Councillor Britcliffe Called off the AGM - Page 9

Gayle · 23-05-2010, 11:23

I don't think anyone comes out of this in a good light. When it all boils down to it, the Tories have 17 seats and Labour only 14. Yes, they can up that to 17 by scratching around to get the independent's votes, but at the end of the day that means that everyone is selling their soul for something. The Tories have the most seats and therefore, morally they should be allowed to form the council - isn't that the argument that everyone, including a lot of Labour MPs (our own newly elected MP Graham Jones as well) were saying about the national situation?

There are 4 independents on the council - one was voted in as Conservative and is now siding with Labour, one was first voted in as Labour then fell out with them so was then voted in as an Independent but is still happy to side with Labour when it comes to this vote and one was voted in as a LibDem, went over to Labour, then became Independent and is now seemingly happy to side with the Tories. The people who voted for these Independents didn't vote for for either Labour or Conservative so are now being short changed by these allegiences.

I think it also proves, what we suspected all along, that it is near impossible for one person to be a Councillor, County Councillor AND MP!!! Far too many demands on your time.

As for the argument raging on here - well that doesn't really make either party look good in my opinion - if you were my children and you were bickering like this I'd have sent you to your rooms.

Tealeaf · 23-05-2010, 11:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gayle

As for the argument raging on here - well that doesn't really make either party look good in my opinion - if you were my children and you were bickering like this I'd have sent you to your rooms.

So now it's come to this. Raw, violent brutality.

Gayle · 23-05-2010, 11:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tealeaf

So now it's come to this. Raw, violent brutality.

Hardly brutal, it's not like I deprive them of their tea or anything!

Ken Moss · 23-05-2010, 11:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrewb

Ken, unless Peter holds it on a Friday, Graham is going to be in London anyway. He shouldn't be charging the taxpayer for coming back for business that isn't related to Parliament. I don't think his £66,000 wallet will be dented that heavily.

I don't particularly understand why it's at 1.30pm rather than 7. I haven't seen any explanation and I'm not in constant contact with Peter Britcliffe to find out, despite being acused of being his mouth piece on here before.

I'd prefer it to be at 7.00pm because it's easier for the public to attend. I just think that the way Labour councillors have come about this when as far as everyone knows Peter has the majority of votes to be leader, is rather daft.

You're a great listener, has anyone ever told you? Or were you too busy listening?

You've just disregarded everything I've posted and come back with the same old rhetoric and no new answers. It's no wonder you get all the flack you do on this forum.

JCB · 23-05-2010, 11:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gayle

The Tories have the most seats and therefore, morally they should be allowed to form the council

I thought all the councillors formed the council.

Gayle · 23-05-2010, 12:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by JCB

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gayle

The Tories have the most seats and therefore, morally they should be allowed to form the council

I thought all the councillors formed the council.

I meant 'lead the council and form the cabinet'.

jaysay · 23-05-2010, 12:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gayle

I don't think anyone comes out of this in a good light. When it all boils down to it, the Tories have 17 seats and Labour only 14. Yes, they can up that to 17 by scratching around to get the independents votes, but at the end of the day that means that everyone is selling their soul for something. The Tories have the most seats and therefore, morally they should be allowed to form the council - isn't that the argument that everyone, including a lot of Labour MPs (our own newly elected MP Graham Jones as well) were saying about the national situation?

There are 4 independents on the council - one was voted in as Conservative and is now siding with Labour, one was first voted in as Labour then fell out with them so was then voted in as an Independent but is still happy to side with Labour when it comes to this vote and one was voted in as a LibDem, went over to Labour, then became Independent and is now seemingly happy to side with the Tories. The people who voted for these Independents didn't vote for for either Labour or Conservative so are now being short changed by these allegiences.

I think it also proves, what we suspected all along, that it is near impossible for one person to be a Councillor, County Councillor AND MP!!! Far too many demands on your time.

As for the argument raging on here - well that doesn't really make either party look good in my opinion - if you were my children and you were bickering like this I'd have sent you to your rooms.

I agree fully with your statement about being a Local Councillor, County Councillor and MP its just not workable, its like the old saying jack of all trades master of none, no matter what the reasons are being an MP IS a full time job, end of story, its not like Peel ward would fall into Tory Hands in any by election is it, Accrington South at County could be more contentious, but the bottom line is Graham can't do all three jobs, trying would only end up in all three suffering

Less · 23-05-2010, 19:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaysay

I only comment on things which interest me, cancelling a meeting is not a phenomena, and doesn't warrant any serious thoughts from me, I'll leave that to those with little else to do

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaysay

I agree fully with your statement about being a Local Councillor, County Councillor and MP its just not workable, its like the old saying jack of all trades master of none, no matter what the reasons are being an MP IS a full time job, end of story, its not like Peel ward would fall into Tory Hands in any by election is it, Accrington South at County could be more contentious, but the bottom line is Graham can't do all three jobs, trying would only end up in all three suffering

Please excuse me, what gained your interest?

Or maybe from the first quote, you have little else to do?

You just had to have your...

Jaysay?

g jones · 23-05-2010, 21:10

I don't believe the arguments are worthless or simply mere bickering. Trivialisation is unacceptable. Look at the real issues around us. Woodnook is a boarded up ghetto. One party wants to do something serious, one admits they do not really want to do anything about it. People are playing with (poor) people's lives and that important fact is being forgotten all to easy.

I think when you represent a poor area, or live in one, these matters are important. When you can drive past these issues, they don't seem as important.

Whilst no longer a council member after Wednesday, I feel for the honest person who is going to see £millions miss spent by The Leader and their lives blighted. (I could also include the incompetence of Spring St. in Rishton). This money won't be available again so it is imperative that every argument is exhausted so that ordinary people get a fair deal.

And that is just one issue amongst many.

Ken Moss · 24-05-2010, 07:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by garinda

I wonder if all those councillors, with full time jobs to do, have been awarded massive pay rises recently?

'A VOTE to increase councillor's expenses sparked cries of disgust from the public gallery at Accrington Town Hall on Tuesday, during a Cabinet meeting.'

'Labour members had tabled an amendment which would have scrapped an estimated £5,000 rise in the allowance for council leader, Councillor Peter Britcliffe but this was defeated.'

'His basic allowance has jumped from £17,032 to £19,842, but he is also allowed to claim allowances for more than one special responsibility, which has led to the extra £5,000 he can claim.'

'This equates to a whopping pay increase of around 20 per cent.'
Expenses rise sparks fury in council chamber - Accrington Observer

All Area Councils have just had their budgets cut for the year, the official reason being that money from the Floral Market Towns projects has been taken in previous years and we haven't missed it.

I'm rather afraid we have missed it and could desperately do with more. To use Rishton as an example, we have approximately £12k for the whole year to spend on projects and improvements and we're one of the better off wards.

It's somewhat uncomfortable to now see that we've paid Peter to rob Paul.

claytonender · 24-05-2010, 08:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gayle

I don't think anyone comes out of this in a good light. When it all boils down to it, the Tories have 17 seats and Labour only 14. Yes, they can up that to 17 by scratching around to get the independent's votes, but at the end of the day that means that everyone is selling their soul for something. The Tories have the most seats and therefore, morally they should be allowed to form the council - isn't that the argument that everyone, including a lot of Labour MPs (our own newly elected MP Graham Jones as well) were saying about the national situation?.

Gayle, you argument about the Conservatives being the largest group and morally bring allowed to form the council is rather dubious when you look at the situation in Blackburn, where Labour have 31 seats and the rag bag coalition (of tories. fib dems and for for darwen) have 33 seats. Surely by your argument there should now be a Labour administration there.

Gayle · 24-05-2010, 08:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by claytonender

Gayle, you argument about the Conservatives being the largest group and morally bring allowed to form the council is rather dubious when you look at the situation in Blackburn, where Labour have 31 seats and the rag bag coalition (of tories. fib dems and for for darwen) have 33 seats. Surely by your argument there should now be a Labour administration there.

Yes, by my argument there should, I never said there shouldn't. Why is my argument dubious - it's perfectly valid and stacks up in most situations. Do you think the coalition in Blackburn is the right way to lead the Council?

Gayle · 24-05-2010, 08:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by g jones

I don't believe the arguments are worthless or simply mere bickering. Trivialisation is unacceptable. Look at the real issues around us. Woodnook is a boarded up ghetto. One party wants to do something serious, one admits they do not really want to do anything about it. People are playing with (poor) people's lives and that important fact is being forgotten all to easy.

I think when you represent a poor area, or live in one, these matters are important. When you can drive past these issues, they don't seem as important.

Whilst no longer a council member after Wednesday, I feel for the honest person who is going to see £millions miss spent by The Leader and their lives blighted. (I could also include the incompetence of Spring St. in Rishton). This money won't be available again so it is imperative that every argument is exhausted so that ordinary people get a fair deal.

And that is just one issue amongst many.

I never said the arguments were worthless, I said that the bickering didn't do any parties any favours or show any in a good light.

All the things you mentioned above are valid issues and I'm sure that they would receive attention if Labour got into power BUT this thread wasn't about the many issues that Labour would stand up for - it was about the argument surrounding when the AGM should be.

Let's face it, you were fighting to keep it on a day when you knew that two Conservative Councillors would be unable to attend - Paul Barton because he's been in a crash and another one who's name I forget right now but it said she was unable to be there. If those two had failed to turn up then Labour would have taken control.

The battle on this thread isn't about who would deal best with the issues but who would win the vote.