A Week is a Long Time

[steveL]

Brilliant how you guys take things out of context.. if AW has Labour values like i do so be it.. tell me where i have defended her actions instead of spinning.. i often wonder if some of PHF are plastic tories or failed Lib Dems.. you mope on on here about how bad Labour are but do bot all about it.. if you have Labour values as you profess or conservative ones join either party and make change happen instead of whining Labour have done this or the local tories have done that.. thats the problem with PHF they have no identity other than to jump on the next bandwagon.. tell us what you stand for and what you would do like oppositions are supposed to do.. you can make a start by naming your preferred site for the travellers and gypsy site

Braindead...

[pensionater]

I must admit Arc86 has a point when he says that nobody from PHF is prepared to put forward an alternative site for the gypsies.I heard that Lilley proposed West View.So any takers ?. 

[Hartlepudlion]

I wish you guys would start a new topic to air you differences. It just distracts from the seriousness of this thread and others like it. Perhaps Lucy lass tick can come up with a suitable thread name and signature tune. High Noon or Mine is bigger than yours etc. the EU and gypsies is not even part of this thread.

So back to this thread and not one of you has commented on jaffa's post. That is what we should all be concentrating on, trying to help them get justice. Think about what we can do to involve the police e.g. How about a citizens delegation to the Inspector in charge of Hartlepool to demand action?

[ARC86]

Fred i think you will find i have utterly condemned her actions many times. As has been said everybody is different in their views what AW did was morally repugnant in my personal view and she has been roundly condemned.

Steve instead of being personal why dont you answer the question.. where do PHF propose to put the travellers site? What are you doing or PHF doing on council procurement procedures? What do PHF stand for?

[Lucy Lass-Tick]

Bulk order required?


Reading some of the comments on here I really do despair of this town and fear for the future of it's unfortunate inhabitants.



We're seeing the collapse of all that we believe in - integrity seems to have gone to the wall; seemingly those in power choose to ignore major issues, pulling up the drawbridge whilst singing 'la la la' loudly as they stuff their fingers firmly in their ears.



So what do posters do? Bicker about political labelling - pathetic!

[ARC86]

If thats your view i respect it.. but if people cant even answer a simple question how do they expect to be elected to run the town

anyway im off to pools

[steveL]

I must admit Arc86 has a point when he says that nobody from PHF is prepared to put forward an alternative site for the gypsies.I heard that Lilley proposed West View.So any takers ?.

You have heard that Lilley has suggested West View because that's what Labour have said he has suggested.

When the council officers first came up with the original list Labour tried desperately to add non-Labour wards to it even though council officers had already decided those wards had not been identified as having any suitable sites which met the selection criteria.

So they first tried to add Fens and Rossmere (3 PHF), then Seaton (2 Indies and 1 PHF) and Rural West (3 Tories) - they didn't get away with adding the first two but slipped through Briarfields while George Morris nodded off.

'Exclusivity Deals' (not actual Planning Applications) were suddenly conjured up from nowhere to protect the two Stranton sites leaving the marginal Hart Ward as the ward considered  would cause them the least political damage. Hart Ward is not natural Labour territory. It consists almost exclusively of private properties and up until recently had two Lib-Dem Councillors for years.

PHF's view is that Labour have used their majority to manipulate the selection process in a way that most benefit themselves..

They have proved themselves incapable of making an objective decision on the matter based on the laid down selection criteria and therefore the only solution is to hand the full list of sites to the Planning Inspectorate and let him make the choice because this is the only way that politics can be kept out of the decision.

The council has never been under any obligation to recommend any particular site; only to provide a list of possible sites which meet to various degrees the criteria laid down by the Government.

Labour wanted to put a preferred site forward because it would reduce the chance of the Planing Inspector choosing one of their own strongest wards - all of which contained more sustainable sites than did Hart Village.

This is why PHF tried to get the decision called in, to propose that all sites were given to the Planning Inspector so that he could choose the most appropriate site against the criteria and without political influence. As everyone now knows, both Labour and their coalition partners the Tories opposed the move.

[Interested]

Agree totally with Lucy Lass-Trick, your town is going to the dogs and would appear to be run and controlled by moronic buffoons in it for financial gain.
All you want to do is have a p*****g match with each other and point the finger of blame for the lack of any direct action.
Wake up folks!!
Regardless of who has the "biggest d**k" isn't it about time you put your individual personal and political views to one side and worked together because it is the RIGHT thing to do.

I remain interested, from the sidelines!!!!!!!!

[steveL]

Rubbish. There is only one party in the council chamber which raised concerns over MR and one party which tried to get the Traveller decision referred back to the council to be amended. The other two parties, which are in coalition together,  have resisted both moves all the way.

This is not merely bickering but a clear difference between the 'two' parties.

[ARC86]

Sorry Steve but it was Cllr Brash who proposed the Hart call in it was merely PHF who wrote the motion as there is no way Labour would back a motion in Cllr Brash's name.. so lets have it right PHF were not the ones who thought this motion up they sponsored it

[mo the lawn]

Well said Lucy its time to stop bickering and stand side by side to get rid of the cancer that is killing our town the only way to cure cancer is to remove it . Its about time people started working together to rid the town we all love of the cancer .SO ONWARD AND  UPWARDS

[steveL]

Sorry Steve but it was Cllr Brash who proposed the Hart call in it was merely PHF who wrote the motion as there is no way Labour would back a motion in Cllr Brash's name.. so lets have it right PHF were not the ones who thought this motion up they sponsored it

The two discussed it but it was Lilley who sent the e-mail to all councillors  - two councillors, one PHF and one Independent Labour working together for the greater good. Is there something wrong with that? And why is there 'no way Labour would back a motion in Cllr Brash's name?' Surely they would back a good motion? Or are you saying that they would not back any motion that had Brash's name on it?

[mk1]

Lets be realistic here. The only way the 2 fatties are going to be shifted is from within.
It looks like they are not as popular as they like to think and it can not be too long before self-preservation kicks in and the others realise the damage being inflicted on the party. They will turn on the SCABs and  ditch the bitches. That still leaves the nodding dogs in control. They will elect a new figurehead and continue to do their masters bidding. Wells will keep selling the Tory  vote to make sure he has total control  of all planning in the town. Nothing will change untill a few seats can be prised from Labour. That is a fact that has to be faced.
It appears Hart is ripe for the picking and I see nothing more that jostling for position in order to pick up those seats.
As for the 'bickering' I see  it as an attempt by UKIP placemen to infiltrate and 'take over' the forum using the well tried and not exactly secret method of flooding it with positive stories about UKIP.
Mud sticks and the forum is already tarred with the UKIP/Far Right Loony brush.
Keep the nutters at arms length.

[mk1]

It is a sad fact that deeply committed people genuinely believe they, and only they,  are able to run things. This mindset drives them to keep power at all costs. They really believe the world will stop turning if any other party replaced them.
Thus even if their party is  seen to be deeply corrupt and  totally taken over by  thieves and conmen they console themselves with the  fact at least it is thieves and conmen who share their views. They  think that is better for the people than Tory thieves and conmen taking over.
I am afraid it wont wash. We have a clear example here of  woman and her puppet master are able to gain the ear of Labour grandees and extort over a million pounds of our money and not even pay the people she employs at slave rates. A woman who the SCABs dare not offend in case she takes them down with her and who they allow to continue salting away cash  before she ends up on jail.
Calling me a far right/Tory/UKIP/PHF stooge will not work. I know how the system works.  I know how you do deals behind closed doors. I know how the 'I owe you one' system works.  The local Labour party is totally corrupt and run as a private revenge seeking entity by 2 of the most vile and despicable people it has ever been my misfortune to come across. All within the party who do not speak out loudly about these 'bleeding obvious' facts is just as culpable as the 2 Fagin's running the show.
Brah and Hargreaves may be 'useful tools' at the moment but they were 'in the know' for many of the present problems. They realise they have no future in the Labour Party while the SCABs are in control. They have to get rid of them so Jonathan can resume his climb up the greasy pole. They are using MR as a tool to beat the SCABs with but they did  bugger all about it when they were in the Labour Group.
Who will be running Hartlepool in 2 years time?
The 2 fatties or the Brash family?

[ARC86]

So therefore Steve it wasnt only PHF who were looking out for the Hart Ward it was the independent Labour councillor too.. as for all other motions i dont believe the current Labour leadership would accept a Cllr Brash motion.. they may accept it in principle and then amend it.. as was done with the NMW motion.. as far as the travellers site was concerned.. the council did have to nominate a site from the original list.. mayor Drummond told me this at the time so to suggest otherwise is tomfoolery

MK1 your talking an awful lot of sense there.. there should never be any room for complacency because the people can have you out just as quick as your elected