And God knows they need to, any how clattering through the letterbox of Flaig mansions, disturbing my afternoon nap, comes an edition of Dane Valley Ward Matters, a piece of propaganda published by Clive Hart's local Labour party although its no surprise given the current state of labour party that the logo is hidden well inside the pamphlet.
Reading it, it appears as they've have done nothing in the last year, for the people of the Dane Valley, or indeed Thanet, not surprisingly Clive Hart on page 3 of this leaflet, does not mention his rather disconcerting effort to attack and stop, the provision of social housing for working people, so much for Labour's honesty and care of us lower orders.
Still the good news is that Cllr Sandra Hart will be joined in her next political fight for the Dane Valley ward by two newcomers and it would be hoped that would enable her to actually respond to e-mails from constituents like mine, see last post, anyhow fortunately local elections are not till May next year and who knows in that time even Thanet Labour, might have developed a social conscience.
Will Labour have any of their old Councillors? I hear the famed Mark Nottingham has been de selected?
ReplyDeleteIf you dislike Labour so much, why not stand for the Liberal Democrats in the Ward? Or do they not think you would be suitable?
ReplyDeleteGood question Labour activist 4 28, I don't dislike Labour, what I dislike is the outrageous accusations made by people in the Labour party, naturally the biggest porkies, emanate from the top, like Union placement Ed Milliband, who wrote the Labour manifesto worked with Gordon "bigot" Brown and takes no responsibility for wrecking the economy.
ReplyDeleteLike your colleague Mark Nottingham, you confuse being a member and sympathiser of a political party with being a spokesperson, its understandable that Mark Nottingham who earns his money by working for a Labour MEP (one of the few) confuses his professional situation with that of a genuinely independent supporter, which is why I presume he refers to this blog as Liberal Democrat News Margate. Childish I know but that's Labour
A regular reader will appreciate that many of my views don't fit comfortably with Liberal Democratic policy, still that said Clive Harts outrageous recent stand against social housing could no doubt place him and his Thanet colleagues outside the Labour party well maybe not.
They are all a LIB/LAB/CON and none of the the councillors deserve to be re-elected FULL STOP.
ReplyDeleteThink of how much council tax could be reduced if the public was to stop paying for these unnecessary public pretenders!
No early start for Labour - just business as usual Tony. As you know, we deliver 3 to 4 times every year. Your home and every other in Dane Valley has had that service from Labour for 8 years now - 7 of them when we didn't have a sitting councillor in your ward.
ReplyDeleteFact is you do ONLY receive literature from Conservatives or LibDems in the few months before an election and you know it!
Tony, what ever has social conscience got to do with the Labour party.
ReplyDeleteWhen in office it is all about clinging to power by any means from bribing the electorate with money we haven't got to opening the immigration floodgates to swell their party's vote. Even dodgey postal voting comes into the frame.
When in opposition it turns to opposing everything that those in office do even when devoid of ideas themselves or, as with Dalby Square, it is something they would be expected to support. If they didn't do it, or even think of it themselves, it has to be opposed.
Who really is the 'nasty' party one might ask!
The Con-Dems general election 2015 campaign has already started. Non means tested £140 per week pension regardless of whether you paid NI for the full term. Very good deal for a couple where one partner paided no NI.
ReplyDeleteSpeaking of Dalby Square, the cuts in housing benefits (confirmed by Cameron) will mean that the Coalition has created a demand for more tht a 100 such schemes in Margate when the DFLs start flooding in to the area. This policy will swell the 18% not in work in Thanet to a new high not seen since Thatcher was in power.
The cuts in benefit, or more precisely, the capping of housing benefit still provides up to £400 per week to rent.
ReplyDeleteAs a recently retired estate agency manager in South London I can assure the previous writer that there are plenty of properties available to rent at that level and below. Indeed, the less fashionable areas outside central London are not really much dearer than rents in East Kent.
The flood of DFLs heading for Margate is but a figment of Labour's over active imagination and scaremongering. More likely folk will move from Westminster to Lewisham and, one might ask, why the heck not? I worked all my life and could never have afforded to live in central London.
I am the "Anonymous" of 4.28 pm. I am not a Labour activist. I am not a member of the Labour Party, or indeed any other Party. I know you can't tell that from "Anonymous" but you have no grounds for assuming it either. So don't.
ReplyDeleteI don't think you are in any position, as a Liberal Democrat, to spout about principles. From the views you have expressed through this blog over time, you would seem to be a world away from your Party's line on many key issues.
That said, it probably doesn't matter any more, given that, as even the London Evening Standard observed yesterday, your leaders have turned their back on standing Liberal Democrat policies, beliefs and objectives to gain seats in the Tory/Coalition Government, with all the personal benefit - including financial - that goes with that.
A postscript... or two...
ReplyDeleteI wonder who you blame for the "wrecked" economies in Ireland, Greece, Spain, the USA, and the severely damaged economies in Germany, France, Italy and so on. Did the UK Labour Party - or even the Social Democratic movement - provide the governments in all those countries? Even you must know enough to be able to answer that. Even you must know enough to identify the countries where Liberals form part of the government.
More personally, is Mark Nottingham in your sights now that Eastcliff Richard has moved on? You seem to need to have someone to bitch about and to take posthots at? Does this have something to do with the chip that weighs so heavily on your shoulder?
Anon 10.53, its not the capping of the weekly rate at £400 that will cause the problem for Thanet, the London Councils estimate that only 17,000 will be affected by this. Its the 10% cut in housing benefits that according to the London councils will affect 80,000.
ReplyDeleteThese people will be looking for cheaper accomodation and I dont think it will be in Lewisham or Newham.
12:49 Please get real. A 10% cut in housing benefit is not going to force people living in London to move to Margate regardless of some media hype.
ReplyDeleteThere are people on housing benefit living in massively expensive housing in central London who could easily lose 10% and still find adequate accommodation in the suberbs.
But, let me give you another example. I was made redundant back in the early 90's when banks were scuttling out of estate agency. To get a job I had to work for a small firm again paying substantially less than my previous corporate employer. That loss of earnings necessitated a house down size and move to a cheaper part of London with all the usual upheaval.
I accept that shit happens. It is life but why should it be just those of us with jobs that pay our way who have to face life's realities. If folk can't afford to live in Mayfair or Belgravia why should the rest of us have to subsidize them?
Tony, well done, I am surprised that any Socialist wants to be recognised in view of the mess their party left the country in.
ReplyDeleteYou have obviously got the measure of Hart and his cronies who despite their protestations have started the Election gun when they should either be very quiet or at least accept the damage they have inflicted on our country and hang their heads in shame
Clive I'm pleased to see that you do not deny your stance on social housing or that your party has not done much for the people of the dane valley ward
ReplyDelete9 35 agree
10 53 agree perhaps labour propaganda department could come up with some other scare
4 28 of course you're not Labour lackey because you say so righteo And as you point out a lot of my views expressed do not concur with Lib Dem policy please update your mate Mark Nottingham
12 37 as 4 28 pointed out my views don't always concur with Lib Dem policy although Mark Nottingham is not for reasons of intellect prejudice or whatever able to place an honest link from his blog rather than refer to " Bignews Margate" he chooses lib dem news margare, perhaps I should recipricate with "F-wit labour blogger on EU gravy train" or similar suggestions accepted
12 49 thanks for reminding our Labour pals that some of have to work, not everyone takes baby making as a career option.
At the heart of our current crisis is the fact that Labour have created a dependent culture of work shy dross paying brides in the form of unsustainable benefits so that these cretins vote for them every few year,
Yes you are right Anon 10.53
ReplyDeleteThe 10% cut will, for many landlords, mean that claimant tenants leave them 10% short of their rent. Where councils pay it direct then it will be up to landlords to try to get the 10% out of the claimant tenants.
A residential landlords assn is petitioning Downing Street and gearing up. When claimant tenants know they will be put on a residential landlords credit and behaviour referency agency reserach has shown there is a consequent 80% reduction in anti social behaviour, rent arrears and drug pushing from the rented properties. That is when the fiddling tenants get faced with the reality they may nopt be able to skip to a new tenancy as easily as in the past.
Labour's change of LHA rules has left each private landlord on average with about £5,000 of rent arrears as claimant tenants simply pocketed the handout two months rent new Labour trusted them with.
The cxhange to LHA was framed so as to say it would not be a crime when tenant claimants pocketed money paid from public purse to pay their rent.
BUT now the landlords are saying that other social security law required the thieving tenant claimants to declare when they pocketed LHA as it represents INCOME which should attract a consequ8ent reduction of benefits. IE The exchequer can recover two months rent at least for each claimant at each address they deliberately pocketed two months housing benefits.
The sum the Exchequer could recover against thieving benefits tenants is between quarter and one billion pounds.
The landlords are encouraging DWP to do exactly that.
Now suppose tenant claimants in London start running up rent arrears at 10 per cent underpayment per month. Then a landlord could seek Section 21 repossession through the courts (not pursuing arrears but just getting a Court order to repossess)
That could take five to six months.
If we are talking 80,000 cases then how long will it takle to put through the courts ?
Well we issued proceedings against Kent Chief constable for recovery of a rolex his officers seized at a murder scene. We are now at the twelve month mark and no notification from the county court of a simple hearing to decide our application that they knock out the Chief constable defence and award us judgment.
If it takes this long to decide possession of a rolex how long when it's a house ?
If anything happens fast re waves of tenants leaving properties I would be surprised.
What happened ? In April 2008 new Labour theorized (Inevitably their social theory will cost someone else money) that tenant claimants should be dignified by being trusted to pay their own rents.
ReplyDeleteThen in the hypocrisy that Blair and Brown took to new heights they exempted Housing Assn and Council tenants. It was only private landlords who would not be paid housing benefits direct until tenants ran up two months arrears.
So across the land claimant tenants found that their rent money was paid to them as well as their benefits. Hey ho hard luick landlord that is going in the claimant's pocket.
I had tenants who used housing benefits to insure their seven seater SUV and then to have a new gearbox fitted and then to have a holiday.
The best I have heard though was the tenant who used housing benefits to rent a field and feed her two horses.
New Labout thus bankrupted many small buy to let investors costing them their savings and pensions. Vindictive ideology on the hoof.
The average thieving benefits tenant took five grand. IE They had an income five grand above their benefits level and that means DWP can take that money back. Yes it is the landlords money but better the public purse has it than the thieving claimant tenants.
Interesting times.
I hear that police escorted DSS officials who did a creeping check of Staner Court's benefits claimants. Perhaps now the public sector is finally waking up to its responsibilities.
You really are a thoroughly offensive and pugilistic debater, Mr Flaig. People who believe - whether you like it or not - in the Labour Party do not become "lackies" any more than you are a lackey of the Liberal Democrat Party. If you could argue without resort to rudeness, you may be taken more seriously. But then, for you, spin goes in where facts fear to tread.
ReplyDeleteI, for one, am not too unhappy with the present government, despite the labour party using the 'Buzz word' Con-Dem to try and besmurch them, at least the present lot are trying to sort out the mess left to them. Top marks to the Lib Dems for smoothing some of the Tory policies, and top marks to Cameron and his crew for realising the country needs sorting and working with the Lib dems. Time to get real, the country is in the poo and its going to take all of us to get it out! That means ALL of us
ReplyDelete7 34 thanks for your praise I'm only reacting to labour abuse
ReplyDelete08:18 PM, agree entirely with your call for 'all of us' to rally to the cause but, unfortunately, the Labour party, in their typically unpatriotic way, are determined to talk us into a double dip recession.
ReplyDeleteDespite the fact that Alistair Darling was planning similar cuts in public spending, if returned to government, there is no way this self serving party will support anything the coalition does to repair our country. No, they would much rather oppose and rubbish every measure backed by their left wing leaning sycophants at the BBC, Polly of the Guardian and sundry so called economists.
They can hardly conceal their eagerness for the country to go bankrupt!
would you create new social housing in one of the most deprived areas of the country with high crime, worklessness etc, or 5 minutes up the road in one of the least deprived?
ReplyDeleteI think all local parties have got it wrong. Cliftonville needs to be fixed. putting more housing into it will only exasperate the problem.
1:02 PM
ReplyDeleteAre you saying that the unemployed and deprived should not get social housing? What kind of progressive politics is that might I ask?
Perhaps, in your utopia, social housing is only built in affluent leafy suberbs so that they to might become areas of Labour influence!
Your reaction, Mr Flaig, represents the behaviour of the playground. A track back through your posts shows that it is you who is constantly goading, or throwing away offensive jibes in the knowledge they will be picked up. When they are, you bleat that others are ganging up on you. But, as ever, this is your blog.
ReplyDeleteBe more concise 5 15
ReplyDeleteI appreciate that your doing your bit for Labours black propaganda but come on!
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/4/20101029/tuk-pm-defends-housing-benefit-cap-dba1618.html
ReplyDeletein house fighting amongst the CON's/ mayor
now why am I not surprised,
does anybody really believe that any of these overpaid fat cat millionaires could really care less about anyone other than themselves?
smoke & mirrors from the lot of them LIB/LAB/CON party lie
Retired said
ReplyDelete’Well we issued proceedings against Kent Chief constable for recovery of a rolex his officers seized at a murder scene. We are now at the twelve month mark and no notification from the county court of a simple hearing to decide our application that they knock out the Chief constable defence and award us judgment.
If it takes this long to decide possession of a rolex how long when it's a house ?’
This again is a good example of the duplicity where everyone else is
expected to obey the Law while those in authority, because they control
the administration of the Law think they are privileged in being able to
break the law with impunity. Knowing full well that if they are discovered
they will be protected by their brothers/brethren.
If they are arrogant enough to believe that they can succeed by bending, breaking or manipulating
the rules of Natural Law they will inevitably come to grief.
Sadly, Retired, you will probably be long gone before they do. Why don't you just sit back and enjoy the time you have left for you really are not going to change anything.
ReplyDelete02.02pm
ReplyDeleteI wouldn't be so sure, there are many who are sick and tired of the freemasons running Kent and beyond.
It is very obvious that there are two completely parallel worlds running side by side, hidden by smoke & mirrors.
Why are Masons are forbidden to say the word JABULON in one breath?
for further reading
MASTERS OF THE TRUTH FATHER OF LIES