Councillors in Hyndburn - Are they fit for purpose?

[gondola]

Mancie,

I see Graham Jones in his reposne confirmed everything I stated. He certainly did'nt deny it.

Now why do you think that is. Because I was wrong? No, thought not.

[Less]

Originally Posted by garinda

Less waffle,

Aw rindy I'm doing my best how much waffle can I put on with just two fingers typing?

gondola=I find your approach rather startling. I do not recall having held any discussion with you, yet you appear on this thread and question my motives for posting here, suggesting that I am seeking to disrupt these forums.

I find you quite startling, this is an open forum what you type, them ones of us wot 'as a carer have the words read out to us.

So although I didn't join in on there, I read the other thread that you attempted to hi-jack and I feel I am getting to know you very quickly.

I have every right as a member of this site to question the motives of any other member of this site and your motives are as yet very unclear but extremely suspect.

Can I ask you to go into your bathroom take a long hard look at what stares back at you from the mirror in there and consider, is what I see before me something my parents would be proud of? Is this really what they brought me up to be? If you can answer yes to any of these questions, you are probably lying.

Now if you do not wish to contribute anything worthwhile will you please do as accymel requested.

[gondola]

Im off to the pub for a Whisky.

Cheerio now

[Gayle]

Originally Posted by gondola

'You say in the other thread that you do not feel that the independent candidate is truly independent'

When did I say that?

Nope, you're quite right to question me, it was actually Cllr Jones that implied that the independent was not independent. I was merely trying to come back on thread by talking about councillor's suitability for the purpose.

[shillelagh]

Gondola if you dont like the councillors hyndburn have got at the moment or standing in May why dont you stand. All you have to do is go down to the Town Hall and pick up a set of nomination papers and get 10 people to sign them then canvass your way round the ward you have chosen to stand in and see what happens.

[Mancie]

Originally Posted by gondola

Mancie,

I see Graham Jones in his reposne confirmed everything I stated. He certainly did'nt deny it.

Now why do you think that is. Because I was wrong? No, thought not.

I also see Graham Jones making posts about the going's on at the council... but he has the guts to be upfront.. and when he does post I am inclined to belive what he says, the difference is gondola no matter what YOU say it will always be treated as hear say..common gossip!

[Neil]

Originally Posted by gondola

Less remarked 'I don't trust you'

gondola,

I am assuming you don't know how to quote what someone has said like I have above.
Here is a quick explanation to help you out.
If you click the quote button on the bottom right of someones post it starts a reply with their quote in it. It makes it much easier for us to read and understand who you are quoting. It is also easier for you. You can remove some of their quote if you like but make sure you leave the words quote and /quote in with square brackets around them at the beginning and end of the quote or it will not show correctly.

[g jones]

Central Ward Labour Party - As I understoood it.


A Tory hinted to me about people's alliances not being upfront a month before selection. He meant Safdar but short of being pyschi or good cryptically I missed the point.

I was always aware second hand from a distance what was happening in Central Ward. Touring all 17 branches for meetings is not practical when they are functioning democratically.

Safdar (in my mind) had always been available. Tories and Labour do a lot of talking to each other but people had mentioned Safdar as one who spoke too much with the Tories. You can only do something about it if you have evidence.

Safdar told me the day before he was standing which was surprising as his name had never come up with anyone I had spoken to fromm Central Ward. In fact the main contender, someone very popular, dropped out of selection which left it a bit open upon shortlisting. I speak with the yonger members and Ayub was spoken about very highly. It was widely predicted he would be nominated on merit. Good candidate, nice lad.

Safdar told me the night before selction he was standing and 'he'd better win (or else)". I told him that wasn't the right attitude. If he lost he should be gracious and offer his support to the winner like he would expect if he was selcted.

Safdar said; "I will don't worry, I am not disloyal". I said Central has elections next year and the runner up should take advantage of that for next year. Safdar agreed totally. It was a dodgy conversation. I suspected something wasn't right with Safdar.

I rang around a couple off CW members. I got a different picture. Safdar won't win. He's been talking to the Tories too much. Kazi and Allah Dad, spending a lot of time with them.

Safdar lost, I did not know by how many. Then the phone rang. Safdar immediatly had gone to the Tories. No-one was surprised though no one knew he had ACTUALLY done a deal. I was told by a Tory the deal was nailed months previously. So that put some flesh on well founded suspicions.

Safdar could not have been barrred. There was no proof of a deal. I was told he would lose. It eneded up close as Safdar got older members to the meeting in support of him for his years of service as I understand it.

Press ring up a week or so later. I say what I said which was pretty much accurate. 2+2 had made 4. Yes I did speak with a bit of hindsight but it was true Safdars actions prior to selection where know and that was in the minds of CW LP members. They told me so when I discoverd Safdar had put his name forward. So I think I was jsutified in what I said.

There is an alternate theory. Can't say any of it is true. Kazi knows he will beat Safdar as a weak candidate and had entered into an alliance whereby Safdar as the Labour candidate would lose and Kazi would be indebted to Safdar. Kazi knows he may well lose to Ayub who is a nice lad, straight, hard working and honest.

As Gondola knows, we had LP monitors in observing the process.

[Wynonie Harris]

Gondola, there's something very funny about you. Your strange, stilted, archaic prose style is reminiscent of the great novelists of the 19th century. It's almost as if you're playing a character from a novel by Arthur Conan Doyle or Edgar Allen Poe. Then, just once in a while the mask drops and you say something normal like "I'm off to the pub for a whisky."

Can't really make my mind up about you, but I'll be watching your posts very closely for more clues!

[gondola]

Wynonie Harris,
Your comments are duly noted. The whisky was jolly impressive .
I had been saving a bottle or two to celebrate the resignation in disgrace, for so I suppose, of those unfit to represent upstanding members of society. But the very thought was enough to turn a man to drink.
More on that later, of that you can be assured.

[claytonender]

Originally Posted by Gayle

I suspect Gondola is unable to reveal his/her true identity as it would probably jeopardise his/her job.

I can understand and appreciate that because there are times when using my real name has meant that I've been unable to say what I really think or spill the dirt on something. I suspect that there are many people in Scaitcliffe House who are also currently trying to find out who Gondola is.

I think that Gayle is quite right with this statement.

But You need to be less agrressive to the other members of Accy Web Gondola, otherwise you risk alienate the very people who you are trying to enlightened about the situation.

[andrewb]

I never really followed the story closely as it unfolded. From what i've read so far it seems blindingly obvious that the license shouldn't have been given back. Am I missing something that made certain councilors vote for the license to be reinstated?

I can see why some of you might be annoyed or have a dislike for gondola, the way he writes is probably interpreted as quite aggressive because it's somewhat intellectual, however I don't think he means it to come across that way.

I shall watch this unfold with interest, hopefully somebody can explain anything im missing.

[gondola]

Originally Posted by g jones

Central Ward Labour Party - As I understoood it.


A Tory hinted to me about people's alliances not being upfront a month before selection. He meant Safdar but short of being pyschi or good cryptically I missed the point.

I was always aware second hand from a distance what was happening in Central Ward. Touring all 17 branches for meetings is not practical when they are functioning democratically.

Safdar (in my mind) had always been available. Tories and Labour do a lot of talking to each other but people had mentioned Safdar as one who spoke too much with the Tories. You can only do something about it if you have evidence.

Safdar told me the day before he was standing which was surprising as his name had never come up with anyone I had spoken to fromm Central Ward. In fact the main contender, someone very popular, dropped out of selection which left it a bit open upon shortlisting. I speak with the yonger members and Ayub was spoken about very highly. It was widely predicted he would be nominated on merit. Good candidate, nice lad.

Safdar told me the night before selction he was standing and 'he'd better win (or else)". I told him that wasn't the right attitude. If he lost he should be gracious and offer his support to the winner like he would expect if he was selcted.

Safdar said; "I will don't worry, I am not disloyal". I said Central has elections next year and the runner up should take advantage of that for next year. Safdar agreed totally. It was a dodgy conversation. I suspected something wasn't right with Safdar.

I rang around a couple off CW members. I got a different picture. Safdar won't win. He's been talking to the Tories too much. Kazi and Allah Dad, spending a lot of time with them.

Safdar lost, I did not know by how many. Then the phone rang. Safdar immediatly had gone to the Tories. No-one was surprised though no one knew he had ACTUALLY done a deal. I was told by a Tory the deal was nailed months previously. So that put some flesh on well founded suspicions.

Safdar could not have been barrred. There was no proof of a deal. I was told he would lose. It eneded up close as Safdar got older members to the meeting in support of him for his years of service as I understand it.

Press ring up a week or so later. I say what I said which was pretty much accurate. 2+2 had made 4. Yes I did speak with a bit of hindsight but it was true Safdars actions prior to selection where know and that was in the minds of CW LP members. They told me so when I discoverd Safdar had put his name forward. So I think I was jsutified in what I said.

There is an alternate theory. Can't say any of it is true. Kazi knows he will beat Safdar as a weak candidate and had entered into an alliance whereby Safdar as the Labour candidate would lose and Kazi would be indebted to Safdar. Kazi knows he may well lose to Ayub who is a nice lad, straight, hard working and honest.

As Gondola knows, we had LP monitors in observing the process.

Mr Jones,

Thank you for the valuable insight, allowing readers to gasp at the lamentable antics from representatives of the mainstream parties in the Central Ward. Surely no one in Hyndburn can prosper from such stupidity, save those seeking to elect themselves.
It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his job depends on not understanding it. The thesis that Safdar would not have been elected on the basis that he had been ‘talking to the Tories’ is as laughably foolish as the notion that he found support from ‘older members’ as a result of his robust service to the party over the years. One only has to consider the profiles of current Councillors of Asian origin to note that most have at some stage been affiliated to both Labour and the Conservatives, either as members, candidates or serving councillors. Thus the assertion that there is a strong sense of party loyalty is tenuous at best.
The alternate theory you propose sounds far more plausible. In fact I think it likely, though like yourself I have no tangible evidence to prove the same, save to point out that this is not the first time I have heard this.
Indubitably, Safdar would not have been successful in the Central Ward. The odds were clearly stacked against him, and thus there may have been other reasons for him seeking the candidacy. I decline further commentary on this issue, for fear of making an egregious remark.
Separately, I am not sure if Safdar thought through the likelihood of success in the Church Ward. In my considered view, the chances of him being elected are increasingly moribund.

All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them.
I shall return later in the week.

[gondola]

Neil,

Thank you for that. It makes it easier on the eye.

[g jones]

Originally Posted by gondola

Mr Jones,

Thank you for the valuable insight, allowing readers to gasp at the lamentable antics from representatives of the mainstream parties in the Central Ward. Surely no one in Hyndburn can prosper from such stupidity, save those seeking to elect themselves.
It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his job depends on not understanding it. The thesis that Safdar would not have been elected on the basis that he had been ‘talking to the Tories’ is as laughably foolish as the notion that he found support from ‘older members’ as a result of his robust service to the party over the years. One only has to consider the profiles of current Councillors of Asian origin to note that most have at some stage been affiliated to both Labour and the Conservatives, either as members, candidates or serving councillors. Thus the assertion that there is a strong sense of party loyalty is tenuous at best.
The alternate theory you propose sounds far more plausible. In fact I think it likely, though like yourself I have no tangible evidence to prove the same, save to point out that this is not the first time I have heard this.
Indubitably, Safdar would not have been successful in the Central Ward. The odds were clearly stacked against him, and thus there may have been other reasons for him seeking the candidacy. I decline further commentary on this issue, for fear of making an egregious remark.
Separately, I am not sure if Safdar thought through the likelihood of success in the Church Ward. In my considered view, the chances of him being elected are increasingly moribund.

All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them.
I shall return later in the week.

I simply told the thruth, warts and all, how I was told it or saw it. Nothing more or less. I actually don't know much more than what I wrote. I think your being pedantic over a word or so when most peole accept the thrust of the Observer article was ball park 95%+ what is on here.

You seem to think I am Zen and know everything about everything, I am not and I don't. Only knowing 95% of an issue should not disbar someone from passing comment 'in the debate' who can offer some light on a matter of interest.