Britains Youngest Councillor - Page 4

WillowTheWhisp · 20-03-2005, 09:53

He's only 66? Good grief I thought he was well into his sixties twenty years ago!!!

park381 · 20-03-2005, 10:04

a-b, you forgot to add from my post " I am not saying that I am supporter of the man"

PurpleLass · 20-03-2005, 10:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by park381

Ah yes, its the "new" labour party these days, cast off the old, and bring in the young. I am not saying that I am supporter of the man, but may be he has still something to offer even though he is 66 years young.

I don't think anyone should be cast off purely because of their age - experience counts for a lot. But I do think that political parties tend to need candidates who, at the very least, appear to be clutching hold of their marbles.

garinda · 20-03-2005, 10:48

I don't think a councillers diasability, or in deed narcisism should have any bearing on their abilities to do the job. Rather, as with the case of the recently elected counciller, lets hope greeness behind the ears in this case, equals freshness, honesty and a desire to listen to her ward rather than use the position as a political springboard to greatness.

Will Georges expences from his new party be paid as thirty pieces of silver? Funny the cost of principles.

Acrylic-bob · 20-03-2005, 11:55

As Graham says, George Slynn is a creature out of Labour's socialist past. Now that New Labour is in so many ways more Conservative than the Conservative Party, it should come as no surprise that they would regard him as an embarassment and want to get rid of him. I am surprised at the Liberal's accepting him though.

However, his administration was a disaster for the borough and it looks as though the current idiot in chief is following his lead. Stupidity, lack of imagination and mendacity observe no political boundaries.

I seem to remember, at some time in the early seventies, George Slynn campaigning for election to HBC in the Springhill Ward as a Liberal Candidate. Perhaps someone would be kind enough to either confirm or refute this notion.

Graham Jones · 20-03-2005, 23:46

George should have gone gracefully. It was bad enough trashing the people who had either supported you over many years or others and the party for whom he had claimed to be great passionate leader and intergral part of.

However to target the release of the information to undermine tactically Claire Hamilton on the day of the Rishton by-election, a 21 year old he has never met, was dispicable. [George timed his press release so he grabbed the front page on the night voters went to the ballot box]. You couldn't possibly print what I actually said down the pub.

He was always as long as I knew him and spoke with him, a dillusional walter mitty character who thought he walked on water and who he thought would be remembered as a great visionary of Hyndburn.

Even as socialist thinker I would caution anyone facing the onslaught of Blairites to see George as something alternate from the past. In my view he wasn't a socialist, or a labour man, or any other tag he is identified with. He was just a muddled thinker who believed in no one else but himself and always judged everything he did as brillant and that the other 40 Labour councillors then should be grateful for his brilliance.

As for Labour now in Hyndburn its neither old labour and definately not new labour bob. I think you'd find it pragmatic labour in line with what most residents are thinking because most of us live in houses in the poorer areas of Hyndburn and have a healthy relationship with daily reality.