County Council candidates in Cambridge
Phil Rodgers
constituency. Regular readers will note that Arbury Liberal Democrats are
continuing our policy of attempting to populate local government in
the Cambridge area with cam.misc regulars.
Abbey
Stephen Roger LAWRENCE, Green
Simon Anthony MITTON, Conservative
Kirsten Joanne PROCTER, Liberal Democrat
* Colin Ernest SHAW, Labour
Arbury
Robert William BOORMAN, Conservative
* Ian Charles KIDMAN, Labour
Rupert William George MOSS-ECCARDT, Liberal Democrat
Castle
* Sarah Virginia BRINTON (known as Sal), Liberal Democrat
Charles Spencer HARCOURT, Conservative
Gillian Miles RICHARDSON, Labour
Cherry Hinton
Frances Aisha Roberts AMRANI, Liberal Democrat
Christine Margaret CARTER, Labour
Graham Ernest PALMER, Conservative
Coleridge
Charles Martin BALLARD, Labour
Laurence Keith EDKINS, Liberal Democrat
** Josephine PERCY, Conservative
East Chesterton
Kevin John BONNETT, Labour
Colin HAVERCROFT, Conservative
Julian Leon HUPPERT, Liberal Democrat
Kings Hedges
Evelyn Vernon BRADFORD, Liberal Democrat
* Janet Dorothy JONES, Labour
Hugh Alastair Ousley MENNIE, Conservative
Market
* Anthony John BOWEN, Liberal Democrat
Angela Elizabeth Hathaway DITCHFIELD, Green
Lucy Mary WALKER, Labour
Ann WATKINS, Conservative
Newnham
* Elsa MEYLAND-SMITH, Liberal Democrat
*** Susan Amanda O'DELL, Labour
William Henry Macaulay PAPWORTH, Conservative
Petersfield
* Bachan Singh BHALLA, Labour
Lee Steven GLENDON, Conservative
Kevin WILKINS, Liberal Democrat
Margaret Elizabeth WRIGHT, Green
Romsey
Anne Elizabeth DIXON, Liberal Democrat
Vivian Charles ELLIS, Conservative
* Josef Lawrence GLUZA, Labour
Victoria Lesley RUSSELL (known as Vicky), Green
West Chesterton
* Maurice Leonard LEEKE, Liberal Democrat
Patrick Joseph Campbell SCHICKER, Labour
James Andrew STRACHAN, Conservative
* indicates sitting County Councillor.
** Josephine Percy was elected in 1997 as Labour councillor for Coleridge,
but this time is standing as Conservative candidate in Coleridge
*** Susan O'Dell was elected in 1997 (as Susan Bicker) as Labour
councillor for Cherry Hinton, but this time is standing in Newnham (still
for Labour, though!)
Phil Rodgers
Cambridge Liberal Democrats
Paul Treadaway
Rodgers says...
>Rupert William George MOSS-ECCARDT, Liberal Democrat
How have the mighty fallen...
nathan2000
18th March regarding council tax increases (see earlier thread), county
council services and central government's role in tilting the balance
against local council tax payers, such that a city centre resident's council
tax has risen by 40.7% over 5 years (49.2% County, 51.2% Police, 1.5% City).
So far, all I can see is that the City blames the County, the County blames
central government and central government makes no comment. Sounds like
typical politics to me!
I have emailed them both again this morning - hoping for a response in
advance of local/general elections.
Nathan in Cambridge
Paul Oldham
natha...@ntlworld.com (nathan2000) growled:
> Note that Bachan Bhalla and Anne Campbell haven't replied to my email of
> 18th March regarding council tax increases (see earlier thread), county
> council services and central government's role in tilting the balance
> against local council tax payers, such that a city centre resident's
> council tax has risen by 40.7% over 5 years (49.2% County, 51.2% Police,
> 1.5% City).
>
> So far, all I can see is that the City blames the County, the County
> blames central government and central government makes no comment. Sounds
> like typical politics to me!
If your figures are right then the City at least appears to have a point.
--
Paul Oldham, Milton villager and telecommuting COBOL hack
The cam.* FAQ ---> http://the-hug.org/paul/camfaq.html
Milton web site -> http://www.miltonvillage.org.uk/
Hugo 'NOx' Tyson
ph...@philrodgers.co.uk (Phil Rodgers) writes:
> Here is the list of County Council candidates within the Cambridge City
I would vote for
> Colin HAVERCROFT, Conservative
if he would only accept Luftkissenfahrzeug as an alias.
Vicky Larmour
[much snipped]
>* Sarah Virginia BRINTON (known as Sal), Liberal Democrat
Just curioous - why do Sal and Vicky have to be "known as", whereas Keith
Edkins doesn't?
Vicky
--
"Succurrite, succurrite!" Porcellus clamavit. "Heffalumpus, horribilis
heffalumpus!" et quam ocissime aufugit, clamitans: "Succurrite, succurrite,
horribilis heffalumpus! Hoff, hoff, hellibilis horralumpus! Holl, holl,
hoffabilis hellerumpus!" -- Winnie ille Pu, A.A.Milne (trans. A. Lenard)
Vicky Larmour
wrote:
>I would vote for
>> Colin HAVERCROFT, Conservative
>if he would only accept Luftkissenfahrzeug as an alias.
Havercroft -> Liftkussenfahrzeug, Shirley? :-)
Peter Ellis
>In article <memo.20010405...@rodgers.ntlworld.com>, Phil Rodgers
>wrote:
>[much snipped]
>>* Sarah Virginia BRINTON (known as Sal), Liberal Democrat
>>Laurence Keith EDKINS, Liberal Democrat
>>Victoria Lesley RUSSELL (known as Vicky), Green
>
>Just curioous - why do Sal and Vicky have to be "known as", whereas Keith
>Edkins doesn't?
>
Wild guess (and it's radical, I know), but could it be something to do
with the following?
"Sal" != "Sarah"
"Vicky" != "Victoria"
"Keith" = "Keith"
Peter
Hugo 'NOx' Tyson
Vicky Larmour
Peter Ellis wrote:
>Wild guess (and it's radical, I know), but could it be something to do
>with the following?
>
>"Sal" != "Sarah"
>"Vicky" != "Victoria"
>"Keith" = "Keith"
Yes but scanning down the list you see Laurence EDKINS and think "Who's
that then?" I would have thought the rule would be that if you were known
by anything other than your first name, they would say "known as".
Gareth Marlow
wrote:
>In article <memo.20010405...@rodgers.ntlworld.com>, Phil Rodgers
>wrote:
>[much snipped]
>>* Sarah Virginia BRINTON (known as Sal), Liberal Democrat
>>Laurence Keith EDKINS, Liberal Democrat
>>Victoria Lesley RUSSELL (known as Vicky), Green
>
>Just curioous - why do Sal and Vicky have to be "known as", whereas Keith
>Edkins doesn't?
I think the point is, they don't have to be, they have chosen to be.
Your name has to appear on the ballot paper as it does on the
electoral register. If you are more commonly known by another name you
are entitled to have that shown. But you don't have to.
Gareth
Al Grant
news:memo.20010405...@rodgers.ntlworld.com...
> ** Josephine Percy was elected in 1997 as Labour councillor for Coleridge,
> but this time is standing as Conservative candidate in Coleridge
Is there a story behind this?
Andrew Nightingale
>>for Coleridge, but this time is standing as Conservative
>>candidate in Coleridge
>Is there a story behind this?
Lead story in the CEN
Extract: Thursday, April 5, 2001 Councillor sees red. Josephine Percy. A
LABOUR county councillor has defected to the Conservatives because she is
disillusioned with the party. Josephine Percy, who is Labour councillor for
Coleridge ward in Cambridge, plans to stand as Conservative candidate in the
June county council e...
see
www.cambridge-news.co.uk/archives/2001/04/05/lead1.html
Paul Oldham
tna...@arm.REVERSE-NAME.com (Al Grant) growled:
Yes. It was all over the local meeja yesterday. She told the Labour Party
she wasn't going to stand for them again a while back, but announced
yesterday that she was going to stand for the Conservatives, which came as
something of a surprise to all concerned, including some local Tories it
appears.
Her stated reasons were disillusion with the party, in particular over
public services and crime. She said in CEN "After years of being a Labour
Party member I have been disgusted at the was this Government has treated
our schools and hospitals. [...] Local people have been let down by Labour.
Four years ago I help Anne Campbell get elected on the promise of more
police on the beat, yet numbers have been cut. Labour has betrayed its
voters and has tried to stop anyone speaking up."
She went on to claim that the Tories "both, nationally and locally, have a
better vision for public services for ordinary people".
Uh huh, as I'm often known to say at this point while edging away slowly.
Tim Ward
news:memo.2001040...@books.the-hug.org...
> In article <9ak9ho$n28$1...@cam-news1.cambridge.arm.com>,
> tna...@arm.REVERSE-NAME.com (Al Grant) growled:
>
> she wasn't going to stand for them again a while back,
There are also rumours that it was the other way around, ie that she was
deselected.
--
Tim Ward - posting as an individual unless otherwise clear
But you still get an ad: Brett Ward Ltd - www.brettward.co.uk
Cambridge Accommodation Notice Board has moved to
www.brettward.co.uk/canb
Al Grant
news:aTiz6.217$sr5....@news11-gui.server.ntli.net...
Party
> > she wasn't going to stand for them again a while back,
>
> There are also rumours that it was the other way around, ie that she was
> deselected.
And if there weren't before, there are now.
Paul Oldham
t...@brettward.co.uk (Tim Ward) growled:
> Paul Oldham <pa...@the-hug.org> wrote in message
> news:memo.2001040...@books.the-hug.org...
> > In article <9ak9ho$n28$1...@cam-news1.cambridge.arm.com>,
> > tna...@arm.REVERSE-NAME.com (Al Grant) growled:
> >
> > Yes. It was all over the local meeja yesterday. She told the Labour
> > Party she wasn't going to stand for them again a while back,
>
> There are also rumours that it was the other way around, ie that she was
> deselected.
Nah, I don't know who's peddling that line but I don't think it can be true.
La Bagnall said in CEN that "She did give us an indication some time ago
that she didn't want to be considered as a Labour candidate this year and we
have selected another one. I'm shocked and desperately disappointed that she
chose to even consider aligning herself with the party that tried to close
Coleridge Community College. It's astonishing."
If they had deselected her Bagnall would have characterised her defection as
the "bitter act of an embittered woman" ... or something.
My theory, having seen the pic in CEN, is that her last visit to the salon
has unbalanced not only her hair but her mind too. It's the only rational
explanation for the last quote I gave. ;-)
Richard Meredith
t...@brettward.co.uk (Tim Ward) wrote:
> Paul Oldham <pa...@the-hug.org> wrote in message
> news:memo.2001040...@books.the-hug.org...
> > In article <9ak9ho$n28$1...@cam-news1.cambridge.arm.com>,
> > tna...@arm.REVERSE-NAME.com (Al Grant) growled:
> >
> > Yes. It was all over the local meeja yesterday. She told the Labour
> > Party
> > she wasn't going to stand for them again a while back,
>
> There are also rumours that it was the other way around, ie that she was
> deselected.
Sounds like the authentic noise of spin doctors at work.
--
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.
Tim Ward
news:memo.2001040...@rmeredith.compulink.co.uk...
>
> Sounds like the authentic noise of spin doctors at work.
Certainly. But I haven't a clue whether the CEN report was spin or the
rumour I heard was spin or they were both spin and the "true" story is
something different again.
Richard Meredith
t...@brettward.co.uk (Tim Ward) wrote:
> Richard Meredith <rmer...@cix.dontspamme.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:memo.2001040...@rmeredith.compulink.co.uk...
> >
> > Sounds like the authentic noise of spin doctors at work.
>
> Certainly. But I haven't a clue whether the CEN report was spin or the
> rumour I heard was spin or they were both spin and the "true" story is
> something different again.
That's the problem with spin - all meaning is lost.
Phil Rodgers
(Vicky Larmour) wrote:
> In article <Pine.SOL.4.21.010406...@red.csi.cam.ac.uk>,
> Peter Ellis wrote:
> >Wild guess (and it's radical, I know), but could it be something to do
> >with the following?
> >
> >"Sal" != "Sarah"
> >"Vicky" != "Victoria"
> >"Keith" = "Keith"
>
> Yes but scanning down the list you see Laurence EDKINS and think "Who's
> that then?" I would have thought the rule would be that if you were
> known by anything other than your first name, they would say "known
> as".
Well, it basically depends on whether you put "known as" on your
nomination form! Though I don't know how far this could be taken...
Phil
--
Colin Rosenstiel
(Hugo 'NOx' Tyson) wrote:
How come you've just noticed him? A glance at my local election history site
index (http://www.cix.co.uk/~rosenstiel/camelect/candsh_k.htm#H) will tell you
that he has stood in nearly every election since 1994:
Havercroft, Colin Con East Chesterton 5/94 5/95 5/96 5/98 5/99 5/00
Colin Rosenstiel
Colin Rosenstiel
(Vicky Larmour) wrote:
> In article <memo.20010405...@rodgers.ntlworld.com>, Phil
> Rodgers wrote:
> [much snipped]
> >* Sarah Virginia BRINTON (known as Sal), Liberal Democrat
> >Laurence Keith EDKINS, Liberal Democrat
> >Victoria Lesley RUSSELL (known as Vicky), Green
>
> Just curioous - why do Sal and Vicky have to be "known as", whereas
> Keith Edkins doesn't?
Apart from the reasons given by others, consider the possibility that Sal
wishes voters to be clear who she is as she seeks re-election in castle
while Keith, making a comeback appearance in Coleridge 25 years after he
last stood there, may not be so bothered. ;-)
Colin Rosenstiel
Colin Rosenstiel
(Paul Oldham) wrote:
> In article <aTiz6.217$sr5....@news11-gui.server.ntli.net>,
> t...@brettward.co.uk (Tim Ward) growled:
>
> > Paul Oldham <pa...@the-hug.org> wrote in message
> > news:memo.2001040...@books.the-hug.org...
> > > In article <9ak9ho$n28$1...@cam-news1.cambridge.arm.com>,
> > > tna...@arm.REVERSE-NAME.com (Al Grant) growled:
> > >
> > > Yes. It was all over the local meeja yesterday. She told the Labour
> > > Party she wasn't going to stand for them again a while back,
> >
> > There are also rumours that it was the other way around, ie that she
> > was deselected.
>
> Nah, I don't know who's peddling that line but I don't think it can be
> true.
>
> La Bagnall said in CEN that "She did give us an indication some time
> ago that she didn't want to be considered as a Labour candidate this
> year and we have selected another one. I'm shocked and desperately
> disappointed that she chose to even consider aligning herself with the
> party that tried to close Coleridge Community College. It's
> astonishing."
>
> If they had deselected her Bagnall would have characterised her
> defection as the "bitter act of an embittered woman" ... or something.
>
> My theory, having seen the pic in CEN, is that her last visit to the
> salon has unbalanced not only her hair but her mind too. It's the only
> rational explanation for the last quote I gave. ;-)
Trying to remain neutral while the other parties are discomforted, I think
these observations are at least close to the truth.
1. Coleridge Ward Labour certainly sets high standards. They "lost" their
last County Councillor, Tony Carter. He wasn't de-selected, oh no. But he
had caused his party immense embarrassment and loss of support as the
architect of the city centre bike ban. Being an intensely loyal life-long
Labour support he has kept stumm.
2. It is known that Josephine Percy has been talking to Tories for some
months. She brought John Powley as her guest to the Mayor's reception in
November which raised a good few eyebrows at the time. Ruth Bagnall missed
it.
3. There are councillors who embarrass their parties when they open their
mouths. There are other councillors who even embarrass councillors of
other parties when they...
If you want my understanding, I believe that Josephine Percy was not
actually de-selected. She probably expected to be, though. It was
certainly widely expected amongst her fellow-councillors.
Her defection reduces the County Labour group to just 9.
On a different point no-one seems to have noticed the other^W Labour
de-selection - of Susan Bicker (now Susan O'Dell). She was elected in
Cherry Hinton in 1997 and is now standing for them in Newnham. Their
leaflet uses a most bizarre turn of phrase to describe her experience. She
lives in Willingham.
Colin Rosenstiel
Martin Saxon
rosen...@cix.co.uk (Colin Rosenstiel) wrote:
> Apart from the reasons given by others, consider the possibility that
> Sal wishes voters to be clear who she is ...
No question about that. There were no fewer than seven photos of her in
the 4-page issue of Focus that dropped through our door the other day. One
would think she was the only person in the local party who does anything.
--
Martin
Paul Oldham
rosen...@cix.co.uk (Colin Rosenstiel) growled:
> On a different point no-one seems to have noticed the other^W Labour
> de-selection - of Susan Bicker (now Susan O'Dell). She was elected in
> Cherry Hinton in 1997 and is now standing for them in Newnham. Their
> leaflet uses a most bizarre turn of phrase to describe her experience.
> She lives in Willingham.
I noticed. If you remember I raised the Cllrs O'Dell issue a week or so ago
when I was talking about the oddity, to my mind, of councillors living away
from the area they represent (your Cllr Leeke being another example). My
assumption is that she and Tim said they wouldn't stand as they've moved out
to Willingham but that the party persuaded her to stand for Newnham with
much the same expectation of success as Keith has in standing for Coleridge.
Paul Oldham
(Martin Saxon) growled:
I think that's probably because she's standing for the Lib Dems in the
general election in the South East Cambridgeshire constituency, she did
last time IIRC. Given James Paice's majority, even in the 1997 election was
substantial (and in the election before he has an *absolute* majority of the
those who voted) I don't think anyone's holding their breath.
That "Focus" advertises her web site[1] where you can "read more about your
local area". I wouldn't bother going there. The menu on the right is
unreadable from my browser (I think the style sheet is broken under NN, they
come up yellow in IE4) but if you get past that there's a grand total of
five pages: a home page, who Sal Brinton is, how to contact her, a links
page with five links (two to party sites, three to council), and a news page
with two items of "news": "Focus" has been delivered free to 35,000 homes
and ... Sal Brinton's website, is launched! And that's it. So where's the
information about my local area? Or about her come to that - it's a tad
sparse even on that front.
[1] http://www.salbrinton.org.uk/
Colin Rosenstiel
> In article <memo.20010407...@rosenstiel.cix.co.uk>,
> rosen...@cix.co.uk (Colin Rosenstiel) growled:
>
> > On a different point no-one seems to have noticed the other^W Labour
> > de-selection - of Susan Bicker (now Susan O'Dell). She was elected in
> > Cherry Hinton in 1997 and is now standing for them in Newnham. Their
> > leaflet uses a most bizarre turn of phrase to describe her
> > experience. She lives in Willingham.
>
> I noticed. If you remember I raised the Cllrs O'Dell issue a week or so
> ago when I was talking about the oddity, to my mind, of councillors
> living away from the area they represent (your Cllr Leeke being another
> example). My assumption is that she and Tim said they wouldn't stand as
> they've moved out to Willingham but that the party persuaded her to
> stand for Newnham with much the same expectation of success as Keith
> has in standing for Coleridge.
I think would accept the soubriquet "party member who knows where his duty
lies". They will be in great demand in 2003, when the City Council will
have an all-out election on new ward boundaries. Parties will be looking
for something like 42 candidates [1] instead of the usual 14.
Colin Rosenstiel
[1] I say something like 42 because in 1976, the last time this happened,
even the then so much stronger Labour and Tory parties failed to do this.
They managed 38 and 36.
Dan Sheppard
>That "Focus" advertises her web site[1] where you can "read more about your
>local area". I wouldn't bother going there. The menu on the right is
>unreadable from my browser (I think the style sheet is broken under NN, they
>come up yellow in IE4) but if you get past that there's a grand total of
You should read it using lynx or w3m, they work fine (though there's
nothing of substance there).
Why do parliamentary candidates always have to appear insufferably
worthy? If someone stood on a bio of
"An undistinguished child, growing up in the suburban hinterland of
Corby, Fred managed to scrape his way into a good University. Once
there, he became an active member of the local Foo Party. After
leaving, Fred spent a few years in a squat in Bradford living a wild
life. Eventually, alienated by the lonely meaninglessness of the pub
and club culture, and on finding a good partner to straighten him out,
Fred rediscovered the Foo party, becoming an expert on Oof and Fuchs,
and eventually becoming Foo party local councillor. Fred is now, if
anything, a little staid and boring, liking nights in with Jim, his
partner of 12 years, drinking wine and watching old films. However, he
says he doesn't regret any of his life, and during working hours Fred
campaigns tirelessly for everyone to have the opportunities he has had
over the years, leading to the life he now enjoys. This is only
achievable, he believes, with strong Fooist policies.
Fred doesn't think there's much chance of him winning the seat of
Wibble North West, but he dreams that he might, and hopes that anyone
who supports him or his party will feel able to support him. In the
long run, when the national tide turns towards Fooism, Fred hopes to
be representing Wibble North West in Parliament; he intends to retain
his interest in this constituency for the long haul. Help turn that
tide of opinion towards Fooism, vote for Fred and send a message to
Britain.
Fred spends Saturdays on the terraces supporting Lincoln City. A very
loyal man, he's supported them through thick and thin, "though mostly
thin", and is convinced that they will one day win the FA Cup.
"
then I'd vote for them. What you tend to get instead is
"
Fred was a bright and attentive child growing up on a small farm in
rural Berkshire. Following on from a successful school career, he
entered a good University, where he excelled academically and
discovered his life-long love of Whateverball. Fred still plays
whateverball at a regional level, and is a member of the sport's
governing body in England. After founding a small consultancy firm,
which five years later he later sold to MegaCorp for a considerable
sum, he married Jemimah -- a sculptor of great local acclaim. They now
have two young girls, Chloe and Percephone, currently boarding at
Inherit The Advantages Of Capital Pre-Preparatory School.
Since selling the consultancy, Fred has been dedicated full time to
County Council work, particularly the planning committee where he
campaigns tirelessly about Wibble North West's terrible problems with
litter bins and graffiti. He also campaigns for further investigation
into the effects of mobile phone masts on children, because his wife
and all his friends do.
Fred spends his saturdays supporting Manchester United on
television. He thinks that, like the Foo Party, Manchester United are
represent a successful organisation based around teamwork and
enterprise. Fred is a three times winner of the Member of Minor
Royalty Award for All Round Good Eggs.
"
which is dull.
Gareth Marlow
Paul Oldham <pa...@the-hug.org> wrote:
>
>That "Focus" advertises her web site[1] where you can "read more about your
>local area". I wouldn't bother going there. The menu on the right is
>unreadable from my browser (I think the style sheet is broken under NN, they
>come up yellow in IE4) but if you get past that there's a grand total of
>five pages: a home page, who Sal Brinton is, how to contact her, a links
>page with five links (two to party sites, three to council), and a news page
>with two items of "news": "Focus" has been delivered free to 35,000 homes
>and ... Sal Brinton's website, is launched! And that's it. So where's the
>information about my local area? Or about her come to that - it's a tad
>sparse even on that front.
Mmm, that's down to me I'm afraid. We had a domestic crisis just when I
started playing around with pages, and stuff had gone to press with the
URL on it before I had chance to put anything up there that I was happy
with. We'd picked up the Netscape problem, too. But there you go. It will
be fixed, and real news 'n' stuff about your local area will be up there
real soon now. And naturally, cam.misc readers will be the first to have
the chance to tear it to pieces on grounds of poor html, lack of content,
browser incompatibilities or misplaced apostrophe's...
Gareth
--
http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~garethm/ : Gareth Marlow
______________________________________________________________________
C-3P0:It's against my programming to impersonate a deity.
Phil Rodgers
da...@chiark.greenend.org.uk (Dan Sheppard) wrote:
[...]
> Why do parliamentary candidates always have to appear insufferably
> worthy? If someone stood on a bio of
>
> "An undistinguished child, growing up in the suburban hinterland of
> Corby, Fred managed to scrape his way into a good University. Once
> there, he became an active member of the local Foo Party. After
> leaving, Fred spent a few years in a squat in Bradford living a wild
> life.[...]
Brilliant! Ever thought of standing for the local council?
Phil [greatly amused]
Graham Stuart
"Richard Meredith" <rmer...@cix.dontspamme.co.uk> wrote in message
news:memo.2001040...@rmeredith.compulink.co.uk...
> In article <0Alz6.277$sr5....@news11-gui.server.ntli.net>,
> t...@brettward.co.uk (Tim Ward) wrote:
>
> > Richard Meredith <rmer...@cix.dontspamme.co.uk> wrote in message
> > news:memo.2001040...@rmeredith.compulink.co.uk...
> > >
> > > Sounds like the authentic noise of spin doctors at work.
> >
> > Certainly. But I haven't a clue whether the CEN report was spin or the
> > rumour I heard was spin or they were both spin and the "true" story is
> > something different again.
>
> That's the problem with spin - all meaning is lost.
>
As it happens the "staggered" Bagnall got it right. Josephine was asked to
stand again but declined. This hasn't stopped various Labour councillors and
the local MP stating the exact opposite at every opportunity. It would be
different if they were merely mistaken...
Graham Stuart
Colin Rosenstiel
graham...@mail.com (Graham Stuart) wrote:
> "Richard Meredith" <rmer...@cix.dontspamme.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:memo.2001040...@rmeredith.compulink.co.uk...
> > In article <0Alz6.277$sr5....@news11-gui.server.ntli.net>,
> > t...@brettward.co.uk (Tim Ward) wrote:
> >
> > > Richard Meredith <rmer...@cix.dontspamme.co.uk> wrote in message
> > > news:memo.2001040...@rmeredith.compulink.co.uk...
> > > >
> > > > Sounds like the authentic noise of spin doctors at work.
> > >
> > > Certainly. But I haven't a clue whether the CEN report was spin or
> > > the rumour I heard was spin or they were both spin and the "true"
> > > story is something different again.
> >
> > That's the problem with spin - all meaning is lost.
>
> As it happens the "staggered" Bagnall got it right. Josephine was asked
> to stand again but declined. This hasn't stopped various Labour
> councillors and the local MP stating the exact opposite at every
> opportunity. It would be different if they were merely mistaken...
All I can say is that the Tory party's candidate vetting procedures must
be as flakey as Labour's!
Colin Rosenstiel
Roland Perry
<natha...@ntlworld.com> writes
>Note that Bachan Bhalla and Anne Campbell haven't replied to my email of
>18th March regarding council tax increases (see earlier thread), county
>council services and central government's role in tilting the balance
>against local council tax payers, such that a city centre resident's council
>tax has risen by 40.7% over 5 years (49.2% County, 51.2% Police, 1.5% City).
Ha! You should worry. The lower valuations in the City mean that you pay
much less, for a correspondingly priced property in today's market, than
those in SCDC. I don't have the figures immediately to hand, but moving
from a City terrace to a village detached house (at a slight profit) has
added up to 50% to my council tax bill.
So, if the amounts are tied to house prices as an indication of ability
to pay (which seems likely) then City residents are in receipt of a huge
subsidy from the rest of the County (assuming North Cambs is in much the
same state as South, which seems likely).
--
Meldrew of Meldreth
Tim Ward
news:+ptyYIA6...@linx-regul.demon.co.uk...
>
> So, if the amounts are tied to house prices as an indication of ability
> to pay (which seems likely) then City residents are in receipt of a huge
> subsidy from the rest of the County (assuming North Cambs is in much the
> same state as South, which seems likely).
One Mrs. M. Thatcher tried to do something about that once, by inventing a
thing call the "poll tax". It didn't go down very well.
Colin Rosenstiel
(Roland Perry) wrote:
Not exactly. It's political cowardice by successive governments in
refusing to revalue properties for Council Tax banding since 1991.
Colin Rosenstiel
Fiona
Colin Rosenstiel <rosen...@cix.co.uk> wrote in message
news:memo.20010408...@rosenstiel.cix.co.uk...
> Not exactly. It's political cowardice by successive governments in
> refusing to revalue properties for Council Tax banding since 1991.
>
But if they do this, where does that leave people like me? I only just
managed to buy a small house four years ago, am single and earn less than
15k. In theory my house has increased in value, but I can only realise this
value by selling it and moving somewhere else entirely, pointless really
because my job is here. I can't move house whilst remaining within a
reasonable vicinity of my workplace because I've been left behind by the
property boom, there's no way whatsoever for me to bridge the gap between
the prices and my salary, even with the money I will make on my own house.
There's no council provision for people in my situation as I'm single, not
pregnant & I'm working.
Any increase in the council charge based on increased value of property when
the increases are being largely forced by a small minority of incomers on
inflated wages will force support staff like me out and away, it's hard
enough now to make ends meet.
Fiona
Colin Rosenstiel
(Fiona) wrote:
> Colin Rosenstiel <rosen...@cix.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:memo.20010408...@rosenstiel.cix.co.uk...
>
> > Not exactly. It's political cowardice by successive governments in
> > refusing to revalue properties for Council Tax banding since 1991.
>
> But if they do this, where does that leave people like me? I only just
> managed to buy a small house four years ago, am single and earn less
> than 15k. In theory my house has increased in value, but I can only
> realise this value by selling it and moving somewhere else entirely,
> pointless really because my job is here. I can't move house whilst
> remaining within a reasonable vicinity of my workplace because I've been
> left behind by the property boom, there's no way whatsoever for me to
> bridge the gap between the prices and my salary, even with the money I
> will make on my own house. There's no council provision for people in my
> situation as I'm single, not pregnant & I'm working.
Sadly true.
> Any increase in the council charge based on increased value of property
> when the increases are being largely forced by a small minority of
> incomers on inflated wages will force support staff like me out and
> away, it's hard enough now to make ends meet.
You would only be affected by relative changes in value. That could raise
the tax in the South and East of England relative to the rest, depending
on how the Government changed the grant distribution formula to
compensate.
The largest effects would likely be where house price differentials have
changed with an area like the City.
It won't change the dodgy assumption underlying Council tax that tenants
can afford to buy the places they rent.
Colin Rosenstiel
dodger
> > Colin Rosenstiel <rosen...@cix.co.uk> wrote
Big snip>>>
> It won't change the dodgy assumption underlying Council tax that tenants
> can afford to buy the places they rent.
Or even the equally dodgy assumption that those that have bought and paid
for their own homes could afford to buy them at today's prices!
--
dodger
"Your e-mail is slow because Tony Blair has to read it first"
Colin Rosenstiel
artful.dodger@ntlworldDOTcom (dodger) wrote:
> > > Colin Rosenstiel <rosen...@cix.co.uk> wrote
> Big snip>>>
> > It won't change the dodgy assumption underlying Council tax that
> > tenants can afford to buy the places they rent.
>
> Or even the equally dodgy assumption that those that have bought and
> paid for their own homes could afford to buy them at today's prices!
If they bought them ten years ago then the assumption is correction
because those prices are the basis of Council Tax banding.
Colin Rosenstiel
Paul Treadaway
Meredith says...
>That's the problem with spin - all meaning is lost.
Yama nashi, imi nashi, ochi nashi. 'Twas ever thus.
Paul Oldham
gar...@chiark.greenend.org.uk (Gareth Marlow) growled:
> In article <memo.2001040...@books.the-hug.org>,
> Paul Oldham <pa...@the-hug.org> wrote:
>
> >That "Focus" advertises her web site[1] where you can "read more about
> >your local area". I wouldn't bother going there. The menu on the right
> >is unreadable from my browser (I think the style sheet is broken under
> >NN, they come up yellow in IE4) but if you get past that there's a grand
> >total of five pages: a home page, who Sal Brinton is, how to contact
> >her, a links page with five links (two to party sites, three to
> >council), and a news page with two items of "news": "Focus" has been
> >delivered free to 35,000 homes and ... Sal Brinton's website, is
> >launched! And that's it. So where's the information about my local area?
> >Or about her come to that - it's a tad sparse even on that front.
>
> Mmm, that's down to me I'm afraid. We had a domestic crisis just when I
> started playing around with pages, and stuff had gone to press with the
> URL on it before I had chance to put anything up there that I was happy
> with. We'd picked up the Netscape problem, too. But there you go. It will
> be fixed, and real news 'n' stuff about your local area will be up there
> real soon now. And naturally, cam.misc readers will be the first to have
> the chance to tear it to pieces on grounds of poor html, lack of content,
> browser incompatibilities or misplaced apostrophe's...
;-) Hey *I* had to suffer, now it's your turn. BTW, when you're expanding
the links there's the new Milton web site you might like to include, as it's
in the SE Cambs constituency ...
Paul Oldham
> In article <memo.2001040...@books.the-hug.org>, pa...@the-hug.org
> (Paul Oldham) wrote:
>
> > My assumption is that she and Tim said they wouldn't stand as
> > they've moved out to Willingham but that the party persuaded her to
> > stand for Newnham with much the same expectation of success as Keith
> > has in standing for Coleridge.
>
> I think would accept the soubriquet "party member who knows where his
> duty lies".
;-) Indeed.
> They will be in great demand in 2003, when the City Council
> will have an all-out election on new ward boundaries. Parties will be
> looking for something like 42 candidates [1] instead of the usual 14.
My, that will be fun. Will you revert to a rolling programme thereafter?
Tim Ward
> > will have an all-out election on new ward boundaries. Parties will be
> > looking for something like 42 candidates [1] instead of the usual 14.
>
> My, that will be fun. Will you revert to a rolling programme thereafter?
Yes, assuming that the reorganisation takes any of the forms currently under
discussion. The all-up election is a one-off following the boundary changes.
It'll be a beauty contest, with the councillor in each ward with the most
votes sitting for four years, next most sitting for three years ...
Paul Oldham
rosen...@cix.co.uk (Colin Rosenstiel) growled:
> All I can say is that the Tory party's candidate vetting procedures must
> be as flakey as Labour's!
My, there's a hostage to fortune if ever I saw one ...
Colin Rosenstiel
> In article <memo.20010407...@rosenstiel.cix.co.uk>,
> rosen...@cix.co.uk (Colin Rosenstiel) growled:
>
> > In article <memo.2001040...@books.the-hug.org>,
> > pa...@the-hug.org (Paul Oldham) wrote:
> >
> > > My assumption is that she and Tim said they wouldn't stand as
> > > they've moved out to Willingham but that the party persuaded her to
> > > stand for Newnham with much the same expectation of success as
> > > Keith has in standing for Coleridge.
> >
> > I think would accept the soubriquet "party member who knows where his
> > duty lies".
>
> ;-) Indeed.
>
> > They will be in great demand in 2003, when the City Council
> > will have an all-out election on new ward boundaries. Parties will be
> > looking for something like 42 candidates [1] instead of the usual 14.
>
> My, that will be fun. Will you revert to a rolling programme thereafter?
Yes indeedy. BTDTGTTS in 1976. South Cambs gets to join the same party, by
the way.
Colin Rosenstiel
Richard Meredith
paul.tr...@dial.pipex.com (Paul Treadaway) wrote:
Sure, but the problem now is that the spin has spread from the
seldom-believable party political propaganda to virtually everything
emanating from government sources, and it's very hard to believe anything
that comes from that nowadays. If the politicians (of any party) ever wonder
why they are so distrusted, they should look no further than their own
propaganda machines.
ISTM that it's far worse now than it used to be - nowadays much government
information seems to be getting as believable as tractor production figures
from the old Soviet Union.
--
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.
Paul Oldham
rosen...@cix.co.uk (Colin Rosenstiel) growled:
> In article <memo.2001040...@books.the-hug.org>, pa...@the-hug.org
> (Paul Oldham) wrote:
>
> > In article <memo.20010407...@rosenstiel.cix.co.uk>,
> > rosen...@cix.co.uk (Colin Rosenstiel) growled:
> >
> > > They will be in great demand in 2003, when the City Council
> > > will have an all-out election on new ward boundaries. Parties will be
> > > looking for something like 42 candidates [1] instead of the usual 14.
> >
> > My, that will be fun. Will you revert to a rolling programme thereafter?
>
> Yes indeedy. BTDTGTTS in 1976. South Cambs gets to join the same party,
> by the way.
... if ever they decide what the new wards are to be. We've had a series of
proposals for Milton which have progressed from borderline to ridiculous as
those responsible for the re-alignment desperately try to find a solution
which will keep everyone happy.
Mike Pitt
Colin Rosenstiel <rosen...@cix.co.uk> wrote:
>lies". They will be in great demand in 2003, when the City Council will
>have an all-out election on new ward boundaries. Parties will be looking
Is there anywhere I can get more info on the ward changes (or proposed
ward changes)? Or have I just been asleep and missed all the discussion
of it here already?
Mike
Graham Stuart
> In article <9apq8c$ifh$1...@uranium.btinternet.com>, F.Ha...@btinternet.com
> (Fiona) wrote:
>
> > Colin Rosenstiel <rosen...@cix.co.uk> wrote in message
> > news:memo.20010408...@rosenstiel.cix.co.uk...
> >
> can afford to buy the places they rent.
>
> Colin Rosenstiel
The leader of the County Council, Keith Walters, has been pushing government
to recognise the people in this position and provide relief. One of the
benefits of the community charge was that it did help with this.
The elderly in particular, who may have lived in their houses for a long
time, find themselves unable to pay council tax because they happen to live
in an area that has become fashionable. Should they really be forced out?
An elderly lady in Clarendon Street (Colin's patch) told me she was
struggling to pay her council tax. She wrote to Anne Campbell who,
apparently, suggested that she move!
Graham Stuart
Graham Stuart
"Richard Meredith" <rmer...@cix.dontspamme.co.uk> wrote in message
news:memo.2001040...@rmeredith.compulink.co.uk...
> paul.tr...@dial.pipex.com (Paul Treadaway) wrote:
> Sure, but the problem now is that the spin has spread from the
> seldom-believable party political propaganda to virtually everything
> emanating from government sources, and it's very hard to believe anything
> that comes from that nowadays. If the politicians (of any party) ever
wonder
> why they are so distrusted, they should look no further than their own
> propaganda machines.
>
> ISTM that it's far worse now than it used to be - nowadays much government
> information seems to be getting as believable as tractor production
figures
> from the old Soviet Union.
Presentation has always been an important part of politics but it is not
fair to tar all parties with the same brush. Labour have taken political
honesty to record lows. They are demonstrably more dishonest than any
British previous government. Unfortunately they are bound to tempt others
(including their opponents) to follow suit. After all it is always easier to
make something up than deal with an uncomfortable truth. I certainly hope
that their persistent dishonesty is punished in some way. Otherwise we will
end up with the kind of politicians that cynics think we already have!
Graham Stuart
Graham Stuart
"Colin Rosenstiel" <rosen...@cix.co.uk> wrote in message > All I can say
is that the Tory party's candidate vetting procedures must be as flakey as
Labour's!
>
> Colin Rosenstiel
Is this slur by innuendo? Are you Lib Dems so institutionalised into Labour
that you try to do their dirty work for them? First Tim brings up the
"rumour" about Josephine's supposed deselection which proves to be Labour
lie-making (I've got documentary proof of this if you were really
interested) and now you try to rubbish Josephine with the unpleasant remark
above.
Graham Stuart
David Damerell
>Presentation has always been an important part of politics but it is not
>fair to tar all parties with the same brush. Labour have taken political
>honesty to record lows.
I think I liked him better when he was a write-only poster; mind you,
there's something curiously ironic about a politician spewing a bunch of
lies and spin in a thread complaining about the preponderance of lies and
spin. At least after the election we'll not hear anything out of him for
another 4 years...
Really, which part of "Political campaigning is barely tolerated from
existing posters" is unclear?
--
David/Kirsty Damerell. dame...@chiark.greenend.org.uk
CUWoCS President. http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~damerell/ Hail Eris!
|___| That is not dead which can eternal lie, Vote Cthulhu: why make do
| | | And with strange aeons even death may die. with the lesser evil?
Colin Rosenstiel
> In article <memo.20010409...@rosenstiel.cix.co.uk>,
> rosen...@cix.co.uk (Colin Rosenstiel) growled:
>
> > In article <memo.2001040...@books.the-hug.org>,
> > pa...@the-hug.org (Paul Oldham) wrote:
> >
> > > In article <memo.20010407...@rosenstiel.cix.co.uk>,
> > > rosen...@cix.co.uk (Colin Rosenstiel) growled:
> > >
> > > > They will be in great demand in 2003, when the City Council
> > > > will have an all-out election on new ward boundaries. Parties
> > > > will be looking for something like 42 candidates [1] instead of
> > > > the usual 14.
> > >
> > > My, that will be fun. Will you revert to a rolling programme
> > > thereafter?
> >
> > Yes indeedy. BTDTGTTS in 1976. South Cambs gets to join the same
> > party, by the way.
>
> ... if ever they decide what the new wards are to be. We've had a
> series of proposals for Milton which have progressed from borderline to
> ridiculous as those responsible for the re-alignment desperately try to
> find a solution which will keep everyone happy.
At present South Cambs is just discussing what to put to the Local
Government Commission, as is the City. In the end the Commission will
decide.
Is South Cambs still trying to combine Milton with Horningsea (or was it
Waterbeach that had that fate)?
Colin Rosenstiel
Colin Rosenstiel
graham...@mail.com (Graham Stuart) wrote:
> "Colin Rosenstiel" <rosen...@cix.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:memo.2001040...@rosenstiel.cix.co.uk...
> > In article <9apq8c$ifh$1...@uranium.btinternet.com>,
> > F.Ha...@btinternet.com
> > (Fiona) wrote:
> >
> > > Colin Rosenstiel <rosen...@cix.co.uk> wrote in message
> > > news:memo.20010408...@rosenstiel.cix.co.uk...
> > >
> > It won't change the dodgy assumption underlying Council tax that
> > tenants can afford to buy the places they rent.
>
> The leader of the County Council, Keith Walters, has been pushing
> government to recognise the people in this position and provide relief.
> One of the benefits of the community charge was that it did help with
> this.
>
> The elderly in particular, who may have lived in their houses for a long
> time, find themselves unable to pay council tax because they happen to
> live in an area that has become fashionable. Should they really be
> forced out?
>
> An elderly lady in Clarendon Street (Colin's patch) told me she was
> struggling to pay her council tax. She wrote to Anne Campbell who,
> apparently, suggested that she move!
I think I know who Graham means.
However, I think going back to the Poll Tax would be typical of the Tory
suicidal tendency these days.
Local income Tax would solve her problem and most other Council Tax
iniquities, however.
Colin Rosenstiel
Colin Rosenstiel
graham...@mail.com (Graham Stuart) wrote:
Careful, Graham. I agree all Government spin can bring it into disrepute,
but who else here remembers the last Government's "seasonally adjusted
optimism"?
Colin Rosenstiel
Colin Rosenstiel
mike...@chiark.greenend.org.uk (Mike Pitt) wrote:
It's still early days yet. The City Council will be consulating after
April 26th.
There is likely to be a debate between keeping the existing 42 councillors
and reducing their number to 36. With the new structures coming in, it is
hard to see how councillors could cope with the workload if there were
only 36 councillors.
Colin Rosenstiel
James Osborne
> Labour have taken political
> honesty to record lows. They are demonstrably more dishonest than any
> British previous government.
Really? You'd be happy to demonstrate it, then?
--
James
Paul Oldham
> It's still early days yet. The City Council will be consulating after
> April 26th.
So they will all have to smoke the same brand of ciggies? Weird.
Paul Oldham
> Is South Cambs still trying to combine Milton with Horningsea (or was it
> Waterbeach that had that fate)?
No, it was us. It was proposed in round one, and also in round two where we
were also to be lumped in with Quy. Bob alone knows what we'll get next.
What Milton PC want is either to keep the current ward boundaries, but with
two councillors or, if we have to have a bigger ward to pick up Landbeach,
which at least makes sense geographically, politically and logistically. We
have a lot of interests in common with Landbeach (the landfill site, A10,
new Waterbeach etc) than with Horningsea.
Colin Rosenstiel
graham...@mail.com (Graham Stuart) wrote:
> "Colin Rosenstiel" <rosen...@cix.co.uk> wrote in message
> > All I can say is that the Tory party's candidate vetting procedures
> > must be as flakey as Labour's!
>
> Is this slur by innuendo? Are you Lib Dems so institutionalised into
> Labour that you try to do their dirty work for them? First Tim brings up
> the "rumour" about Josephine's supposed deselection which proves to be
> Labour lie-making (I've got documentary proof of this if you were really
> interested) and now you try to rubbish Josephine with the unpleasant
> remark above.
I speak on the basis of my own observations.
Colin Rosenstiel
Hugo 'NOx' Tyson
rosen...@cix.co.uk (Colin Rosenstiel) writes:
> In article <wwtu242...@masala.cambridge.redhat.com>, hm...@redxhatx.com
> (Hugo 'NOx' Tyson) wrote:
> > > Colin HAVERCROFT, Conservative
> >
> > if he would only accept Luftkissenfahrzeug as an alias.
>
> How come you've just noticed him? A glance at my local election history
> site index (http://www.cix.co.uk/~rosenstiel/camelect/candsh_k.htm#H)
> will tell you that he has stood in nearly every election since 1994:
I know. I make that joke every time, to some audience or another.
- Huge
Colin Rosenstiel
> In article <memo.20010409...@rosenstiel.cix.co.uk>,
> rosen...@cix.co.uk (Colin Rosenstiel) growled:
>
> > Is South Cambs still trying to combine Milton with Horningsea (or was
> > it Waterbeach that had that fate)?
>
> No, it was us. It was proposed in round one, and also in round two
> where we were also to be lumped in with Quy. Bob alone knows what we'll
> get next.
>
> What Milton PC want is either to keep the current ward boundaries, but
> with two councillors or, if we have to have a bigger ward to pick up
> Landbeach, which at least makes sense geographically, politically and
> logistically. We have a lot of interests in common with Landbeach (the
> landfill site, A10, new Waterbeach etc) than with Horningsea.
Combining Milton with Horningsea wins a prize for the stupidest ward
combination I have ever seen. And I've seen a lot.
Colin Rosenstiel
Colin Rosenstiel
> In article <memo.20010409...@rosenstiel.cix.co.uk>,
> rosen...@cix.co.uk (Colin Rosenstiel) growled:
>
> > It's still early days yet. The City Council will be consulating after
> > April 26th.
>
> So they will all have to smoke the same brand of ciggies? Weird.
B* spilling chukka! s/consulating/consulting of course.
Colin Rosenstiel
Paul Oldham
> In article <memo.2001040...@books.the-hug.org>, pa...@the-hug.org
> (Paul Oldham) wrote:
>
> > In article <memo.20010409...@rosenstiel.cix.co.uk>,
> > rosen...@cix.co.uk (Colin Rosenstiel) growled:
> >
> > > Is South Cambs still trying to combine Milton with Horningsea (or was
> > > it Waterbeach that had that fate)?
> >
> > No, it was us. It was proposed in round one, and also in round two
> > where we were also to be lumped in with Quy. Bob alone knows what we'll
> > get next.
> >
> > What Milton PC want is either to keep the current ward boundaries, but
> > with two councillors or, if we have to have a bigger ward to pick up
> > Landbeach, which at least makes sense geographically, politically and
> > logistically. We have a lot of interests in common with Landbeach (the
> > landfill site, A10, new Waterbeach etc) than with Horningsea.
>
> Combining Milton with Horningsea wins a prize for the stupidest ward
> combination I have ever seen. And I've seen a lot.
Uh huh. I guess it's easier in the city where the area one big lump of
population. I think part of the problem is that there's a lot of historic
baggage to deal with, not to mention some small communities such as
Landbeach who've had a very good deal on councillors to date (they have one,
same as us, although they've a lot smaller than we are) and so are not
enthusiastic about things changing.
Tim Ward
of
> proposals for Milton which have progressed from borderline to ridiculous
as
> those responsible for the re-alignment desperately try to find a solution
> which will keep everyone happy.
There is no requirement to keep everyone happy. The only legal requirement
appears to be to keep the relevant civil servants happy.
Graham Stuart
> In article <L3fA6.3307$2P2.5...@news6-win.server.ntlworld.com>,
> graham...@mail.com (Graham Stuart) wrote:
>
> > "Colin Rosenstiel" <rosen...@cix.co.uk> wrote in message
> > news:memo.2001040...@rosenstiel.cix.co.uk...
> Local income Tax would solve her problem and most other Council Tax
> iniquities, however.
>
> Colin Rosenstiel
How did I know you would say that!
Graham Stuart
Graham Stuart
James Osborne <jr...@cam.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:memo.20010409...@james.cam.ac.uk...
How long have you got?
Graham Stuart
a...@redhat.invalid
: As it happens the "staggered" Bagnall got it right. Josephine was
: asked to stand again but declined.
This doesn't explain why, after putting so much work into protecting
Coleridge School from the Tories, Josephine Percy suddenly decides
that she supports their policies. A personal quarrel with someone in
the local Labour party seems more likely than such a Damascene
conversion.
Andrew.
Diana Galletly
David Damerell <dame...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
>Graham Stuart <graham...@mail.com> wrote:
>>Presentation has always been an important part of politics but it is not
>>fair to tar all parties with the same brush. Labour have taken political
>>honesty to record lows.
>
>At least after the election we'll not hear anything out of him for
>another 4 years...
You have evidence for this assertion, do you ?
>Really, which part of "Political campaigning is barely tolerated from
>existing posters" is unclear?
Is this a "I am talking common-sense, you are employing spin, he is
campaigning politically" kind of thing ?
--
+ Diana Galletly <dag...@eng.cam.ac.uk> +
+ http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~galletly/ +
Richard Meredith
graham...@mail.com (Graham Stuart) wrote:
Unfortunately, it seems that us, the voters, have had a choice of a
moderately competent dovernment with serious dishonesty or a totally
incompetent one with moderate dishonesty, when you could figure out what it
was thinking in the first place. Or, in third place, a bunch of optimistic
no hopers hoping to pick up some power by default. None of the options are
attractive.
a...@redhat.invalid
: On a different point no-one seems to have noticed the other^W Labour
: de-selection - of Susan Bicker (now Susan O'Dell).
No, it's nothing as exciting as that. She had decided not to stand as
a councillor at all, but later after talking to other councillors she
changed her mind. By then Cherry Hinton had already selected, so she
applied to stand in Newnham.
Andrew.
James Osborne
> James Osborne <jr...@cam.ac.uk> wrote in message
> > Graham Stuart wrote:
> >
> > > Labour have taken political
> > > honesty to record lows. They are demonstrably more dishonest than
> > > any
> > > British previous government.
> >
> > Really? You'd be happy to demonstrate it, then?
>
> How long have you got?
Oh, I'm well aware that to demonstrate it clearly would require a minimum
of tens of thousands of carefully researched words. But I'd take the time
to read something like that, yes.
--
James
a...@redhat.invalid
: Presentation has always been an important part of politics but it is not
: fair to tar all parties with the same brush. Labour have taken political
: honesty to record lows.
The trouble with this kind of talk is that mud tends to stick just as
much to the mudslinger as the slingee. A cautionary tale: In the
recent US elections one candidate paid a great deal of money for an
intense negative campaign on TV. When the poll results came back he
was told the good news: his opponent's support had slumped 15%.
Excellent, he thought. The bad news for him, however, was that his
own support had also slumped by 15%.
Andrew.
Colin Rosenstiel
wrote:
Local politicians are still trying to understand why she brought the great
satan John Powley [1] as her guest to the Cambridge Mayor's reception last
November.
Colin Rosenstiel
[1] Anyone not understanding this reference is probably too young to have
heard of "the Kite". A good local history of the 70s and early 80s should
explain.
Colin Rosenstiel
It's the obsession in the Commission's mind with attempting numerical
equality against sensible community representation. To make it worse they
are trying to guess the number of electors in five years' time which is an
uncertain job round here.
Colin Rosenstiel
Gropius Riftwynde
(Richard Meredith) wrote:
>Unfortunately, it seems that us, the voters, have had a choice of a
>moderately competent dovernment with serious dishonesty or a totally
>incompetent one with moderate dishonesty, when you could figure out what it
>was thinking in the first place. Or, in third place, a bunch of optimistic
>no hopers hoping to pick up some power by default. None of the options are
>attractive.
One or more of those sentences could have been applied to British
politics almost every year since the first millenium. Maybe it should
go into the cam.misc faq as a tired old complaint that there is no
point in reiterating.
GR
Mike Pitt
Colin Rosenstiel <rosen...@cix.co.uk> wrote:
>It's still early days yet. The City Council will be consulting after
>April 26th.
Ah. I assume you'll be keeping us informed? :-)
Mike
Colin Rosenstiel
wrote:
Er, right. A party member who knows where her duty lies, more like.
Colin Rosenstiel
Roland Perry
Rosenstiel <rosen...@cix.co.uk> writes
>It won't change the dodgy assumption underlying Council tax that tenants
>can afford to buy the places they rent.
You could always charge everyone the same. Call if Pool tax. I'll get me
coat...
--
Meldrew of Meldreth
Roland Perry
Rosenstiel <rosen...@cix.co.uk> writes
>> So, if the amounts are tied to house prices as an indication of ability
>> to pay (which seems likely) then City residents are in receipt of a huge
>> subsidy from the rest of the County (assuming North Cambs is in much the
>> same state as South, which seems likely).
>
>Not exactly. It's political cowardice by successive governments in
>refusing to revalue properties for Council Tax banding since 1991.
Well, I'm glad you agree that there *is* a huge subsidy. We also agree
on the reason, fwiw. (And I doubt that we outside he City will ever get
a refund for our over-contribution. Makes me feel less guilty to use
your swimming pool, of course...).
--
Meldrew of Meldreth
Chris Brown
It's getting like a school playground in here. Do you think you lot could
take the bickering to email or something?
--
/* _ */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;}
Chris Brown
Richard Meredith <rmer...@cix.co.uk> wrote:
>
>Unfortunately, it seems that us, the voters, have had a choice of a
>moderately competent dovernment with serious dishonesty or a totally
>incompetent one with moderate dishonesty, when you could figure out what it
>was thinking in the first place. Or, in third place, a bunch of optimistic
>no hopers hoping to pick up some power by default. None of the options are
>attractive.
You seem to have a much higher opinion of any of them than me.
Can't we organise a cull of polititians whilst the army are all tooled up?
Paul Oldham
> Local politicians are still trying to understand why she brought the
> great satan John Powley [1] as her guest to the Cambridge Mayor's
> reception last November.
>
> [1] Anyone not understanding this reference is probably too young to have
> heard of "the Kite". A good local history of the 70s and early 80s should
> explain.
I've heard of the Kite. I've even drunk in the Kite (and lived to tell the
tale ;-)) but I'm no idea who Powley is. Do tell.
David Damerell
>David Damerell <dame...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
>>Graham Stuart <graham...@mail.com> wrote:
>>>Presentation has always been an important part of politics but it is not
>>>fair to tar all parties with the same brush. Labour have taken political
>>>honesty to record lows.
>>I think I liked him better when he was a write-only poster; [...]
>>At least after the election we'll not hear anything out of him for
>>another 4 years...
>You have evidence for this assertion, do you ?
Don't you think it's suspicious how he suddenly popped up out of nowhere
as a write-only poster, and then has become read-write for political
tripe only, so close to the election?
>>Really, which part of "Political campaigning is barely tolerated from
>>existing posters" is unclear?
>Is this a "I am talking common-sense, you are employing spin, he is
>campaigning politically" kind of thing ?
Not at all. I agree with most of the stuff that gets posted by the Lib
Dems here, but it's still campaigning; and I would prefer not to see it
except when it bears directly on existing threads or political discussion
from cam.miscers who aren't politically motivated; but I realise that they
are regular readers of the group and have the right to the occasional dull
subthread full of their own obsessions; after all, I do that, too.
--
David/Kirsty Damerell. dame...@chiark.greenend.org.uk
CUWoCS President. http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~damerell/ Hail Eris!
|___| That is not dead which can eternal lie, Vote Cthulhu: why make do
| | | And with strange aeons even death may die. with the lesser evil?
Paul Oldham
cpb...@ntlworld.no_uce_please.com (Chris Brown) growled:
> It's getting like a school playground in here. Do you think you lot could
> take the bickering to email or something?
I'm not sure why it's any less valuable as long threads on speed cameras, or
taking your children on holiday out of term time, or interminable threads
about NTLworld ...
Diana Galletly
David Damerell <dame...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
>Don't you think it's suspicious how he suddenly popped up out of nowhere
>as a write-only poster, and then has become read-write for political
>tripe only, so close to the election?
Not particularly -- he claims to have recently had a cable modem
installed, which I would imagine would indeed increase the likelihood
of checking in on cam.misc on a more frequent basis. Or didn't you notice
him when he wasn't posting in "political tripe" mode ?
>but I realise that they
>are regular readers of the group and have the right to the occasional dull
>subthread full of their own obsessions; after all, I do that, too.
I don't think we have enough evidence to say one way or the other whether
Graham Stuart will continue to be a regular reader and poster to the group
once the election is over. I shall give him the benefit of the doubt,
though no doubt you will take this to mean nothing since I am another evil
Conservative.
Robert Macmillan
rmer...@cix.dontspamme.co.uk (Richard Meredith) wrote:
>
> Unfortunately, it seems that us, the voters, have had a choice of a
> moderately competent dovernment with serious dishonesty or a totally
> incompetent one with moderate dishonesty, when you could figure out
> what it was thinking in the first place.
Which is which?
Robert
Hugo 'NOx' Tyson
dag...@eng.cam.ac.uk (Diana Galletly) writes:
> In article <Uhl*3a...@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>,
> David Damerell <dame...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
> >Don't you think it's suspicious how he suddenly popped up out of nowhere
> >as a write-only poster, and then has become read-write for political
> >tripe only, so close to the election?
>
> Graham Stuart will continue to be a regular reader and poster to the group
> once the election is over. I shall give him the benefit of the doubt,
> though no doubt you will take this to mean nothing since I am another evil
> Conservative.
I think anything one says to David D about politics lately marks one down
as another evil Conservative. That's the impression I'm getting anyway...
- Huge
Richard Meredith
Riftwynde) wrote:
Oh well, maybe I'm just optimistically hoping that there might, against all
the evidence, sometime be some politicians who are actually worth voting
for.
Maybe Iron Age politicians were better.
Tim Ward
news:9asg5j$gm3$1...@earthquake.eng.cam.ac.uk...
> In article <Uhl*3a...@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>,
> David Damerell <dame...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
> >Don't you think it's suspicious how he suddenly popped up out of nowhere
> >as a write-only poster, and then has become read-write for political
> >tripe only, so close to the election?
>
> Not particularly -- he claims to have recently had a cable modem
> installed, which I would imagine would indeed increase the likelihood
> of checking in on cam.misc on a more frequent basis. Or didn't you notice
> him when he wasn't posting in "political tripe" mode ?
I think the cable modem has certainly made a difference. In the Guildhall
the other evening Graham asked me whether Colin and I never sleep, but I
think he's beginning to work out what "always on" means!
Phil Rodgers
graham...@mail.com (Graham Stuart) wrote:
>
> "Colin Rosenstiel" <rosen...@cix.co.uk> wrote in message > All I can
> > > say
> is that the Tory party's candidate vetting procedures must be as flakey
> as
> Labour's!
> >
> > Colin Rosenstiel
>
> Is this slur by innuendo? Are you Lib Dems so institutionalised into
> Labour
> that you try to do their dirty work for them? First Tim brings up the
> "rumour" about Josephine's supposed deselection which proves to be
> Labour
> lie-making (I've got documentary proof of this if you were really
> interested) and now you try to rubbish Josephine with the unpleasant
> remark
> above.
Without wishing to cast any further alleged aspersions, could I ask you to
clear up a couple of matters, namely: What is the current Conservative
policy on whether Coleridge community college should be closed? Does your
candidate for Coleridge agree with this policy?
Phil
--
Phil Rodgers
Cambridge Liberal Democrats
Phil Rodgers
t...@brettward.co.uk (Tim Ward) wrote:
> I think the cable modem has certainly made a difference. In the
> Guildhall
> the other evening Graham asked me whether Colin and I never sleep[...]
Frankly, Tim, I've often wondered this as well. :-)
Tim Ward
news:memo.20010409...@rodgers.ntlworld.com...
> In article <tpkA6.3554$Fm4.1...@news2-win.server.ntlworld.com>,
> t...@brettward.co.uk (Tim Ward) wrote:
>
> > I think the cable modem has certainly made a difference. In the
> > Guildhall
> > the other evening Graham asked me whether Colin and I never sleep[...]
>
> Frankly, Tim, I've often wondered this as well. :-)
Well, I have to switch the thing on when I wake up in the morning to see
which client wants me to do what today - they're two hours ahead of us in
Finland and a reply to a frantic "help!!" email at 0800 is helpful even if
I'm not going to do any actual work for an hour - and I don't switch it off
before I go to bed.
So stuff I post timestamped anything between 0800 and 0100 is perfectly
normal; I think, actually, Phil, that I put out fewer emails dated at three
o'clock in the morning than you do!
Colin Rosenstiel
mike...@chiark.greenend.org.uk (Mike Pitt) wrote:
I'll try.
Colin Rosenstiel
Richard Meredith
rmacm...@cix.co.uk (Robert Macmillan) wrote:
>
> >
> > Unfortunately, it seems that us, the voters, have had a choice of a
> > moderately competent dovernment with serious dishonesty or a totally
> > incompetent one with moderate dishonesty, when you could figure out
> > what it was thinking in the first place.
>
> Which is which?
I was leaving that to the imagination/prejudices (delete as appropriate) of
the reader.
Andrew Mobbs
>
>It's getting like a school playground in here. Do you think you lot could
>take the bickering to email or something?
I disagree entirely. It's very interesting to see party political (and
inter-personal) discussion in an open forum, where all politicians are on
an equal basis to each other and anybody else w.r.t control of the medium.
I'd really like to see more of it. Rather than being fed press releases,
and reading statements by spokespersons in the newspaper of your
prejudice, with little opportunity to respond, you get the opinions of
all sides in raw debate.
Yes, it's messy, can be petty, and is sometimes as "spun" as any other
political statement, but at least you can follow up and say that it's
all rubbish.
--
Andrew Mobbs - http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~andrewm/
dodger
"Andrew Mobbs" <and...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote in message
news:Q6w*kC...@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk...
I just wish they'd all move to cam.bicker...
--
dodger
(political bias removed until after the festivities)
Jonathan Larmour
The purpose of banding was to separate people on the assumption that
the value of their house corresponds to their ability to pay. But
in the City of Cambridge I would suggest the majority of homeowners
bough their houses at a time when the market was not so skewed. Our
house has doubled in value in 5 years. Given that we don't want to
leave the City this leaves us stuck.
Someone's ability to pay is only relevant *at the time they bought
the house*. If there is rampant localised house price inflation,
the base assumptions fall apart.
So I strongly doubt in principle that the rest of Cambs is subsidising
the city.
Jifl
--
Red Hat, Rustat House, Clifton Road, Cambridge, UK. Tel: +44 (1223) 271062
Maybe this world is another planet's Hell -Aldous Huxley || Opinions==mine
Paul Treadaway
Stuart says...
>Presentation has always been an important part of politics but it is not
>fair to tar all parties with the same brush. Labour have taken political
>honesty to record lows.
Have you ever heard of the Tory party? They used to be in government
and did exactly the same thing. Perhaps it's before your time.