Question Time

[beanzontoast]

How many votes did you acknowledge UKIP got was that 4million, and how many for PHF 155, I know its was a different election but hey im`trying not to embarrass, i did however think you could manage second.

[fred c]

Beanz...... seriously, you really need to think long & hard about beating the UKIP national drum here, it is & has been for many years a site almost solely concerned with local political & social matters, you would do well to keep that in mind.

The serious political problems that affect Hartlepool need to be addressed localy, in ful council & committees meetings, you & your fellow UKIP councillors were elected as local councillors to represent local people on local problems, you would do well to keep that at the forefront of your political activities.

[Lord Elpus]

How many votes did you acknowledge UKIP got was that 4million, and how many for PHF 155, I know its was a different election but hey im`trying not to embarrass, i did however think you could manage second.

I'm finding very hard not to reply to this posting with an insulting remark.  Tom, please get real, when UKIP was represented in the Council by just you and George Springer, you both let UKIP and the people who voted for you down badly.

I recall one conversation we had when you told me that you were not going to rock the boat because SAB had threatened you regarding some remarks you had made, (I know that to be a fact).  Instead of telling SAB to 'get photographed' with a big camera you did as he asked, in reality you TOM HIND became his man.

Hartlepool deserves better.

[steveL]

I'm not at all embarrassed. in fact, I'm very optimistic.

Think about it, Tom (a vain hope, I know). UKIP threw everything they had at that by-election dragging people in from all over the North East, Broughton and Arnott and at the end of it all they maxed out on 496 votes. That's not enough to win Headland and Harbour in a standard May local election.

UKIP's 'peek' is over. The party has lost 27% of its membership since July and its back to being smaller that both the Lib-Dems and the Greens. In the same period, its poll rating has dropped from 15% to 11% and that's before the effect of the Brussels boxing match has kicked in.

In addition to that, your main financial backer looks ready to walk if Steven Wolfe doesn't get to be Leader, (Arnott is calling for him to step down from the contest) when the party is already £800,000 in debt and doesn't even have enough money to properly fight the Cameron by-election - something your MEPs didn't want to hear, evidently.

The next few weeks will see the headlines all about the fractious arguments within the party as those 22 returning MEPs realise that their plan to slot themselves into Westminster seats in 2020 is falling apart.

It's real problem though is that the party is full of Councillors like you, ignorant enough to make claims such as the EU preventing the UK from changing the level of Corporation Tax when in fact the level of Corporation Tax has already been changed several times by the UK Chancellor in just the last few years and stupid enough to claim that you can clean up the coastal water at Seaton by lowering the required standard.

The good news though, is that you personally haven't got a cat-in-hell's chance of keeping your own seat in Seaton in 2018. 

[beanzontoast]

Again Seaton, my post was quite explicit, and to the point PHF who are they, UKIP returned 4million votes in the last general election, verified by their own PHF candidate steveL this is the same guy who stood as a candidate in the Headland and Harbor ward, and his election leaflet spent one side demonising UKIP, not one word of his support for the fishing industry, Why because PHF are for staying in the EU and giving your fishing rights away. Let them Sling their hook as it`s one local policy they don`t have.

[steveL]

I know it's going to come as a shock. Tom, but Hartlepool Borough Council has no say in either the UK or EU Fishing Policy and as for 'demonising UKIP', the page on that leaflet said three things:

   
• UKIP membership had fallen 17%
• It's total membership was now smaller than The Greens
• It took UKIP Councillors 2¹2 years to propose anything in council (and when they did, they changed their mind and withdrew in 10 minutes later.)

I now know the fall in membership figure was wrong - it's actually 27%. Other than that, what exactly are you suggesting is untrue?

I must say I'm astonished that someone in the UKIP hierarchy hasn't told you to STFU by now but hey . . . keep on posting, Tom.    Lovin' it.

[BresslawoffoftheBunker]

Leaflets that post other party's failings rather than there own plans are worthless.

[steveL]

...but hardly rare and it was one page of a six page leaflet. Labour leaflets are generally full of anti-Tory rhetoric and they've been running the council for years.

[BresslawoffoftheBunker]

I know.   

[akarjl]

I don't think anyone has anything to be concerned about UKIP/Others when it comes to Hartlepool .

https://www.hartlepool.gov.uk/councillors/108/thomas_hind

1 attendance  out of possible 5?

PHF not much better

https://www.hartlepool.gov.uk/councillors/117/james_black

2 out of possible 7?

Mrs and Mrs seem to spend most of their lives at meetings as do some of the "conservatives"

Influence seems to be in direct proportion to the amount of time your snout is in the trough......

I used to say if you put a wheel bin up for election in Hartlepool for Labour people would vote for it....people laughed.

Then they voted in a Monkey as a mayor............

[steveL]

Meetings are arranged for during the day which if you work, like the majority of people, makes it difficult to get to them whether you're a Councillor or a member of the public. The majority of Labour Councillors are either pensioners, unemployed or unemployable, or in jobs which they don't seem to have a problem walking away from at the drop of a hat, especially if they are council funded..e.g. Healthwatch. Some Councillors appear to have no declared occupation.

A recent public survey on whether the public would prefer all council meetings to be held on an evening showed that they would by a significant margin but Labour have refused to follow it through.

As I understand it, Tom Hind has now retired. James Black works in a school and Paul Thompson, who also works, substitutes for him when he can and when Black can't get there.

If you believe that a  council should reflect the make-up of the people of a town then it is clearly wrong to limit the chance to be a Councillor solely to the unemployed, people over 65 and people who have been slotted into public sector jobs where their actual presence appears to be optional, which is what Labour have been doing for years.

[akarjl]

Completely agree......hold them in evenings or weekends.....

[Lucy Lass-Tick]

Well, Lucy's had an email this morning with an invitation ...

[fred c]

Unlease Hell on them Lucy 

[Lucy Lass-Tick]

Unlease Hell on them Lucy 

And that's just as a member of the audience ...