Lib Dems tighten control of Cambridge
Keith Edkins
Lib Dem gain Trumpington from Con.
Labour gain Abbey from Ind (elected as Lab).
New Council:
Lib Dem 24
Labour 16.
Cons 2.
Full results with comparative figures for 2001 (use fixed width font!)
* Denotes sitting councillor.
ABBEY
Hart, Caroline (Lab) ...................... 571 58.6% (1396 56.7%)
Mitton, Simon (Con) ....................... 180 18.5% (540 21.9%)
Keating, Chris (L Dem) .................... 113 11.6% (414 16.8%)
Collins, John (Green) ..................... 60 6.2% (113 4.6%)
*Mbaya, Mungai (Ind) ...................... 51 5.2%
Lab gain from Ind. Maj 391. Turnout 20.3%
ARBURY
Todd-Jones, Michael (Lab) ................. 828 41.0% (1389 45.7%)
Moss-Eccardt, Rupert (L Dem) .............. 579 28.7% (857 28.2%)
Boorman, Robert (Con) ..................... 513 25.4% (796 26.2%)
Mitchell, Shayne (Green) .................. 73 3.6%
Minns, Diana (Soc All) .................... 27 1.3%
Lab hold. Maj 249. Turnout 39.2%
CASTLE
*White, J.David (L Dem) ...................1121 51.4% (2377 57.0%)
Boorman, Rhona (Con) ...................... 458 21.0% (805 19.4%)
Richardson, Gillian (Lab) ................. 412 18.9% (965 23.3%)
Lawrence, Stephen (Green) ................. 188 8.6%
Lib Dem hold. Maj 663. Turnout 30.6%
CHERRY HINTON
*Stuart, Graham (Con) .....................1174 49.3% (1380 38.6%)
Newbold, Stuart (Lab) ..................... 948 39.8% (1665 46.5%)
Amrani, Frances (L Dem) ................... 196 8.2% (532 14.9%)
Tayar, Daryl (Green) ...................... 64 2.7%
Con hold. Maj 226. Turnout 43.4%
COLERIDGE
*Bagnall, E.Ruth (Lab) .................... 938 50.6% (1832 49.7%)
Hall, Martin (Con) ........................ 454 24.5% (1064 28.9%)
Monroe, Jonathan (L Dem) .................. 267 14.4% (790 21.4%)
Docherty, Damian (Green) .................. 94 5.1%
Watts, Albert (UKIP) ...................... 53 2.9%
Sedgwick-Jell, Simon (Soc All) ............ 46 2.5%
Lab hold. Maj 484. Turnout 31.3%
EAST CHESTERTON
Bailey, Jennifer (L Dem) ................... 974 40.5% (1760 42.3%)
Woodall, Sarah (Lab) ....................... 858 35.7% (1504 36.2%)
Rashid, Mamanur (Con) ...................... 319 13.3% (893 21.5%)
Hewett, Neil (Green) ....................... 129 5.4%
Hudson, Barry (UKIP) ....................... 124 5.2%
Lib Dem hold. Maj 116. Turnout 33.4%
KING'S HEDGES
Bell, Maria (Lab) .......................... 550 54.6% (1351 57.1%)
Weinman, Cyril (Con) ....................... 235 23.3% (586 24.7%)
Bradford, Evelyn (L Dem) ................... 157 15.6% (431 18.2%)
Goldbeck-Wood, Gerhard (Green) ............. 65 6.5%
Lab hold. Maj 315. Turnout 20.8%
MARKET
*Rosenstiel, Joye (L Dem) .................. 879 57.0% (1939 50.3%)
Chamberlain, Samuel (Con) .................. 239 15.5% (663 17.2%)
Sargeant, Michael (Lab) .................... 238 15.4% (804 20.9%)
Lucas-Smith, Martin (Green) ................ 187 12.1% (446 11.6%)
Lib Dem hold. Maj 640. Turnout 22.4%
NEWNHAM
Reid, Sian (L Dem) .........................1134 56.3% (2489 55.1%)
Wright, H.Patricia (Lab) ................... 372 17.0% (1156 25.6%)
Normington, Richard (Con) .................. 326 16.2% (869 19.3%)
Harrison, Tandy (Green) .................... 190 9.4%
Douglas, Nigel (Ind) ....................... 23 1.1%
Lib Dem hold. Maj 792. Turnout 25.9%
PETERSFIELD
*Blencowe, Kevin (Lab) ..................... 964 40.4% (1647 37.9%)
Wilkins, Kevin (L Dem) ..................... 579 24.3% (1207 27.8%)
Wright, Margaret (Green) ................... 514 21.5% (793 18.2%)
Glendon, Lee (Con) ......................... 257 10.8% (701 16.1%)
Walker, Jonathan (Soc All) ................. 72 3.0%
Lab hold. Maj 385. Turnout 30.2%
QUEEN EDITH'S (2 vacancies)
*Taylor, Amanda (L Dem) ....................1564 62.7% (2255 56.2%)
Baker, Alan (L Dem) ........................1424 57.1% (2255 56.2%)
Henry, Keith (Con) ......................... 473 19.0% (896 22.3%)
Ray, James (Con) ........................... 409 16.4% (896 22.3%)
Harper, Frances (Lab) ...................... 342 13.7% (861 21.5%)
Stevens, Jean (Lab) ........................ 258 10.3% (861 21.5%)
Milsom, Robert (Green) ..................... 160 6.4%
Davies, Helene (UKIP) ...................... 78 3.1%
2 Lib Dem holds. Maj 951. Turnout 40.7% (2495 papers returned)
ROMSEY
*Smart, Catherine (L Dem) .................. 969 44.8% (1414 38.8%)
Sales, Paul (Lab) .......................... 867 40.1% (1454 39.9%)
Russell, Vicky (Green) ..................... 194 9.0% (262 7.2%)
Ellis, Vivian (Con) ........................ 131 6.1% (355 9.8%)
(Ind) (156 4.3%)
Lib Dem hold. Maj 102. Turnout 35.2%
TRUMPINGTON
Pinnington, Judith (L Dem) .................1118 47.5% (1977 53.7%)
Towns, Hannah (Con) ........................ 937 39.8% (1176 32.0%)
Turner, Rosemary (Lab) ..................... 201 8.5% (527 14.3%)
Westcott, Brian (Green) .................... 100 4.2%
Lib Dem gain from Con. Maj 181. Turnout 38.9%
WEST CHESTERTON
*Nimmo-Smith, M.Ian (L Dem) ................1071 51.1% (1864 49.0%)
Schicker, Patrick (Lab) .................... 474 22.6% (1202 31.6%)
Strachan, James (Con) ...................... 350 16.7% (741 19.5%)
Peake, Stephen (Green) ..................... 202 9.6%
Lib Dem hold. Maj 597. Turnout 34.0%
Keith Edkins
Cambridge Liberal Democrats: http://www.cambridgelibdems.org.uk/
Mark Ayliffe
news:1020389968.10222....@news.demon.co.uk...
<...>
>
> * Denotes sitting councillor.
<...>
What a conservative bunch we are. Only one sitting councillor booted
out and that one had changed allegiance. I suppose masses of new
development, misguided buses and gridlock are now inevitable :(
Mark
Jon Green
<keith....@gwydir.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>ABBEY
>Hart, Caroline (Lab) ...................... 571 58.6% (1396 56.7%)
>Mitton, Simon (Con) ....................... 180 18.5% (540 21.9%)
>Keating, Chris (L Dem) .................... 113 11.6% (414 16.8%)
...but not in Abbey, it seems!
I wonder what caused the huge swing away from the Lib Dems. Perhaps
it was because (he commented, pointedly) they didn't appear to canvas
or leaflet in the area? (Well, not where we live, anyway.)
The Cons got something of a spanking, too. Guess what? They didn't
canvas or leaflet, either.
Me? Given the alternatives, I voted for the independent. Didn't have
a hope in hell, but at least it gave him more chance to avoid losing
his deposit.
Jon
(living in what's become -- perhaps through opposition party apathy --
the most rigidly Labour ward on the Council *sigh*)
--
SPAM BLOCK IN USE! Replace 'deadspam' with 'green-lines' to reply in email.
Want a free solution to email spam? Try http://www.deadspam.com/
(Declaration of interest: I own/run the domain.)
Robert Macmillan
"Keith Edkins" <keith....@gwydir.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1020389968.10222....@news.demon.co.uk...
> Lib Dem gain Trumpington from Con.
> Labour gain Abbey from Ind (elected as Lab).
Can I apologise to the rest of cam.misc please. I hadn't realised
that to be a fully-fledged member of this group it was necessary to
stand in the local elections as a LibDem. I can now see the error of
my ways, even if I can't immediately see the answer to the problem.
Humble gratuities.
Robert
Jon Green
<rob...@mbe-windsor.co.uk> wrote:
>Can I apologise to the rest of cam.misc please. I hadn't realised
>that to be a fully-fledged member of this group it was necessary to
>stand in the local elections as a LibDem. I can now see the error of
>my ways, even if I can't immediately see the answer to the problem.
>
>Humble gratuities.
...to Party funds? *snigger*
Jon
Paul Oldham
mark.ayl...@nospam.pem.cam.andthis.ac.uk (Mark Ayliffe) growled:
They were anyway. To be honest it's not in the City's gift to prevent it.
The Regional Planning Guidance, brought to us by central government, is
the key document driving the new development; guided buses come from that
and from CHUMMS, another central government document; and the gridlock is
a natural consequence of the first two.
It's all deeply depressing.
--
Paul Oldham, Milton villager
The cam.* FAQ ---> http://the-hug.org/paul/camfaq.html
Milton web site -> http://www.miltonvillage.org.uk/
Keith Edkins
"Robert Macmillan" <rob...@mbe-windsor.co.uk> wrote in message
news:aatiqu$ks6$1...@thorium.cix.co.uk...
may have a few vancancies for candidates if you apply early enough :-) - and
if you live or principally work within the city boundary.
Keith Edkins
(Cam Lib Dems hat on)
Olly Johnson
> What a conservative bunch we are. Only one sitting councillor booted
> out and that one had changed allegiance. I suppose masses of new
> development, misguided buses and gridlock are now inevitable :(
Wait until Marvin the Moose becomes mayor. He'll get rid of the dead wood.
O.
--
otj...@cam.ac.uk http://www.statslab.cam.ac.uk/~johnson 01223 337946
Christ's College and Statistical Laboratory, University of Cambridge
Keith Edkins
"Jon Green" <jo...@deadspam.com> wrote in message
news:obj4du847nsn4k0ka...@4ax.com...
> Me? Given the alternatives, I voted for the independent. Didn't have
> a hope in hell, but at least it gave him more chance to avoid losing
> his deposit.
>
Not sure if that was seriously meant, but there are no deposits in local
elections. There are 87614 electors in Cambridge and they're all entitled to
stand (plus untold thousands more who work but don't live within the city).
Keith
Jennifer Liddle
> (living in what's become -- perhaps through opposition party apathy --
> the most rigidly Labour ward on the Council *sigh*)
Don't be silly.
It's nothing to do with apathy, and everything to do with lack of
resources. If you don't like the fact that Abbey is a safe Labour ward,
then get off your bottom and do something about it. I can't, because I'm
too busy in my own ward.
--
Jennifer Liddle http://www.jsquared.co.uk/jennyl
Tim Ward
> On Fri, 3 May 2002 09:39:09 +0100, "Robert Macmillan"
> <rob...@mbe-windsor.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >Can I apologise to the rest of cam.misc please. I hadn't realised
> >that to be a fully-fledged member of this group it was necessary to
> >stand in the local elections as a LibDem. I can now see the error of
> >my ways, even if I can't immediately see the answer to the problem.
> >
> >Humble gratuities.
>
> ...to Party funds? *snigger*
Money isn't that big a deal actually, although we wouldn't turn it down.
*Time* would be even more welcome.
--
Tim Ward - posting as an individual unless otherwise clear
Brett Ward Ltd - www.brettward.co.uk
Cambridge Accommodation Notice Board - www.brettward.co.uk/canb
Cambridge City Councillor
Robert Macmillan
Of course, if we took politicians' exhortations at their word(s), a
significant fraction of us would stand. Can you imagine a voting
slip with 153 candidates?
Robert
Jon Green
Well, I didn't know that! I'd believed there were deposits, but much
smaller than for national elections. I sit corrected.
It was a combination of protest vote and supporting-the-little-guy
anyway, so it wouldn't have made any great difference, but thanks for
the info.
Jon
Tim Ward
>
> Of course, if we took politicians' exhortations at their word(s), a
> significant fraction of us would stand. Can you imagine a voting
> slip with 153 candidates?
I've been in charge of a count where there were around 40. It does make
physical handling of the voting papers rather a pain.
Tim Ward
>
> It was a combination of protest vote and supporting-the-little-guy
> anyway, so it wouldn't have made any great difference, but thanks for
> the info.
If more people took more of an interest in local politics, and actually knew
who their councillors were, chatted to them in the pub or whatever as Paul
suggests, then Mungai might have done rather better. As it was one suspects
that people just voted "Labour" with no regard as to who the candidate might
be or why there was an independent.
If I'd been living in Abbey I'd probably have voted for him. (Sorry Chris!)
Paul Rudin
[snip horribly formatted cited text]
You asked to be told: your quoted text looks 'orrid.
--
Th' MIND is the Pizza Palace of th' SOUL
Robert Macmillan
"Paul Rudin" <Paul_...@scientia.com> wrote in message
news:uwuula...@scientia.com...
> >>>>> "RM" == Robert Macmillan <rob...@mbe-windsor.co.uk> writes:
>
> [snip horribly formatted cited text]
>
> You asked to be told: your quoted text looks 'orrid.
It does, and I'm sorry. I don't know what the answer is yet.
Robert
Hugo 'NOx' Tyson
Jon Green <jo...@deadspam.com> writes:
> On Fri, 3 May 2002 02:39:24 +0100, "Keith Edkins"
> <keith....@gwydir.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >ABBEY
> >Hart, Caroline (Lab) ...................... 571 58.6% (1396 56.7%)
> >Mitton, Simon (Con) ....................... 180 18.5% (540 21.9%)
> >Keating, Chris (L Dem) .................... 113 11.6% (414 16.8%)
>
> ...but not in Abbey, it seems!
>
> I wonder what caused the huge swing away from the Lib Dems. Perhaps
> it was because (he commented, pointedly) they didn't appear to canvas
> or leaflet in the area? (Well, not where we live, anyway.)
Not to discount the other good followups, but...
The figures suggest that that ward changed boundaries since last time. 900
votes in all (for them 3) instead of 2400! Did it? Does that account for
it? If not, how come the figures are so odd?
- Huge
Paul Oldham
jo...@deadspam.com (Jon Green) growled:
> The Cons got something of a spanking, too. Guess what? They didn't
> canvas or leaflet, either.
The one that interested me was East Chesterton, where they did leaflet,
and they suffered a big swing against them compared to the rest of the
City. I can't help but smell a touch of racism in that result.
Paul Rudin
RM> I don't know what the answer is yet.
I do: get rid of OE :-)
--
YOW! I can see 1987!! PRESIDENT FORD is doing the REMAKE of "PAGAN
LOVE SONG"...he's playing ESTHER WILLIAMS!!
Tim Ward
news:m3helpl...@foo.surfingsuggestion.co.uk...
The ward boundaries change next year, not this.
The reason is that there was a general election last year on the same day as
the (county) local election, and general elections get higher turnout, and
most (but not all) people who turn out for the general election will also
vote in the local election when they're given two ballot papers, even if
they didn't actually know that there was a local election on.
Comparison with the last local-only election in 2000 might be more helpful
for some purposes, such as comparing turnouts, but less so for others as it
would ignore a year of switching.
Jennifer Liddle
> The one that interested me was East Chesterton, where they did leaflet,
> and they suffered a big swing against them compared to the rest of the
> City. I can't help but smell a touch of racism in that result.
I'm afraid so. I canvassed one gentleman who said he wasn't voting because
"I'm a Tory, but I'm not voting for *him*".
Robert Macmillan
> >>>>> "RM" == Robert Macmillan <rob...@mbe-windsor.co.uk> writes:
>
> RM> I don't know what the answer is yet.
>
> I do: get rid of OE :-)
Well, I'm not committed to it yet. But I think I should give it more of a
chance before giving up on it.
Robert
Mark Ayliffe
I've not noticed anyone being offended by my using OE, and it's just
the simplest option for me here. I've many irritations with it (like,
why can't I stop it putting the space after the > quoting marker?),
but nothing which makes it a showstopper yet.
Still, we're about to change ISPs and if the new newsserver is rubbish
enough then I'll be reduced to Google I suppose. :(
Mark
Jon Green
wrote:
>"Jon Green" <jo...@deadspam.com> wrote in message
>news:cpl4dugj6a107qaeh...@4ax.com...
>>
>> It was a combination of protest vote and supporting-the-little-guy
>> anyway, so it wouldn't have made any great difference, but thanks for
>> the info.
>
>If more people took more of an interest in local politics, and actually knew
>who their councillors were, chatted to them in the pub or whatever as Paul
>suggests, then Mungai might have done rather better.
Of course, that presupposes there exists a pub in the ward...
Jon (who can't get a pint of ale at the McDonald's, boo!)
Diana Galletly
Hugo 'NOx' Tyson <hm...@surfingsuggestionx.co.ukx> wrote:
>> On Fri, 3 May 2002 02:39:24 +0100, "Keith Edkins"
>> <keith....@gwydir.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>> >ABBEY
>> >Hart, Caroline (Lab) ...................... 571 58.6% (1396 56.7%)
>> >Mitton, Simon (Con) ....................... 180 18.5% (540 21.9%)
>> >Keating, Chris (L Dem) .................... 113 11.6% (414 16.8%)
>
>votes in all (for them 3) instead of 2400! Did it? Does that account for
>it? If not, how come the figures are so odd?
Last time there was a general election at the same time. People would have
gone out to vote in the general, and decided they might as well vote in
the local as well. It's the same in other wards (look at Castle's figures,
f'rinstance.
--
+ Diana Galletly <dag...@eng.cam.ac.uk> +
+ http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~galletly/ +
Tim Ward
>
> Of course, that presupposes there exists a pub in the ward...
>
> Jon (who can't get a pint of ale at the McDonald's, boo!)
Ah, yes, there is that. Arbury has recently gained a pub, of course, with
the welcome return of the British Queen.
Paul Oldham
jenn...@jsquared.co.uk (Jennifer Liddle) growled:
> Paul Oldham wibbled:
>
> > The one that interested me was East Chesterton, where they did
> > leaflet,
> > and they suffered a big swing against them compared to the rest of the
> > City. I can't help but smell a touch of racism in that result.
>
> I'm afraid so. I canvassed one gentleman who said he wasn't voting
> because "I'm a Tory, but I'm not voting for *him*".
I think you have a serious spelling error in the first line there.
Somewhere between "one" and "who".
Jon Green
<jenn...@jsquared.co.uk> wrote:
>Jon Green wibbled:
>
>> (living in what's become -- perhaps through opposition party apathy --
>> the most rigidly Labour ward on the Council *sigh*)
>
>Don't be silly.
>
>It's nothing to do with apathy, and everything to do with lack of
>resources. If you don't like the fact that Abbey is a safe Labour ward,
>then get off your bottom and do something about it.
Thank you for replying to valid criticism with an ad-hominem attack.
In answer to your question, before I bury it where it belongs -- how?
Right now, *none* of the established parties is exactly in good odour
with me, and I certainly don't have enough time in the day to stand as
an independent, even if I wished to do so.
And this "If you don't like it, fix it yourself" argument is specious
at best.
It's your bloody party; *you* fix it, if you want to get (your
candidate) elected. Try being credible, and maybe people will join
and want to help out, come next election. Don't shoot the messenger
when the message is just a little too accurate for comfort.
Jon
Nicholas JS Gibson
> On Fri, 3 May 2002 02:39:24 +0100, "Keith Edkins"
> <keith....@gwydir.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >ABBEY
> >Hart, Caroline (Lab) ...................... 571 58.6% (1396 56.7%)
> >Mitton, Simon (Con) ....................... 180 18.5% (540 21.9%)
> >Keating, Chris (L Dem) .................... 113 11.6% (414 16.8%)
>
>
> I wonder what caused the huge swing away from the Lib Dems. Perhaps
> it was because (he commented, pointedly) they didn't appear to canvas
> or leaflet in the area? (Well, not where we live, anyway.)
No canvassing in my bit of Abbey either apart from one Labour leaflet...
Nick
Paul Rudin
> "Robert Macmillan" <rob...@mbe-windsor.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:aatnkb$nm3$1...@thorium.cix.co.uk...
>> "Paul Rudin" <Paul_...@scientia.com> wrote in message
>> news:ug019a...@scientia.com... > >>>>> "RM" == Robert
>> Macmillan <rob...@mbe-windsor.co.uk> writes:
>> >
>> > RM> I don't know what the answer is yet.
>> >
>> > I do: get rid of OE :-)
>>
>> Well, I'm not committed to it yet. But I think I should give it
>> more
> of a
>> chance before giving up on it.
>>
> I've not noticed anyone being offended by my using OE,
Well I'm not "offended" but your quoted text looks horrid as well.
> and it's just the simplest option for me here.
presuambly because it comes ready-installed with the OS?
> I've many irritations with it
So why not use something that works well?
> Still, we're about to change ISPs and if the new newsserver is
> rubbish enough then I'll be reduced to Google I suppose. :(
Ick... google is nice for ad hoc searching. But as a day-to-day way of
keeping up with newsgroups it's terrible IMO.
--
Will this never-ending series of PLEASURABLE EVENTS never cease?
Tim Ward
>
> In answer to your question, before I bury it where it belongs -- how?
> Right now, *none* of the established parties is exactly in good odour
> with me, and I certainly don't have enough time in the day to stand as
> an independent, even if I wished to do so.
OK, the serious, correct, answer to "how", in a system (which I know Paul
doesn't approve of) where you can't get elected without a party label, is to
choose the least worst party, join it, and change the bits of its policy
that you don't like.
> It's your bloody party; *you* fix it, if you want to get (your
> candidate) elected. Try being credible, and maybe people will join
> and want to help out, come next election. Don't shoot the messenger
> when the message is just a little too accurate for comfort.
Trouble is that you didn't give us a message. You just said:
> Right now, *none* of the established parties is exactly in good odour
> with me,
That doesn't give any party much of a clue as to what you think is broken
with that party and how you want it fixed, so even with the best will in the
world it seems fairly unlikely, simply in practical terms, that it can
happen.
And to go back to:
> It's your bloody party; *you* fix it
Not really. At least one "party" could reasonably be described as "a loose
association of people who quite often have similar approaches to some
problems"; it's not "owned" by anyone except the members, and the moment you
join you "own" it just as much as anyone else does. (It is rumoured that
other parties don't work quite that way, and have more of a system of people
being told what to think from head office, but I have no personal experience
of belonging to such a party and it's possible these rumours could be
untrue.)
Chris Keating
> On Fri, 3 May 2002 02:39:24 +0100, "Keith Edkins"
> <keith....@gwydir.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >ABBEY
> >Hart, Caroline (Lab) ...................... 571 58.6% (1396 56.7%)
> >Mitton, Simon (Con) ....................... 180 18.5% (540 21.9%)
> >Keating, Chris (L Dem) .................... 113 11.6% (414 16.8%)
>
> ...but not in Abbey, it seems!
>
> I wonder what caused the huge swing away from the Lib Dems. Perhaps
> it was because (he commented, pointedly) they didn't appear to canvas
> or leaflet in the area? (Well, not where we live, anyway.)
This doesn't explain the swing - we also mounted no campaign in Abbey in
2000 and 2001.
> Me? Given the alternatives, I voted for the independent. Didn't have
> a hope in hell, but at least it gave him more chance to avoid losing
> his deposit.
It was a real shame that he wasn't re-selected - I've heard many good things
about him.
>
> Jon
> (living in what's become -- perhaps through opposition party apathy --
> the most rigidly Labour ward on the Council *sigh*)
Blame First-Past-The-Post. Labour get 60%ish there, so both other parties
tend to put their resources where they can win.
If people in Abbey don't like this - and I know I don't - then they can
always stand themselves, with the help of a party or not.
Chris
Keith Edkins
"Tim Ward" <t...@brettward.co.uk> wrote in message
news:xEtA8.957$jE6....@news8-gui.server.ntli.net...
> "Jon Green" <jo...@deadspam.com> wrote in message
> news:5lp4du0b3ifiji8au...@4ax.com...
> >
> > Of course, that presupposes there exists a pub in the ward...
> >
> > Jon (who can't get a pint of ale at the McDonald's, boo!)
>
> Ah, yes, there is that. Arbury has recently gained a pub, of course, with
> the welcome return of the British Queen.
>
It'll gain another five with the boundary changes next year! Not that that
figured in the Local Government Commission's considerations of course.
Keith
Chris Keating
> "Jon Green" <jo...@deadspam.com> wrote in message
> news:cpl4dugj6a107qaeh...@4ax.com...
> >
> > It was a combination of protest vote and supporting-the-little-guy
> > anyway, so it wouldn't have made any great difference, but thanks for
> > the info.
>
> If more people took more of an interest in local politics, and actually
knew
> who their councillors were, chatted to them in the pub or whatever as Paul
> suggests, then Mungai might have done rather better. As it was one
suspects
> that people just voted "Labour" with no regard as to who the candidate
might
> be or why there was an independent.
>
> If I'd been living in Abbey I'd probably have voted for him. (Sorry
Chris!)
Watching the Abbey count was quite a sad experience. Though I don't know him
personally, everyone speaks very highly of his commitment as a councillor.
He must have been in an extremely difficult situation. In a sense it's a
shame that someone like me who didn't campaign got more votes... However,
that's the way it works out with this system.
Chris
Jennifer Liddle
> Thank you for replying to valid criticism with an ad-hominem attack.
I apologise if you saw my reply as a personal attack or criticism, it was
not meant as such.
> Right now, *none* of the established parties is exactly in good odour
> with me, and I certainly don't have enough time in the day to stand as
> an independent, even if I wished to do so.
If you don't like any of the established parties, then how would the
LibDems (or anyone else) campaigning in your ward help you?
> And this "If you don't like it, fix it yourself" argument is specious
> at best.
> It's your bloody party; *you* fix it,
There is nothing wrong with my party. You were complaining about the lack
of representation in your ward. You live there and I don't. I don't think
it's at all specious to suggest that problems in a ward are best solved by
the people living in that ward.
> Don't shoot the messenger
> when the message is just a little too accurate for comfort.
Please correct me if I'm failing to understand you here, but the message
seems to be "there is a problem with representation in my ward, but I'm not
prepared to do anything about it, I think you should solve the problem for
me. Oh and by the way, I don't like any established party, including yours."
Now, if you'd just put this blindfold on and stand against this wall....
Vicky Larmour
Jennifer Liddle wrote:
> Jon Green wibbled:
>> (living in what's become -- perhaps through opposition party
>> apathy -- the most rigidly Labour ward on the Council *sigh*)
>
>
> It's nothing to do with apathy, and everything to do with lack
> of resources. If you don't like the fact that Abbey is a safe
> Labour ward, then get off your bottom and do something about it.
Hmmm. Jifl and I have delivered leaflets in Abbey for the LibDems
before, but we weren't contacted this time to ask if we could do it
again.
Vicky
--
"Bother," said Pooh, "Eeyore, ready two photon torpedoes and lock
phasers on the Heffalump. Piglet, meet me in transporter room
three. Christopher Robin, you have the bridge."
Jon Green
Look, if you've got one or two spare, any chance of borrowing them
until some enterprising publican can get Abbey sorted on a more
permanent basis? <g>
Jon
Tim Ward
>
> Look, if you've got one or two spare, any chance of borrowing them
> until some enterprising publican can get Abbey sorted on a more
> permanent basis? <g>
Well, Abbey will be gaining quite a lot of territory as well next year, and
there must be some pubs in there somewhere ...
Mark Ayliffe
> On Fri, 3 May 2002 12:12:18 +0100, "Keith Edkins"
> <keith....@gwydir.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Tim Ward" <t...@brettward.co.uk> wrote in message
> >news:xEtA8.957$jE6....@news8-gui.server.ntli.net...
> >> "Jon Green" <jo...@deadspam.com> wrote in message
> >> news:5lp4du0b3ifiji8au...@4ax.com...
> >> >
> >> > Of course, that presupposes there exists a pub in the ward...
> >> >
> >> > Jon (who can't get a pint of ale at the McDonald's, boo!)
> >>
> >> Ah, yes, there is that. Arbury has recently gained a pub, of
course, with
> >> the welcome return of the British Queen.
> >>
> >It'll gain another five with the boundary changes next year! Not
that that
> >figured in the Local Government Commission's considerations of
course.
>
> Look, if you've got one or two spare, any chance of borrowing them
> until some enterprising publican can get Abbey sorted on a more
> permanent basis? <g>
Or give them back to Castle, which I think won't have any after the
boundary changes
Mark
Tim Ward
news:90vA8.90$mj.1...@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net...
>
> "Chris Keating" <cj...@nospcam.ac.uk> wrote in message
> news:aatqr4$nl6$1...@pegasus.csx.cam.ac.uk...
> >
> If people in Abbey don't like this - and I know I don't - then they can
> > always stand themselves, with the help of a party or not.
> >
> > Chris
> >
> wouldn't believe how delighted I would be to hear from them.
Instead of Simon? Or as well, because you need three next year? (Simon did
say the other two should be easy to recruit, because you'd be able to
promise them that they wouldn't actually have to serve as councillors.)
Graham Stuart
"Chris Keating" <cj...@nospcam.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:aatqr4$nl6$1...@pegasus.csx.cam.ac.uk...
>
> always stand themselves, with the help of a party or not.
>
> Chris
>
wouldn't believe how delighted I would be to hear from them.
Graham Stuart
Tim Ward
news:Xns92037FA96...@213.107.107.169...
>
> Hmmm. Jifl and I have delivered leaflets in Abbey for the LibDems
> before, but we weren't contacted this time to ask if we could do it
> again.
Umm, we were all a bit busy ... of course there's nothing to stop you
*writing* them as well, and printing isn't a problem.
Mark Ayliffe
message news:K4vA8.14$fS6.980@psinet-eu-nl...
<Horrid wrapping>
Eeek, sorry. Line length restored to 76
Mark
Graham Stuart
"Vicky Larmour" <vi...@jifvik.org.nospam> wrote in message
> before, but we weren't contacted this time to ask if we could do it
> again.
>
> Vicky
Would you like to deliver Conservative leaflets instead?
Graham Stuart
Colin Rosenstiel
jo...@deadspam.com (Jon Green) wrote:
> On Fri, 3 May 2002 02:39:24 +0100, "Keith Edkins"
> <keith....@gwydir.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >ABBEY
> >Hart, Caroline (Lab) ...................... 571 58.6% (1396 56.7%)
> >Mitton, Simon (Con) ....................... 180 18.5% (540 21.9%)
> >Keating, Chris (L Dem) .................... 113 11.6% (414 16.8%)
>
> ...but not in Abbey, it seems!
>
> I wonder what caused the huge swing away from the Lib Dems. Perhaps
> it was because (he commented, pointedly) they didn't appear to canvas
> or leaflet in the area? (Well, not where we live, anyway.)
>
> The Cons got something of a spanking, too. Guess what? They didn't
> canvas or leaflet, either.
>
> Me? Given the alternatives, I voted for the independent. Didn't have
> a hope in hell, but at least it gave him more chance to avoid losing
> his deposit.
No deposits in local elections as Keith has pointed out.
The change is to be expected given that there was not a general election
on the same day, with leaflets distributed by all parties. Opposition
candidates in safe wards always do better in such circumstances.
If you look at the figures from the 2000 election in Abbey there is very
little change:
Labour 567
Con 224
Lib Dem 117
Colin Rosenstiel
Colin Rosenstiel
(Diana Galletly) wrote:
And being a General election, all County candidates, especially in the
parties' weak wards, benefited from literature distributed for the
Parliamentary campaigns.
Colin Rosenstiel
Colin Rosenstiel
t...@brettward.co.uk (Tim Ward) wrote:
> "Jon Green" <jo...@deadspam.com> wrote in message
> news:cpl4dugj6a107qaeh...@4ax.com...
> >
> > It was a combination of protest vote and supporting-the-little-guy
> > anyway, so it wouldn't have made any great difference, but thanks for
> > the info.
>
> If more people took more of an interest in local politics, and actually
> knew who their councillors were, chatted to them in the pub or whatever
> as Paul suggests, then Mungai might have done rather better. As it was
> one suspects that people just voted "Labour" with no regard as to who
> the candidate might be or why there was an independent.
Slight problem with that plan. There are no pubs in Abbey! It's
Cambridge's only dry ward.
> If I'd been living in Abbey I'd probably have voted for him. (Sorry
> Chris!)
I've known Mungai for many years and would count him as a gentleman and
friend but he's not an obvious councillor for Abbey.
Colin Rosenstiel
Mike Pitt
So what happened to the Green challenge? I thought they claimed to be
targeting parts of Cambridge.
(Two third places: beating Tories in Romsey and Petersfield is all I can
see. Neither is exactly an earth shattering electoral moment in
Cambridge. :-)
Mike
Jon Green
<jenn...@jsquared.co.uk> wrote:
>Jon Green wibbled:
>
>> Thank you for replying to valid criticism with an ad-hominem attack.
>
>I apologise if you saw my reply as a personal attack or criticism, it was
>not meant as such.
OK, fair enough, but it's hard to see how I could otherwise have
interpreted "If you don't like the fact that Abbey is a safe Labour
ward, then get off your bottom and do something about it" -- which
transfers the problem from the other parties into *my* lap, where it
certainly doesn't belong. I'm a floating voter; always have been. I
vote on issues, not party lines.
>> Right now, *none* of the established parties is exactly in good odour
>> with me, and I certainly don't have enough time in the day to stand as
>> an independent, even if I wished to do so.
>
>If you don't like any of the established parties, then how would the
>LibDems (or anyone else) campaigning in your ward help you?
(I'll take it from that that you're LibDem.)
One of the reasons why I despaired of the LibDems in Abbey, and why
they weren't a voting option for me, is that I hadn't the faintest
idea what their policies or intents were for the next term, because
they didn't take the trouble to tell me. Others of my neighbours had
similar opinions, by the way; there was quite a lot of nattering
around the polling station. I wonder how different the vote would
have been, had the LibDems canvassed or leafletted Abbey.
The decision that a given ward is unwinnable is self-fulfilling.
>> And this "If you don't like it, fix it yourself" argument is specious
>> at best.
>> It's your bloody party; *you* fix it,
>
>There is nothing wrong with my party.
Apart from not letting potential voters know about their policies, and
being invisible to the media on an ongoing basis (ever since Paddy
passed the reins).... Any other faults are, literally, unknowable at
present.
I'll say it again, it bears repetition: I *could* not vote LibDem,
because I didn't know what they stood for, on a ward, Council or
national basis, because I have seen and heard neither hide nor hair
from them for ages.
Worse: not only are you failing to connect with the voters on a
personal basis, your media handling is an utter failure. I can't
remember what the last issue was on which Charles Kennedy (he's still
leader, yes?) or the party as a whole had a strong opinion expressed
through the news media. If it happened recently, it had all the
impact of a mouse farting, to pick a coarse (but apt) simile.
These days, the media "are" the message. If you don't get airtime, if
you don't get sound-bites and interviews, you don't get votes. If you
don't connect on a local level either, what do you expect?
> You were complaining about the lack
>of representation in your ward. You live there and I don't. I don't think
>it's at all specious to suggest that problems in a ward are best solved by
>the people living in that ward.
Then start recruiting in Abbey. If the LibDems show themselves as
actively interested in the ward, the ward's voters might just
reciprocate. It takes effort, but you've time before the next polls
to put in the groundwork, otherwise you'll just slide into obscurity.
And that would be foolish. The Council majority isn't so large that a
relatively small electoral swing couldn't change its balance, so now
you've got a bunch of moderately safe seats in the short term, it's
time (ISTM) to work on turning the ones that are conventionally
unreachable, or unlikely, to reinforce your position.
>> Don't shoot the messenger
>> when the message is just a little too accurate for comfort.
>
>Please correct me if I'm failing to understand you here, but the message
>seems to be "there is a problem with representation in my ward, but I'm not
>prepared to do anything about it, I think you should solve the problem for
>me. Oh and by the way, I don't like any established party, including yours."
I presume the contents of this posting count as a correction, then.
And, if you want to have a chance of capturing floating voters (like
me) or wavering voters (like an increasing proportion of the
population), you should sold the problem for *yourselves*, not for
*me*.
I'm not going to fix the LibDems' problems for them, because (please
note this carefully) I'm not a LibDem. I believe the LibDems have the
possibility of being a credible alternative to Labour in Abbey, *if*
you get their collective act together and be activists in that ward.
It's up to you whether or not you act on that advice.
>Now, if you'd just put this blindfold on and stand against this wall....
Actually, it seems that the firing party's pooped after it finished
with the Abbey LibDem candidate; you'll have to wait.
Aubrey
> Summary:
> Lib Dem gain Trumpington from Con.
> Labour gain Abbey from Ind (elected as Lab).
>
No monkey then?
A.
Vicky Larmour
Tim Ward wrote:
> "Vicky Larmour" <vi...@jifvik.org.nospam> wrote in message
> news:Xns92037FA96...@213.107.107.169...
>> Hmmm. Jifl and I have delivered leaflets in Abbey for the
>> LibDems before, but we weren't contacted this time to ask if we
>> could do it again.
>
> Umm, we were all a bit busy ... of course there's nothing to
> stop you *writing* them as well, and printing isn't a problem.
Er... you were all a bit busy doing *what*? Planning an election
campaign, presumably, which one would assume would include contacting
previous volunteers to see whether they were still available /
interested?
If I'd got round to it myself I would have rung up to find out
whether I could deliver some leaflets, but I wouldn't be up for
writing LibDem leaflets myself (I don't believe in the LibDems, or
any other party, that strongly - my interest is in not having such a
safe seat in my ward that no-one else bothers to campaign).
Hmm. There's a thought. Maybe next time I'll write some leaflets that
say "Vote for anyone EXCEPT labour" and distribute them around Abbey.
Vicky Larmour
Graham Stuart wrote:
> "Vicky Larmour" <vi...@jifvik.org.nospam> wrote in message
>> Hmmm. Jifl and I have delivered leaflets in Abbey for the
>> LibDems before, but we weren't contacted this time to ask if we
>> could do it again.
>
Not *instead*, but I wouldn't mind doing them *as well*. Sticking two
leaflets through a door is no harder than sticking one.
Feel free to mail me next time there's an election coming up and you
want some leaflets delivered.
Thomas Thurman
> Ick... google is nice for ad hoc searching. But as a day-to-day way of
> keeping up with newsgroups it's terrible IMO.
I wonder whether that's especially true for cam.*, because postings almost
always begin on the wrong side of the world and have to propagate across to
Google's servers?
T
Jon Green
wrote:
>"Jon Green" <jo...@deadspam.com> wrote in message
>news:v7v4du0pjq80amjmm...@4ax.com...
>>
>> Look, if you've got one or two spare, any chance of borrowing them
>> until some enterprising publican can get Abbey sorted on a more
>> permanent basis? <g>
>
>Well, Abbey will be gaining quite a lot of territory as well next year, and
>there must be some pubs in there somewhere ...
Dunno where. The nearest one to Abbey within the City is probably the
other side of the Newmarket Rd. bridge. I can't think of any nearer,
but if you can, I'd love to know!
Jon Green
wrote:
>Instead of Simon? Or as well, because you need three next year? (Simon did
>say the other two should be easy to recruit, because you'd be able to
>promise them that they wouldn't actually have to serve as councillors.)
Ooooh, nasty!
Tim Ward
>
> Er... you were all a bit busy doing *what*?
Working in wards with a realistic chance of success, as explained before.
> Planning an election
> campaign, presumably, which one would assume would include contacting
> previous volunteers to see whether they were still available /
> interested?
Yes, and we probably should have done, so we probably apologise. However I
was under the impression that you were primarily interested in increasing
democratic choice in Abbey and would be unlikely to volunteer to work
elsewhere.
I suppose I could have suggested to you that your that your best way to
contribute towards this aim might have been to contact Mungai and offer to
help with his campaign.
> If I'd got round to it myself I would have rung up to find out
> whether I could deliver some leaflets,
The answer would have been "yes please, but nobody has written any for
Abbey, so the options are to write it yourself or deliver elsewhere".
Matthew Vernon
> "Jon Green" <jo...@deadspam.com> wrote in message
> news:v7v4du0pjq80amjmm...@4ax.com...
> >
> > Look, if you've got one or two spare, any chance of borrowing them
> > until some enterprising publican can get Abbey sorted on a more
> > permanent basis? <g>
>
> Well, Abbey will be gaining quite a lot of territory as well next year, and
> there must be some pubs in there somewhere ...
Is there a new map somewhere? I'd like to know which ward my new house
will be in...
Matthew
--
* Emperor reads cam.misc
* antinomy/#chiark puts some clothes on
<Emperor> that's our lives in a nutshell, isn't it?
Matthew Vernon
> In article <obj4du847nsn4k0ka...@4ax.com>,
> jo...@deadspam.com (Jon Green) growled:
>
> > The Cons got something of a spanking, too. Guess what? They didn't
> > canvas or leaflet, either.
>
> The one that interested me was East Chesterton, where they did leaflet,
> and they suffered a big swing against them compared to the rest of the
> City. I can't help but smell a touch of racism in that result.
As an EC voter, I can say that the leaflet wasn't very good...
Jon Green
Care to explain that comment?
Vicky Larmour
Tim Ward wrote:
> "Vicky Larmour" <vi...@jifvik.org.nospam> wrote in message
> news:Xns92038A608...@213.107.107.169...
>> campaign, presumably, which one would assume would include
>> contacting previous volunteers to see whether they were still
>> available / interested?
>
> Yes, and we probably should have done, so we probably apologise.
> However I was under the impression that you were primarily
> interested in increasing democratic choice in Abbey and would be
> unlikely to volunteer to work elsewhere.
Yes, this is true. But are there really no "generic" leaflets for
such wards? Why hasn't the Abbey candidate (not picking on Chris
specifically, because it's been the same in previous years) written a
leaflet for the ward?
Mike Pitt
Matthew Vernon <mat...@debian.org> wrote:
>Is there a new map somewhere? I'd like to know which ward my new house
>will be in...
Colin R and Keith E have...
http://www.cix.co.uk/~rosenstiel/camelect/wardsprop.gif
(which is descibed as "adopted by the Local Government Commisson with
minor changes")
I'm looking for into in *gov.uk without much luck!
Mike
Graham Stuart
"Vicky Larmour" <vi...@jifvik.org.nospam> wrote in message
> In article news:Y3vA8.99$mj.1...@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net,
> Graham Stuart wrote:
> > "Vicky Larmour" <vi...@jifvik.org.nospam> wrote in message
> >> Hmmm. Jifl and I have delivered leaflets in Abbey for the
> >> LibDems before, but we weren't contacted this time to ask if we
> >> could do it again.
> >
> > Would you like to deliver Conservative leaflets instead?
>
> Not *instead*, but I wouldn't mind doing them *as well*. Sticking two
> leaflets through a door is no harder than sticking one.
>
> Feel free to mail me next time there's an election coming up and you
> want some leaflets delivered.
>
> Vicky
Thank you. We did have leaflets for Abbey this time but no deliverers.
Graham Stuart
Tim Ward
>
> Yes, this is true. But are there really no "generic" leaflets for
> such wards?
We don't tend to do generic leaflets. We don't even tend to do, as some
others do, leaflets with one side generic and the other specific to the
ward. (But we do re-use stories and pictures for more than one ward where
appropriate.)
> Why hasn't the Abbey candidate (not picking on Chris
> specifically, because it's been the same in previous years) written a
> leaflet for the ward?
'Cos he was busy working in other wards.
Mark Ayliffe
news:n6e*Si...@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk...
http://www.lgce.gov.uk/reports/periodic/east/cambs/draft/leaflet-cambridge.h
tm
HTH
Mark
Mark Ayliffe
> On 3 May 2002 05:38:20 -0700, hmmmn...@yahoo.co.uk (Aubrey) wrote:
>
> >"Keith Edkins" <keith....@gwydir.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:<1020389968.10222....@news.demon.co.uk>...
> >> Summary:
> >> Lib Dem gain Trumpington from Con.
> >> Labour gain Abbey from Ind (elected as Lab).
> >>
> >
> >No monkey then?
>
> Care to explain that comment?
Hartlepool. At a guess.
Mark
Mike Pitt
Jon Green <jo...@deadspam.com> wrote:
>On 3 May 2002 05:38:20 -0700, hmmmn...@yahoo.co.uk (Aubrey) wrote:
>>No monkey then?
>Care to explain that comment?
Guess:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk_politics/newsid_1965000/1965569.stm
Hartlepool elects a monkey[0] as mayor.
Mike
[0} Oh alright a man whose job is dressing in a Monkey suit.
Tim Ward
>
> Hartlepool elects a monkey[0] as mayor.
"But Labour chairman Charles Clarke said the monkey mascot's success was "a
serious issue".
"The government might have to think again about the system of
directly-elected mayors, he said.
"While there had been a positive mayoral result in Doncaster, where the
Labour candidate won, "the other end of it is the other guy elected in
Hartlepool, the one in the monkey suit, who ridicules the whole system", he
said.."
Riiight ... so if the official Labour candidate gets elected it shows the
system is working well ("positive ... result"), and if someone else gets
elected it shows the system is broken ("might have to think again about the
system").
At least Charles Clarke is being (as usual, I think?) honest!
Colin Rosenstiel
jo...@deadspam.com (Jon Green) wrote:
> On Fri, 3 May 2002 12:12:18 +0100, "Keith Edkins"
> <keith....@gwydir.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >"Tim Ward" <t...@brettward.co.uk> wrote in message
> >news:xEtA8.957$jE6....@news8-gui.server.ntli.net...
> >> "Jon Green" <jo...@deadspam.com> wrote in message
> >> news:5lp4du0b3ifiji8au...@4ax.com...
> >> >
> >> > Of course, that presupposes there exists a pub in the ward...
> >> >
> >> > Jon (who can't get a pint of ale at the McDonald's, boo!)
> >>
> >> Ah, yes, there is that. Arbury has recently gained a pub, of course,
> >> with the welcome return of the British Queen.
> >>
> >It'll gain another five with the boundary changes next year! Not that
> >that figured in the Local Government Commission's considerations of
> >course.
>
> Look, if you've got one or two spare, any chance of borrowing them
> until some enterprising publican can get Abbey sorted on a more
> permanent basis? <g>
The new Abbey ward will gain some pubs. Five I think, all on Newmarket
Road between Elizabeth Way and the railway.
Colin Rosenstiel
Colin Rosenstiel
mark.ayl...@nospam.pem.cam.andthis.ac.uk (Mark Ayliffe) wrote:
> > Look, if you've got one or two spare, any chance of borrowing them
> > until some enterprising publican can get Abbey sorted on a more
> > permanent basis? <g>
>
> Or give them back to Castle, which I think won't have any after the
> boundary changes
New Castle will have some pubs, three on Castle street and the Town and
Gown for starters.
Coleridge will still only have one (Master Mariner).
Colin Rosenstiel
Colin Rosenstiel
graham...@mail.com (Graham Stuart) wrote:
> "Chris Keating" <cj...@nospcam.ac.uk> wrote in message
> news:aatqr4$nl6$1...@pegasus.csx.cam.ac.uk...
> >
> If people in Abbey don't like this - and I know I don't - then they can
> > always stand themselves, with the help of a party or not.
> >
> Any Conservatives in Abbey interested in standing should email me. You
> wouldn't believe how delighted I would be to hear from them.
There was one Conservative candidate in Abbey who stood for us the next
year when she found out more. :-)
Colin Rosenstiel
Mark Ayliffe
news:memo.2002050...@colin.rosenstiel.cix.co.uk...
> In article <K4vA8.14$fS6.980@psinet-eu-nl>,
> mark.ayl...@nospam.pem.cam.andthis.ac.uk (Mark Ayliffe) wrote:
>
> > > Look, if you've got one or two spare, any chance of borrowing them
> > > until some enterprising publican can get Abbey sorted on a more
> > > permanent basis? <g>
> >
> > Or give them back to Castle, which I think won't have any after the
> > boundary changes
>
> New Castle will have some pubs, three on Castle street and the Town and
> Gown for starters.
Ah, I'd missed that half of Magdalene street moving. That would include the
Pickerel too. But which three on Castle Street? They're all on the new
Arbury side of the road aren't they?
Mark
Robert Macmillan
"Mike Pitt" <mike...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote in message
news:22h*0m...@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk...
> Hartlepool elects a monkey[0] as mayor.
Is this to go with the baboon they have for an MP?
Robert
Chris Brown
Mike Pitt <mike...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
>
>So what happened to the Green challenge? I thought they claimed to be
>targeting parts of Cambridge.
I got one of their leaflets. I live in Petersfield, and I was just returning
home when I caught them at the door, on the verge of putting a leaflet
through. I perhaps thought they might want to have a chat (particularly
given that I'd just arrived on an electric power-assisted bicycle -
presumably the sort of thing greenies are supposed to be into), but they
scurried away.
Anyway, their leaflet was saying something about them being the only
credible opposition to Labour in Petersfield, which given that they came
third both this and last tiem (behind the LDs), is a bit dishonest, if you
ask me.
Of all the leaflets I got, the only one which actually impressed me was the
one from the Socialist Alliance party, which did a good job of getting to
the point. The 3 main parties' leaflets were all busy sniping at each other
and droning on about various bits of national politics, which appear to have
very little to do with, e.g. us getting the Pelicon Crossing we're been
promised for Tenison Road for ages. The Green leaflet I already mentioned.
If I didn't have some pretty fundemental problems with what the SA stand
for, I'd have voted for them on the strength of their leaflet. As it was, I
voted LD (I seem to have an almost unbroken record of voting for people who
don't win). To be honest, the other 4 would have got more respect from me if
I'd never seen their leaflets. However, since I've already stated that I
almost never vote for the winning candidate anyway, it's not clear how
useful this feedback is. :-)
--
/* _ */main(int k,char**n){char*i=k&1?"+L*;99,RU[,RUo+BeKAA+BECACJ+CAACA"
/* / ` */"CD+LBCACJ*":1[n],j,l=!k,m;do for(m=*i-48,j=l?m/k:m%k;m>>7?k=1<<m+
/* | */8,!l&&puts(&l)**&l:j--;printf(" \0_/"+l));while((l^=3)||l[++i]);
/* \_,hris Brown -- All opinions expressed are probably wrong. */return 0;}
Diana Galletly
Mark Ayliffe <mark.ayl...@nospam.pem.cam.andthis.ac.uk> wrote:
>Ah, I'd missed that half of Magdalene street moving. That would include the
>Pickerel too. But which three on Castle Street? They're all on the new
>Arbury side of the road aren't they?
The County isn't, is it ?
--
+ Diana Galletly <dag...@eng.cam.ac.uk> +
+ http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~galletly/ +
Paul Oldham
(Matthew Vernon) growled:
> pa...@the-hug.org (Paul Oldham) writes:
>
> > The one that interested me was East Chesterton, where they did
> > leaflet, and they suffered a big swing against them compared to the
> > rest of the City. I can't help but smell a touch of racism in that
> > result.
>
> As an EC voter, I can say that the leaflet wasn't very good...
The way it stopped in mid-sentence you mean? ;-)
But they did put out a leaflet, which makes a big difference. Normally.
--
Paul Oldham, Milton villager
The cam.* FAQ ---> http://the-hug.org/paul/camfaq.html
Milton web site -> http://www.miltonvillage.org.uk/
Colin Rosenstiel
mark.ayl...@nospam.pem.cam.andthis.ac.uk (Mark Ayliffe) wrote:
The Local Government Commission has been taken over by the Electoral
Commission Boundary Committee for England. www.boundary-committee.org.uk
has the final report. It's the same IP address as www.lgce.gov.uk.
Colin Rosenstiel
Colin Rosenstiel
jo...@deadspam.com (Jon Green) wrote:
> One of the reasons why I despaired of the LibDems in Abbey, and why
> they weren't a voting option for me, is that I hadn't the faintest
> idea what their policies or intents were for the next term, because
> they didn't take the trouble to tell me. Others of my neighbours had
> similar opinions, by the way; there was quite a lot of nattering
> around the polling station. I wonder how different the vote would
> have been, had the LibDems canvassed or leafletted Abbey.
We'd have lost. That's why it's a safe seat. Even if the opposition try
very hard (and can find the people to achieve that) they lose. Look at the
Abbey County byelection of 1993 (IIRC).
Colin Rosenstiel
Colin Rosenstiel
graham...@mail.com (Graham Stuart) wrote:
> "Vicky Larmour" <vi...@jifvik.org.nospam> wrote in message
> news:Xns92038ACED...@213.107.107.169...
> > In article news:Y3vA8.99$mj.1...@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net,
> > Graham Stuart wrote:
> > > "Vicky Larmour" <vi...@jifvik.org.nospam> wrote in message
> > >> Hmmm. Jifl and I have delivered leaflets in Abbey for the
> > >> LibDems before, but we weren't contacted this time to ask if we
> > >> could do it again.
> > >
> > > Would you like to deliver Conservative leaflets instead?
> >
> > Not *instead*, but I wouldn't mind doing them *as well*. Sticking two
> > leaflets through a door is no harder than sticking one.
> >
> > Feel free to mail me next time there's an election coming up and you
> > want some leaflets delivered.
>
> Thank you. We did have leaflets for Abbey this time but no deliverers.
AAMOI were they that same as most (not yours I know) of your leaflets,
only really different in name of candidate (and photo) and ward? We've
rather gone off them as a concept.
Colin Rosenstiel
Colin Rosenstiel
jo...@deadspam.com (Jon Green) wrote:
> On Fri, 3 May 2002 13:07:59 +0100, "Tim Ward" <t...@brettward.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
> >Instead of Simon? Or as well, because you need three next year? (Simon
> >did say the other two should be easy to recruit, because you'd be able
> >to promise them that they wouldn't actually have to serve as
> >councillors.)
>
> Ooooh, nasty!
But true (for any value of party).
Colin Rosenstiel
Colin Rosenstiel
mike...@chiark.greenend.org.uk (Mike Pitt) wrote:
> So what happened to the Green challenge? I thought they claimed to be
> targeting parts of Cambridge.
>
> (Two third places: beating Tories in Romsey and Petersfield is all I can
> see. Neither is exactly an earth shattering electoral moment in
> Cambridge. :-)
A busted flush? They were touting Petersfield as a Green gain by a
National speaker but came third to our fairly minimal campaign.
Fourth place is standard these days for the Tories in Petersfield and
Romsey. They improved in Petersfield by not being last. :-)
Colin Rosenstiel
John Sullivan
>"Paul Rudin" <Paul_...@scientia.com> wrote in message
>> I do: get rid of OE :-)
>
>Well, I'm not committed to it yet. But I think I should give it more of a
>chance before giving up on it.
The specific problem here is that OE reformats your whole post as it
sends it, not, as most other clients do, as you compose it.
Worse, the version saved in your Sent Items folder is the version
*before* formatting, not what you sent at all. So you can see your
post arriving on the news server all mangled, check back to your Sent
Items folder where it'll look fine, and assume it's a server problem.
It's even worse than that with mail, because you will never know how
shit you look until/unless one of your correspondants tells you.
When I'm absolutely forced to use OE, which I try to make sure happens
rarely, the most reliable approach I've found is to effectively stop
it wrapping by changing Tools->Options...->Send->News Sending
Format->Plain Text Settings...->Automatically Wrap At to 132 columns.
Then during composition, insert a ruler like so
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
1234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789
(stored in a convenient file) and manually insert carriage returns to
keep the text well formatted. Remember to delete the ruler before
sending. Alternatively, set wrap at 132 columns as above, but compose
the message in a different editor then cut'n'paste it to the Outlook
send window.
It's hassle, but gives OE less scope to screw around with your posts.
John
--
Dead stars still burn
Jon Green
Rosenstiel) wrote:
>In article <v7v4du0pjq80amjmm...@4ax.com>,
>jo...@deadspam.com (Jon Green) wrote:
>
>> Look, if you've got one or two [pubs] spare, any chance of borrowing them
>> until some enterprising publican can get Abbey sorted on a more
>> permanent basis? <g>
>
>The new Abbey ward will gain some pubs. Five I think, all on Newmarket
>Road between Elizabeth Way and the railway.
Ahhh, thanks.
Now, any reports of pubs between the NR railway bridge and ... well,
anywhere within the City, would be appreciated!
Jeni Steers
"Chris Brown" <cpb...@ntlworld.no_uce_please.com> wrote in message
news:aau1f6$ide$1...@narcissus.localdomain...
> In article <QnF*Ea...@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>,
> Mike Pitt <mike...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
> >
> >So what happened to the Green challenge? I thought they claimed to be
> >targeting parts of Cambridge.
> Of all the leaflets I got, the only one which actually impressed me was
the
> one from the Socialist Alliance party, which did a good job of getting to
> the point. The 3 main parties' leaflets were all busy sniping at each
other
> and droning on about various bits of national politics, which appear to
have
> very little to do with, e.g. us getting the Pelicon Crossing we're been
> promised for Tenison Road for ages. The Green leaflet I already mentioned.
Exactly how I felt about the only one I did see (but that may have been
because the others may have been delivered before we moved?) The LibDem one
(in Romsey) had blurb about Government allocations to schools on one side
and recylcing on the other. Can't say I took it all in, as I was less than
impressed that
a) there was only two issues raised, b) one of them is a national issue,
surely?, c) recycling is important but given that our ward has schemes in
place, surely it wasn't relevant?
I suppose coming from Peterfield I was used to literature based on the
issues facing that ward specifically. From the LibDem leaflet I had no idea
what the issues were, nevermind whether they were going to addressed.
I used to only vote Labour, but I guess I would call myself a floater or a
waverer now.
> If I didn't have some pretty fundemental problems with what the SA stand
> for, I'd have voted for them on the strength of their leaflet.
I spend all day yesterday trying to find out info on my local candidates
(success with Labour and LibDem, found the name of the Tory one and zero on
the Greens) only to find out that I was still registered for the Petersfield
ward. As I vote for the people I want to represent my views on local issues,
it didn't seem right to vote in a ward I no longer lived, so I didn't. From
what you have said about the SA candidate I probably would have voted for
him, given his views would probably be the closest to mine.
Still, there's always next year.
Jen
Jon Green
So I pose the question: when was the last time the opposition *did*
"try very hard"?
Are you sure that a campaign of constant communication (out-doing
Labour easily) couldn't turn the tide?
Mike Pitt
Colin Rosenstiel <rosen...@cix.co.uk> wrote:
>We'd have lost. That's why it's a safe seat. Even if the opposition try
>very hard (and can find the people to achieve that) they lose. Look at the
>Abbey County byelection of 1993 (IIRC).
1996. (Now this is cheeky: correcting Colin from his own web site!) :-)
http://www.cix.co.uk/~rosenstiel/camelect/county1.htm#ABB
Byelection - November 1996
Colin Shaw (Lab) 723 72.2%
Simon Mitton (Con) 175 17.5%
Evelyn Knowles (LDm) 104 10.4%
No change, Lab Maj 548 54.7%
Is Pat Schicker who stood in WC any relation to Josef Schicker?
Mike
Jon Green
I was wondering whether it was a disparaging comment about Mungai
Mbaya (the Ind. deposed in Abbey). Especially since that was, as far
as Google can tell, the first ever posting in any group by
"hmmmn...@yahoo.co.uk".
I'd like to be wrong on this.
Vicky Larmour
news:memo.2002050...@colin.rosenstiel.cix.co.uk, Colin
What happened then, OOI? That's before we lived in Abbey.
Vicky
--
"Bother," said Pooh, "Eeyore, ready two photon torpedoes and lock
phasers on the Heffalump. Piglet, meet me in transporter room
three. Christopher Robin, you have the bridge."
Hugo 'NOx' Tyson
Diana Galletly <dag...@eng.cam.ac.uk> writes:
> In article <m3helpl...@foo.surfingsuggestion.co.uk>,
> Hugo 'NOx' Tyson <hm...@surfingsuggestionx.co.ukx> wrote:
> >> On Fri, 3 May 2002 02:39:24 +0100, "Keith Edkins"
> >> <keith....@gwydir.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> >>
> >> >ABBEY
> >> >Hart, Caroline (Lab) ...................... 571 58.6% (1396 56.7%)
> >> >Mitton, Simon (Con) ....................... 180 18.5% (540 21.9%)
> >> >Keating, Chris (L Dem) .................... 113 11.6% (414 16.8%)
> >
> >The figures suggest that that ward changed boundaries since last time. 900
> >votes in all (for them 3) instead of 2400! Did it? Does that account for
> >it? If not, how come the figures are so odd?
>
> Last time there was a general election at the same time. People would have
> gone out to vote in the general, and decided they might as well vote in
> the local as well. It's the same in other wards (look at Castle's figures,
> f'rinstance.
That makes perfect sense, thanks.
- Huge
Colin Rosenstiel
mark.ayl...@nospam.pem.cam.andthis.ac.uk (Mark Ayliffe) wrote:
> "Colin Rosenstiel" <rosen...@cix.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:memo.2002050...@colin.rosenstiel.cix.co.uk...
> > In article <K4vA8.14$fS6.980@psinet-eu-nl>,
> > mark.ayl...@nospam.pem.cam.andthis.ac.uk (Mark Ayliffe) wrote:
> >
> > > > Look, if you've got one or two spare, any chance of borrowing them
> > > > until some enterprising publican can get Abbey sorted on a more
> > > > permanent basis? <g>
> > >
> > > Or give them back to Castle, which I think won't have any after the
> > > boundary changes
> >
> > New Castle will have some pubs, three on Castle street and the Town
> > and Gown for starters.
>
> Ah, I'd missed that half of Magdalene street moving. That would include
> the Pickerel too. But which three on Castle Street? They're all on the
> new Arbury side of the road aren't they?
We won the argument with the Commission and the Castle/Arbury boundary
will now go down the back of Shire Hall as far as the Clare "colony". That
will be in Arbury though, including the Clare houses on Castle Street at
the bottom. So the pubs are the Isaac Newton, Castle and County, plus the
Pickerel I forgot and the Town and Gown. Luxury!
Market is losing one of its 40 pubs, Lawyers on Lensfield Road
(transferring to Trumpington).
Colin Rosenstiel
Peter Ellis
>mark.ayl...@nospam.pem.cam.andthis.ac.uk (Mark Ayliffe) wrote:
>>
>> Ah, I'd missed that half of Magdalene street moving. That would include
>> the Pickerel too. But which three on Castle Street? They're all on the
>> new Arbury side of the road aren't they?
>
>We won the argument with the Commission and the Castle/Arbury boundary
>will now go down the back of Shire Hall as far as the Clare "colony".
Unless I'm seriously confused, this means that the proposal being argued
over was one which involved Castle Mound, Castle Hill, the Castle pub and
most of Castle Hill being in Arbury ward.
In what way would the proposed Castle ward have had any claim to
castle-ness, pray?
All in all, I'm glad you won the argument, on grounds of etymology if
nothing else. They[1] can play with my democratic rights all they like,
but they'd better not *dare* maltreat my mother tongue...
(Whee! Friday!)
Peter
[1] You know... Them.
Richard Meredith
mike...@chiark.greenend.org.uk (Mike Pitt) wrote:
> In article <ug25dugii193efauu...@4ax.com>,
> Jon Green <jo...@deadspam.com> wrote:
> >On 3 May 2002 05:38:20 -0700, hmmmn...@yahoo.co.uk (Aubrey) wrote:
> >>No monkey then?
> >Care to explain that comment?
>
> Guess:
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk_politics/newsid_1965000/1965569.stm
>
> Hartlepool elects a monkey[0] as mayor.
What is it with Hartlepool and monkeys? They allegedly hanged one for spying
during the Napoleonic wars.
(Carefully avoiding any references to the current MP for Hartlepool)
--
This message may contain traces of nuts. Do not refreeze once thawed.
No animals were hurt in the making of this production. Suitable for
vegetarians.
Jennifer Liddle
> I'll say it again, it bears repetition: I *could* not vote LibDem,
> because I didn't know what they stood for, on a ward, Council or
> national basis, because I have seen and heard neither hide nor hair
> from them for ages.
This is a perfectly valid point.
We (the Cambridge LibDem Group) would /love/ to tell you why you should
vote for us in Abbey, and what our policies are, and how voting LibDem
would reduce hair loss and make you more sexually attractive to members of
the appropriate sex.
The reason we can't do that is because we don't have any LibDem supporters
in Abbey. The supporters we have in other areas of the city are too busy
looking after their own wards, or working in marginal wards, to be able to
put any effort into campaigning in a safe labour ward, which is what Abbey
is.
I agree with you that it would be a Good Thing, both for us as a party and
for the residents of Abbey because it would give the more of a choice. We
simply can't do it. We're not being arsey and saying we can't be bothered.
We're saying we're unable.
--
Jennifer Liddle http://www.jsquared.co.uk/jennyl
Matthew Vernon
> In article <7jit65q...@rapun.sel.cam.ac.uk>, mat...@debian.org
> (Matthew Vernon) growled:
> > As an EC voter, I can say that the leaflet wasn't very good...
>
> The way it stopped in mid-sentence you mean? ;-)
Indeed. It was a good thing they weren't campaigining on education :)
Matthew
--
* Emperor reads cam.misc
* antinomy/#chiark puts some clothes on
<Emperor> that's our lives in a nutshell, isn't it?
Jennifer Liddle
> Are you sure that a campaign of constant communication (out-doing
> Labour easily) couldn't turn the tide?
On the contrary, I'm sure it would turn the tide. Possibly not in one year,
but eventually it would.
Unfortunately we don't have the resources, in either money or people, to do
that.
Chris Brown
Jeni Steers <h...@btclick.com> wrote:
>
>I spend all day yesterday trying to find out info on my local candidates
>(success with Labour and LibDem, found the name of the Tory one and zero on
>the Greens) only to find out that I was still registered for the Petersfield
>ward. As I vote for the people I want to represent my views on local issues,
>it didn't seem right to vote in a ward I no longer lived, so I didn't. From
>what you have said about the SA candidate I probably would have voted for
>him, given his views would probably be the closest to mine.
POI - I think "he" is a "she". ;-)
Simon Morris
(Richard Meredith) wrote:
>In article <22h*0m...@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>,
>mike...@chiark.greenend.org.uk (Mike Pitt) wrote:
>
>> In article <ug25dugii193efauu...@4ax.com>,
>> Jon Green <jo...@deadspam.com> wrote:
>> >On 3 May 2002 05:38:20 -0700, hmmmn...@yahoo.co.uk (Aubrey) wrote:
>> >>No monkey then?
>> >Care to explain that comment?
>>
>> Guess:
>>
>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk_politics/newsid_1965000/1965569.stm
>>
>> Hartlepool elects a monkey[0] as mayor.
>
>What is it with Hartlepool and monkeys? They allegedly hanged one for spying
>during the Napoleonic wars.
>
...which is why their football team has a bloke dressed in a monkey
suit as their mascot, and he's the new mayor. It all makes perfect
sense.
S.
Jeni Steers
> In article <jFwA8.34968$oK4.74155@NewsReader>,
> Jeni Steers <h...@btclick.com> wrote:
> >
> >I spend all day yesterday trying to find out info on my local candidates
> >(success with Labour and LibDem, found the name of the Tory one and zero
on
> >the Greens) only to find out that I was still registered for the
Petersfield
> >ward. As I vote for the people I want to represent my views on local
issues,
> >it didn't seem right to vote in a ward I no longer lived, so I didn't.
From
> >what you have said about the SA candidate I probably would have voted for
> >him, given his views would probably be the closest to mine.
>
> POI - I think "he" is a "she". ;-)
Ahem, oops. For some reason, when thinking about the SA, I have this image
of one particular Green candidate whose picture is quite scary.
Well, it is Friday. I make less sense than usual on a Friday afternoon :).
Jen
Jón Fairbairn
> The specific problem here is that OE reformats your whole post as it
> sends it, not, as most other clients do, as you compose it.
Well, I'd say that the problem was more that it when it does reformat
it doesn't respect the bird-track quoting. A piece of software that
fails to do that is a poor news agent.
--
Jón Fairbairn Jon.Fa...@cl.cam.ac.uk
Chris Brown
Simon Morris <sim...@iptech.no.spam.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>...which is why their football team has a bloke dressed in a monkey
>suit as their mascot, and he's the new mayor. It all makes perfect
>sense.
So let me get this right - the people of this town like having a mascot that
reminds them of how monumentally thick their ancestors were?
Makes sense.