?
Electioneering? No MK1 I, like Kipperdip, was furious with the blatant arrogance. If I were lying about it then fair enough but I most certainly am not.
Quote from: SRMoore on October 22, 2012, 08: PM
Electioneering? No MK1 I, like Kipperdip, was furious with the blatant arrogance.
All politicians (wanabee's or veteran) are arrogant. If they were not then they would not stand.
Please don't try and flannel me with
'public service', 'serve the community', 'make a difference' or any of the other cliche's used to mask the truth behind the stampede to get elected.
Quote from: mk1 on October 22, 2012, 08: PM
Please don't try and flannel me with 'public service', 'serve the community', 'make a difference' or any of the other cliche's used to mask the truth behind the stampede to get elected.
Believe it or not 'public service' is the reason behind me getting involved in local politics. In 2006 I took an oath of allegiance to the crown and this country; I may no longer wear the uniform but my duty to serve still stands.
;D
I'm still a bit new at this election lark, but aren't the sour grapes supposed to come after the election?
It isn't sour grapes on my part Steve I assure you. Of the people I speak to who don't vote Conservative, it looks more likely Dave Young will be elected as an independent. As I stated earlier, it's arrogant to strut around claiming you have taken the seat before it's been called.
You need to focus on your own efforts and on behalf of your own party - not be looking over your own shoulder all the time. Are you really saying you're shocked that people have an opinion on how their own party is doing? And just how likely is it that when talking about it to someone belonging to another party that a person would say anything other than they expect to win?
I love the bit about Fraud, by the way - if anyone in the Labour Group wants to go anywhere near the word 'Fraud' they are being very brave indeed.
It wasn't a case of "I think we are doing pretty well", it was two seperate occassions and two arrogant statements of certainty. You and I both know it was wrong Steve and it's the last I'm saying on it.
As for the fraud allegation, that's nothing to do with us. I just heard about it yesterday.
I think you need to stop listening to tittle-tattle and get on with your own election campaign instead.
Incidentally, the fraud "allegation" apparently comes from a complaint made to Peter Devlin that the Putting Hartlepool First candidate had used the words "Hartlepool Independent" on their literature. As the full name of the party is "Hartlepool Independents - Putting Hartlepool First", the complaint was quickly and rightly dismissed.
Sounds like someone is getting desperate to me.
I agree, desperation tactics, as is the suggestion that if the TORIES can't win it themselves they'll settle for an ex-TORY. In fact, you can put all the usual suspects together and summarise their campaign as 'anyone BUT PHF'. Wonder why that is? :)
Actually I'll settle for whoever the electorate choose on Thursday. PHF, Ind, Lib, Lab, UKIP or me. I just hope that whoever is elected does the job and the electorate justice and not simply become a mute or nodding dog.
Sorry to rain on your parade not4me.
Best of luck to all of the candidates today.
If you are a resident of the ward and reading this, please do use your right to vote and make sure you choose the candidate who you honestly think will work hard on your behalf and will not let you down.
Is anyone standing from the silent party.[PHF] ?
Quote from: testicles on October 25, 2012, 10: AM
Is anyone standing from the silent party.[PHF] ?
Remember that the words 'silent' and 'majority' are often heard together... ;)
Quote from: perseus on October 25, 2012, 09: AM
Shane, by that rationale it's probably best not to vote at all... ;)
::) :D
Kelly Atkinson has taken Seaton Ward in By-Election
Full Result:
Kelly Atkinson (PHF) 441
Tom Hind (UKIP) 128
Ann Marshall (Labour) 261
Shane Moore (Conservative) 94
Jim Tighe (Lib-Dem) 31
Dave Young (Independent) 193
Congratulations to PHF.Make sure your voice is heard
Is she related to someone we all know ?
As I said in person, congratulations Kelly.
I hope that you do the residents of the ward justice and be a voice within your party.
The Conservative vote was disapointing, however our result does not reflect our effort. We will continue to push in Seaton and we will always be there for residents should they require assistance.
I think Dave Young pinched a chunk of your votes Shane.
Well I never said he would have won....just pointing out that splitting your vote is never a good thing and he would have done better if Mr Young had gone off fishing for Cod instead.
Winning this by-election was always a very long shot for the Conservatives. When our candidate from May could not stand I took the decision to step up to the plate because I knew that the ward deserved a candidate that would campaign hard and put the effort in that the residents deserved.
I have no sour grapes and I am not looking for excuses. My priority throughout the campaign was to push hard and show the residents of Seaton that the Conservatives are there, we are working for them and we will continue to do so.
As stated earlier I do wish Kelly the best of luck and I do hope she will be an effective ward councillor and be the voice that PHF desperately needs in the civic.
You presume I do this all for me.
Well done Kelly....and well done the voters of Seaton Carew. ;D
You are at least one ward that can see through the labour mendacity and don't fall for their 'we're of the people' crap. ::)
I only hope kelly is being given a thorough grounding into what the snakes are like in the kremlin and how to respond to them.
I also hope that we are going to hear MORE from Putting Hartlepool First itself.
I realise they are (at the moment) a small party, but I hope we hear more, now their voice is louder. 8)
Oh to be in the snake pit today and listen to the recriminations....I bet brash is quietly smiling to himself,,,,that'll take down the fat four a peg or two! ;D
People of Hartlepool, is THIS the start of a brighter future for us all?
Are we going to make people stand on their own two feet and look after themselves, rather than let them stink in bed and hand everything to them on a plate? (The genuine ones will always be looked after). ???
We can stop being the butt of jokes; monkey hangers, monkey mayor etc.
We just require GENUINE people leading the way....people wanting to put HARTLEPOOL FIRST.
Oh I'm so happy today....bugger the housework! Well done Kelly. :-*
Hopefully this result adds an extra tooth or two to the mouth of PHF that can be sunk into the backside of la(zy)bour.
Shane may not tick my boxes (nothing personal, blame Thatcher for starters) but well done on a very commendable effort, you made me think twice about my vote.
It appears to me that Shane is a thoroughly nice Hartlepool guy and really is 'for the people'. :-*
But, the Tories will never shake off the 'they're only interested in looking after the rich people' rubbish. (Sadly).
Shane would be better off joining the Putting Hartlepool First bandwagon, then he COULD put his undoubted pride for the town to use. ;)
The Tories will always be limited to their West Park enclave and even then, I would expect the traditional Independent position of the villages to re-exert itself in 2014 as people get used to the new boundaries so they can't even be sure of the three seats they have in future.
I'll just add my own congratulations to the new councillor Atkinson. I should think the win will give a useful boost at an important time. Had it not been for this by-election then May 2014 would have been the next elections which is a long time to keep a new party in the spot light. This win let's everyone know that the new party is still around and, from the result, appears to mean business.
Thank you for your kind words Stig. Knowing that I made people, even those who would neve consider voting Conservative, think twice about where they allocate their vote means I did the job I set out to do. If we'd have just put up a paper candidate or one who would have gone into it half heartedly and possibly not meant what they said, do you think you'd have felt the same?
Again, thank you too Julie. A number of people in the past have suggested I stand as an independent or 'defect' to HF. The reality is that if I went independent I would be lying to people and be no better than some of the red indies people often criticise. Defecting to HF would also give the same image, that I'd only joined the band wagon to get elected.
At the end of the day I am a Conservative, a blue collar tory if you will. Everybody knows I'm Conservative and to pretend to be anything else would be lying to people. I'd rather be honest and keep battling on.
Apart from one or two run ins in my early days i have always tried to keep good relations with all parties and groups in the town. It's taken a while but I'd say I've made headway with UKIP and look forward to speaking to Tom & Dave more often. I've always got on with Steve L even if we don't see eye to eye on many things but I respect his opinions. Other members of HF are more frosty towards me I must admit. I deliberately made a point of saying hello to Geoff on Thursday only to be blanked and when I sat next to him and Tom he got up and walked off which I was understandably offended by. Maybe next time?
People can prophesise about the demise of the local Conservative party all they want but we aren't the oldest political party no reason. We have strong and committed grass root members who are now coming through the ranks, we can and will get back up and shift direction.
The Tories are the oldest party, Shane, because their roots lie in the Feudal system and the old Lords of the Manor. It was the Whigs (Liberals) who were the real believers in the 'free enterprise', laissez faire system of the Victorian Era and the original Labour Party who tried to tackle the injustices that came as a result.
The 19th Century Tories disliked the Whigs because the Whigs represented the 'new money' people who were largely industrialists and entrepreneurs. How things change.
Both the Tories and the Whigs hated the developing Labour party because it gave a voice to the underclass who they both thought should know their place - you only have to follow the Reform Acts to see that.
Incidentally, although The Mail says that Ann Marshall congratulated Kelly, it was only to The Mail that she could bring herself to do so. She couldn't quite bring herself to do so to Kelly directly and when the Labour people were asked why she had not done so they were told, by Mad Marge, I believe, that 'Ann Marshall should have won." You can't really argue with that kind of thinking.
One of the things HBC was criticised for by the Peer Review was the number of changes to the HBC consititution that had been made by the Constitution Committee, something which is extrememly rare within other authorities. I would think that it's a good bet that Mad Marge is now burning the midnight oil trying to find a way to change the constitution so that the person with the most votes doesn't necessarily win in future. ;)
"....although The Mail says that Ann Marshall congratulated Kelly, it was only to The Mail that she could bring herself to do so. She couldn't quite bring herself to do so to Kelly directly and when the Labour people were asked why she had not done so they were told, by Mad Marge, I believe, that 'Ann Marshall should have won." You can't really argue with that kind of thinking."
miserables bas**ar*s...I've been trying to think of the right word ....... mean? petty? arrogant? or just nasty?...and came to the conclusion it was all 4
All of those words.
Belated Congratulations to Kelly.......well done....also a round of applause to the people who supported her....both fellow PHF members ....&....Most of all to the clear thinking voters of Seaton.......
Disappointed not to have been there.....would have loved to have been at the count....