Labour HOLD Manor House

[Winniethepooh]

VOTE HARTLEPOOL 1ST!! Better than any other party. Standing up for our rights.

Other Parties?? No point, it could be suggested they are all 'scratching each others backs' with some of the crap they come out with.

[fred c]

T.G.D.

Bang on the money your post I think!


Fred, why on earth would Raymondo "I might not be true blue, as the Scabs are turning me pink" Wells want to help PHF ..  it was only the other month, that some fella was giving him grief, because he spat his dummy out over a couple of chairmanships he quite fancied.

I can't stand Labour nonsense, they are a pack of ***** but PHF can't be trusted to walk my dog either.

At least Tom Hind is a stand up guy, wants the best for the town and the people in it, if anything, PHF ought to step aside and let the man make a difference.

MisterMr........

You have missed my point entirely............... i never suggested that Raymondo`s Mob should stand aside.

I raised the point about their Leaflet because it was more concerned about bashing PHF, than it was about getting Mandy Loynes elected in the Manor.

Incidentally, the Tory Leaflet has 2 statements on it that are Blatant Lies, & as such it has been reported to the Monitoring Officer

Ray Wells did not "Hand Back" any allowance, "The Independent Review Panel Removed It"

The Allowance for the Leader of PHF was not "Doubled", it has remained "Constant" since the party was first formed

What we have in Hartlepool is a Tory Group that it is impossible to seperate from "The Mob", you can`t find a better example than Raymondo`s backing for having a "Full Time Shop Steward" payed for by the Council tax Payers, which goes against "All Tory Policy".

The Tories could do a lot worse than having SRMoore as their leader, i can`t say i agree with lots of his points of view, but he does have Integrity & the best Interests of Hartlepool at heart.

Anyway enough of the TorLabs....

This following Quote from you doesn`t do you justice.

At least Tom Hind is a stand up guy, wants the best for the town and the people in it, if anything, PHF ought to step aside and let the man make a difference.

(Incidently I don`t know Tom Hinds & this isn`t a Dig at the fella)

However, your Insinuation is that people who are working hard for the PHF party don`t have the Interest of the town at heart.

I can tell you this in all honesty, the "New People" i have met recently, who have been out & about speaking to & leafleting the Manor Ward Residents are all committed to a better Hartlepool.

They aren`t doing it like some people, for the Labour Machine, they are doing it "Because of The Labour Machine" a lot of people on the Manor have seen what "The Mob" are doing at first hand & want to change it.

[Mr Mister]

Yes Fred whatever you say mate,

T.B.H. I haven't got the time to argue the toss this morning, I think PHF will fall over on the Manor, I think Labour will walk it, I could be wrong of course, has been known the odd time...lol

Labour won't win the Manor, PHF will lose the Manor I think.

People might want change and I believe they do, but, if you think PHF is the answer then bless you

I think the relationship with R.W. & the S/C.A.B. isn't healthy for the town but I understand with 3 Tory Councillors there is not much choice to be had by them over it, After all, if you ask someone in the Park area, they think they have good Councillors working for them, in their area.

[mo the lawn]

Just read a good book .
The bad cowboy guys with black hats were getting beaten to a pulp by the guys in white hats.
So they asked the indians for help the indians arrived but not with weapons to help there friends they had some thing much better a leaflet that was suppose to win them votes  but this leaflet only told lies it does not say any thing about what the indians (with blue feathers) will do only says lies about the cowboys in white hats.
So  its not the guys with white hats its the indians who speak with forked tongue.
This is yet  another good reason to vote PHF  or the only other thing to do is pick what liar to vote for.
One last point do we now have a new party LABCON or CONLAB

[steveL]

I think it's important for people to remember that throughout all the Manor Residents/Who cares (NE) saga there have been absolutely no genuine acts of contrition from the Labour camp. None whatsoever.
There have been no expressions of regret or remorse, no committment to put things right and no effort made to ensure that those wronged, either through failure to pay the minimum wage, NI, tax or unfair dismissal recieved their due compensation. Instead we have had denials, on-going support for Wilcox, lies and cowardice.

When this website first raised the management of Manor Residents as an issue we faced a brick-wall of denial and personal insults from the Akers-Belchers, Richardson, Hall and others. It was only through persistence and the help of PHF that we were able to get any recognition that something was seriously wrong with the management of this particular community group.

When the Peer Group raised its own concerns over 'the perception that some councillors were acting out of self-interest', the council's PR Department released a Press release which tried to whitewash over the whole report with The Mail headlining the story with Report Highlights Civic Strengths. It was PHF who issued its own press release which also appeared in The Mail and which criticised the whitewash that was taking place describing the content of the official press release as sanitised – and so it was.

When HTH put in a Freedom of Information Request for a copy of the report Labour asked council officers to find a way around the Freedom of Information Act which, to their credit, council officers wanted nothing to do with; they also wanted the names of those people who were interviewed by the Peer Group in an attempt to find out who had said that some councillors were acting out of self-interest.

When we finally got hold of the report and published it, The Mail published a very different article headlined Damning Detail of Council Review Revealed. This only happened through the efforts of this web site and PHF; the Tories said nothing and supported Labour's attempts to cover up everything up.

It was PHF who called for and pushed for the Mitchell Enquiry while the Tories and Labour claimed there was no need for it only relenting when they realised their opposition left them open to public criticism. Labour tried to limit any enquiry to the existing Audit Committee, Chaired by Christopher Akers-Belcher while Ray Wells stood up and claimed that any Public Enquiry could cost 'hundreds of thousands'.

More recently, it is only PHF that has called for a change in management at MR while S. Akers-Belcher, who as a Trustee was in a position to instigate a change in management, ran away from it like the coward that he is.

So it's more than a little laughable when people ask what PHF has done when they are the only ones who have done anything. They are the only ones to have fought to bring the scandal that is Manor Residents/ Who Cares(NE) into the open and the only ones fighting to give us a council which operates in the way that the people want.

[steveL]

What it should do is make the West Park Tories go Cuckoo hunting....

[brassed off monkey]

Just read a good book .
The bad cowboy guys with black hats were getting beaten to a pulp by the guys in white hats.
So they asked the indians for help the indians arrived but not with weapons to help there friends they had some thing much better a leaflet that was suppose to win them votes  but this leaflet only told lies it does not say any thing about what the indians (with blue feathers) will do only says lies about the cowboys in white hats.
So  its not the guys with white hats its the indians who speak with forked tongue.
This is yet  another good reason to vote PHF  or the only other thing to do is pick what liar to vote for.
One last point do we now have a new party LABCON or CONLAB

Thats been the case for a while now, in one way or another they have all been Kissing Each Others Ar*e`s, they are to all intents & purposes 1 Party.

[SRMoore]

I have to say that whilst I had nothing to do with the conservative leaflet and the content may not be what I would have used; to say that the information on it is a "pack of lies" is itself a lie or delusional.

The IRP recommended the Tory group leader lose his allowance as the third largest group. Ray Wells stood up in full council and agreed with the recommendation stating that in the current climate he agreed that savings needed to be made from the allowance package and that he would not argue against the decision, happily give up his leaders allowance.

The IRP recommended that the leaders allowance given to the second largest group, PHF, be cut by 50% in line with the other cuts to allowances. Councillor Lilley stood up and requested that the allowance be put back to the previous amount (50% higher than the IRP recommended) after doing a deal with the Labour group beforehand.

No doubt there will be those who refuse to accept the above but I would suggest they do a quick search on here and find the discussion that followed the meeting when I had suggested that Geoff had 'received his 30 peices of silver', the words I used when I entered the chamber and advised D Riddle of what was going to happen before the meeting commenced.

I'm not going to question why Geoff asked for the leaders allowance to be increased back to the higher level, I'm sure he has some reason for it. But to do so and then claim that anybody stating they did so to be a liar is pathetic.

You [PHF] were caught with your pants down. Man up and admit it rather than try and lie your way out of it.

So much for being the honest party eh...

[mo the lawn]

It wasnt an increase  or a decrease it stayed the same  so  how is that a lie

[Mr Mister]

Well said Shane!

[SRMoore]

It was decreased as per the recommendations of the IRP. PHF argued against the decision and asked for it to be increased back to the previous amount.

[fred c]

Spin it like Shane Warne... which ever way you put it, the leaflet was a direct attack on PHF..........& as an Election Leaflet for The Tories, it is about as much use a T*ts on a Bull.

Shane sooner or later you are going to have to stop making excuses for the policies your "Party" are persuing in the  Hartlepool Council Chamber, they are not only letting your chosen party down, but they aren`t doing your 2015 Election Chances any good at all.

[Mr Mister]

And one day Fred you'll stop breast feeding PHF and smell the coffee.

[DRiddle]

Shane, you know me. I know you. On various levels there is (I think/hope) a mutual respect for the fact that we both have Hartlepool's best interests at heart.

So before you go on, allow me to make you aware of some direct quotes form Peter Devlin, our council's chief solicitor, returning officer and monitoring office regarding the leaflet in question.

"Councillor Wells was not so noble as to 'hand back' his allowance".[b] "The statement on the leaflet is inaccurate", [/b]  (Those are direct quotes from Peter).

"Inaccurate" is defined by various dictionaries as; 'not correct', 'wrong', 'wide of the mark', 'untrue'.

Hartlepool council's own chief solicitor Peter Devlin is describing the leaflet circulated by the local Conservatives using a word that is essentially a synonym of the word 'lie'.

Those are not my words. Those come via an e-mail circulated to members of Putting Hartlepool First which was initially sent by Mr Devlin in response to a formal complaint by the former leader if PHF Geoff  Lilley.

Whilst I agree with you that I personally wouldn't have taken the money, when one considers that WE (PHF) are fighting against several national parties on a shoe string budget AND all of that allowance in question goes towards campaign funds I fail to see any merit in your argument.

Additionally, I haven't felt the need to check with Councillor Lilley(s) as to whether it's ok to make the contents of Mr Devlin's e-mail to him public. As far as i'm concerned PHF is "open and transparent" in every respect and those words are not just sound bites, they represent core principles of what we're about.

I welcome a reply from you which counters the direct quotes of our councils monitoring officer.

[Mr Mister]

Hang on..

What was the ex leader of PHF moaning about the night he had a pop at Wells?

Wasn't it over money he lost by not getting on the committee's he wanted?

I know SteveL & co say it was party money lost, but I don't buy into that at all.