Saturday, February 05, 2011


Those who might have expected Labour Fireworks after Mark Nottingham's exposé of just how democratic and equitable things are in Clive Hart's Local Labour have been dealt  a blow with the realisation, that not only is this turning out more a damp squib  but despite Cllr Clive Hart's pledge or promise, to resign he hasn't and I doubt personally he will.
Politicians are only human and frankly the further down the food chain, like here in Thanet, that is more apparent, however, Mark has suggested a less than level selection procedure in Thanet Labour which has apparently resulted in his being deselected for May's local elections. Now you only have to look at many candidates and councillors to realise that the gene pool is not that strong as far as competent people fit to run the council is concerned.Mark Nottingham
So looking at Mark Nottingham with even the most cursory knowledge of local politics and his background, its clear that as a respected councillor and Labour party member, in what crazy circumstances would he not be selected?
Now coming back to Clive Hart, he is of course as good as any, in presenting and arguing the Labour party agenda, in Thanet council, but surely has no authority having said he would resign following Mark's revelations, "I am a team player and always have been.  However, I simply refuse to be the leader of a group with a member who behaves in the manner of Mark Nottingham." Mark is still a member of the group following on from Thursday's Labour group meeting.
Thursdays meeting did not remove Mark from the party so when exactly is he going to stand down, as he said he would, even in yesterdays Gazette he is reported to have said "Having a member saying the things Mark says makes my position as leader of the group untenable."
Still taking a gander at Clive's twitter stream nothing seems to perturb him including Pfizer's closure and his own promise/pledge to resign.


  1. Tony I don't think anyone expected Clive to go, the empty promise of a politician

  2. He of the ego and life sized framed photo was never going anywhere despite his tongue in cheek statements about untenable positions.

    This does, as Tony so rightly points out, create something of stalemate in the local Labour party. Mark Nottingham remains a member, despite publicly slagging off the local hierachy, and Clive Hart remains leader despite much criticism of his performance.

    Around the blogs and local papers, Mark Nottingham seems to have plenty of plaudits from the general public whilst there is nothing much other than condemnation of the leadership.

    Really makes one wonder how this can go on and whether the best interests of Thanet would be served by electing any of them in May. Would they find time from their internal squabbles to devote to serving us!

  3. Followed the link to Clive Hart's twitter and, as you say Tony, he does not seem too concerned about anything. What I did like was his reference to Cllr. Mrs Hart being seen off on her break. My wife was an army officer but I never called her Lieutenant Mrs - the sheer ego and importance of these people takes the biscuit.

  4. Hart as leader you have got to be having a laugh, where has he been during the recent problem with Pfizer
    doing the usual, ie nothing, except gazing at his picture on his office door gone are his dreams of being an MP, his "leadership" lacklustre, questions unanswered, the better Socialist Mark N still in place, what a pantomime and what a joke.
    An absolute gift to the Tories!!!

  5. Clive Hart ? false Hair do, fals promises, and allegations of violence and bullying, New Labour or old labour?

  6. Hi Tony, I doubt Clive even considered resignation. No let me re word that Clive never considered resignation. That’s better. He just said it as it sounded vaguely 'POLITICAL' and that is how his party have become vague and now they are out of office just a bunch of point scorer's doing as little as possible to look important but not achieve anything other than words and as we all know WORDS ARE CHEAP.

  7. Good bye Clive close the door as you go and don't forget to take your photo off the office door,time to hand over bye bye

  8. What a muddle how are Labour to dig themselves out of this one?

  9. Edited version ...

    30th January 2011

    Mary Honeyball MEP
    4G Shirland Mews
    W9 3DY

    Dear Ms Honeyball

    European Parliament Resolution 22nd November 1990 and its implications in the policing of Kent and repercussions in Thanet Kent

    (1) I quote from the resolution and especially draw your attention to Section G paras 3,4,5,6 and 7

    G. 3. Calls on the governments of the Member States to dismantle all clandestine military and paramilitary networks;
    4. Calls on the judiciaries of the countries in which the presence of such military organizations has been ascertained to elucidate fully their composition and modus operandi and to clarify any action they may have taken to destabilize the democratic structure of the Member States;
    5. Requests all the Member States to take the necessary measures, if necessary by establishing parliamentary committees of inquiry, to draw up a complete list of organizations active in this field, and at the same time to monitor their links with the respective state intelligence services and their links, if any, with terrorist action groups and/or other illegal practices;
    6. Calls on the Council of Ministers to provide full information on the activities of these secret intelligence and operational services;
    7. Calls on its competent committee to consider holding a hearing in order to clarify the role and impact of the 'Gladio' organization and any similar bodies;

    (2) Your political manager, Mark Nottingham, has knowledge of the issues from his duties as a Thanet Councillor and from information solicited when he was threatened by legal action by a tory Cllr Simon Moores.

    (3) I don't think UK judiciary would lightly enter an investigative role unless provided for by Treason Law of our Realm. But the defining legislation in UK of whether military activity is unlawful was the Unlawful Drilling Act 1819. An act your Jack Straw repealed when Justice Minister. And also an act which he refused to compel inquiry by in 1999 when Home Secretary. I ask you to note now that Jack Straw has acted twice to prevent Judiciary hearing cases under the Unlawful Drilling Act 1819. IE He acted twice to undermine the European Parliament resolution above. I am asking you to report this in Europe and for the resolution to be used as authority to call for explanation from UK via Council of Ministers.

    (4) Enclosure One is a copy of a press report exposing the cabinet bunker security fiasco and its consultant James SHORTT as bogus former SAS.

    (5) As a result of this exposure one of the Royal Marines participants in a training mission to Brussels of 1982 provided me photos of the mission and explained that, at the time in 1982, he had believed the mission had Crown authority and that SHORTT was a serving member of 21 SAS (TA). Enclosures Two are photos of the 1982 mission, to train Belgian police para-commandos,

    (6) Enclosures three are letters from Minister of Defence to Joan Walley MP and letters exchanged in 1982 between an RAF officer and the Commanding Officer of Deal Royal Marines Barracks. These establish proof that SHORTT's activity had no Crown authority. The report to MI5 referred to in Major GROVER's letter was made by Army Physical Training Corps and retired military aikido expert Brigadier Mike HARVEY (who was in 82 a consultant to HM Customs and Excise).

  10. (7) Recent information claims that one of SHORTT's instructors at Deal Barracks was Jean BULTOT. IE One of those wanted for multiple terrorist murders subject of the Belgian Senate Inquiries into the Nijvel gang and Gladio.

    (26) In 1998 George MAISON was found guilty of libel at Aldwych High Court. Tory Cllr HAYTON of the Police Authority allegedly perjured by telling the Judge there were no procedures of inquiry in place concerning MAISON. I refer you back to the European Parliament Resolution of 1990 charging member state judiciary with a duty to examine matters of unlawful military activity. In fact this was the second time tory Cllr MAISON had been exposed by a Court of Law as a liar. On the face of it on top of treason and perjury they had undermined the Judiciary in any duty they felt might be incumbent upon them as a result of the European Parliament resolution.

    (27) I imagine your office sits in horror as Cllr Mark Nottingham details some of his dealings at Thanet Council. A tory kitten killer. A tory alleged kiddie fiddler. Two tories protected by police from perjury and treason inquiries.

    (28) In Dec 1998 I submitted an application to STRAW to compel the inquiry and report called for by Kent Police Authority. There was no reply until he was expedited three months later by Supt Maggie HUNTER Chief Exec Officer to RUC Chief constable Sir Ronnie FLANAGAN. I objected in 99 to the deployment of Kent Chief constable on the Rosemary NELSON inquiry in Ulster when he was refusing his police authority call to report on MAISON's arrest of 1987 which had involved unlawful armed missions to Ulster and into the Republic of Ireland. The idea that Kent Chief constable could reassure the public of evenhandedness was absurd. He was already refusing to pursue related lines of inquiry in the Lawrence case and already refusing the call for inquiry and report re MAISON and paramilitary collusion/Gladio and unlawful armed missions in Ireland. STRAW, once expedited by RUC, issued a decision refusing to compel the inquiry in Kent. But Kent Chief constable was replaced on the Rosemary NELSON case. Having used his position as Home Secretary to suppress inquiries under the Unlawful Drilling Act 1819 STRAW went on eventually as Justice Minister to repeal the Act.

    (29) I ask you to report these facts in the European Parliament and to cause the Council of Ministers to call on UK for explanation as required by the 1990 resolution.

    Finally I have to wonder why Mark NOTTINGHAM would want to be associated with Thanet Labour party. Their former leader Richard NICHOLSON moved to full council that no Standards inquiry should be made into tory Cllr HAYTON. Bent as a corkscrew goes the English phrase.

    The Thanet Labour cllrs followed that party line. And hence their criticism of Mark for not following their line in other matters appears to me to be the highest compliment.


  11. Retired, you seriously do bore the pants off people. Can't you take up bowls or napping or something, please!?

  12. See Cllr. Nicholson has made another valued contribution to the Pfizer solution with his attack on the Tories over on Thanet Press Releases.

    Still nothing on the issue from 'THE LEADER' though. Makes one wonder what exactly leader means in this case. Here we have the biggest single disaster to hit the area in a very long time and the Leader of the Labour group, who represents a lot of voters locally, is too busy preserving his own miserable position, and going swimming, to give a stuff!

  13. Bluenote:
    I think your post just about sums up the quality we have at Cecil Square.

    I have seen mutings over on another blog that there may be a Thanet Futures party being created which could stand as a credible alternative to both of the current puppett shows.
    My only issue is that the real problem lies with the OFFICERS at TDC, it is these bunch of underclass that seemingly provide the weighted info to the councillors and cabinet alike. Take out ALL of the councillors AND the OFFICERS and lets start again, you would see an immediate set of results for the benefit of the whole of Thanet in return.
    Never before have we had to suffer such a self serving, openly defiant and thorouhghly hated council than we have today.
    WE are the decision makers, something long forgotten at Cecil Sq.

  14. Oh where oh where has our little Clive gone, oh where oh where can he be, he has lost his tongue no comments on Pfizer , no Leadership or support of the Council in trying to find a solution, no expessions ofthe effect on peoples lives, nothing, just nothing, but then that just about sums him up, "empty vessels make the most noise and nothing comes from nothing" there I have just written his appraisal, good bye Clive

  15. Anon 9:36, I agree we are, up to a point, the decision makers but only insofar as electing those who actually make them for us. They, in turn, can only operate within the constraints of law and available finance.

    We also do not choose the officers, they being recruited through regulated channels in accordance with employment law.

    At the moment we have some good councillors and some not so hot ones. People within wards need to question what their chosen one has done for them and if they are happy with that performance. Then vote accordingly.

    I do not agree with you about the total clear out of all councillors and officers, for that smacks of anarchy which invariably leads to chaos. Far better to retain the best of what we have mixed with some good new faces. Then support them and stop blaming them for things outside their control or remit.

  16. It has nothing to do with anarchy or a need to install chaos. The current staff list at Cecil Sq are solely responsible for the way that Thanet has gone down the pan over the last ten years.
    Yet whenever the elections are looming they wriggle their way back into influential positions where the status quo can be maintained.
    What is needed is totally new blood.

    I could hand pick twenty five people waiting at a bus stop who could make a better job of running our council and related local services. What we have at the moment is no more than a totally self serving bunch of has beens that have no credible reason for being in post, Thanet has suffered enough and now with the elections looming is the time for a root and branch clear out and a complete new beginning.

  17. Speaking as a Conservative, can I record a huge vote of thanks to the Labour Group of Thanet District Council. If I had a vote in who should be Leader of their group, I would immediately cast my vote for Clive, whose leadership style, integrity, and ability to present a clear policy position, all assist the Conservative cause no end. Ladies and Gentlemen, thank you.

    Anon 0131pm today - you state 'The current staff list at Cecil Sq are solely responsible for the way that Thanet has gone down the pan over the last ten years'. Solely responsible? If you believe you have a real argument to state here, either state it, publicly, or email it to me privately, and I will consider and respond. Otherwise, kindly desist - the statement is clearly nonsense, and cannot be supported in any way.

  18. Bluenote - Cllr mrs Hart is a cllr in her own right, and can use the title as listed. Whether it is wise to do so is another matter...

  19. Chris, I do not dispute Mrs. Hart's entitlement to the title but, simply wondered at Mr. Hart (whoops, sorry, Cllr. Hart) addressing his own wife as such in his twittering. It would have been sufficient in the case in point to say 'my wife.' Just smacks of pomposity.

  20. Anon 1:31, whilst you may find twenty five good people at a bus stop or even at Asda's check out, would they want to be councillors. Certainly if I was one of them I would most definitely decline your offer.

    Afraid you are talking rubbish with your total clear outs for such are as undesirable as they are unlikely. No doubt, for all his evident unsuitability to be leader of the Labour group, I am sure Clive Hart will be re-elected by the left wing faithful.

  21. Anon 7pm, I cannot believe even the Party faithful will put Hart back in Office, he is a liability, and he has not anwswered Mark Nottinghams questions, or indeed said anything at all, I suppose we should all be grateful not to have heard his ranting, Mark deserves answers to his questions or will Hart keep us all in the Dark!.

  22. Good point, 7:48, but is it us or him in the Dark? As to the party faithful, well you seem to have more faith in their selectivity and grasp than I. All too frequently they choose to believe the spin regardless of the credibility of the source. Iraq invasion, perchance?

  23. Have I missed something, Cllr Hart said"I simply refuse to be a Leader of a group with a Member who behaves in the manner of Mark Nottingham"
    So Cllr Hart havent seen your resignation yet and Mark Nottingham is still in your Group, excuse me when you said you refuse to be leader I took that to mean that you refuse to be leader.
    Cllr Nottingham has got enormous sympathy on all the Blogs as a good Councillor and Socialist, yet he is deselected, when will you answer Cllr nottinghams questions in an open letter, or are you hiding something, do your Group and Thanet a favour , RESIGN

  24. Wells and Bluenote, you both seek to occupy the moral high ground so often on here, and wag your Tory fingers at others for political point scoring. Yet your contributions here are childish and to an even lower level of behaviour than you often complain about from elsewhere. "Puerile hypocrites" is a label that comes to mind.

  25. Exited there's a thought.

    Wells, had you ever made a similar remark about your Tory colleagues, Ezekiel and Latchford, and how their behaviour - similar to the drunken louts who appear on our streets on a Friday night - may have benefited Labour, then you might be seen as even-handed.

    Sadly, like politicians from all sides, bad behaviour from your own is excused or hushed up; bad behaviour from your opponents becomes a matter for comment and exploitation. When this stops, the reputation of politicians may rise above the gutter.

  26. oh dear 01:00 can i suggest you look at the subject of this Blog, which is "Labour Leader Clive Hart stays put -despite pledge to resign"
    All the Bloggers are asking is will he honour his pledge and resign?, will he answer the very relevant questions put to him by Cllr Nottingham? and if the answer to both is that he will not, will he at least show some leadership by supporting the current administration in trying to create jobs fol;lowing Pfizer. Afterall is that something that we should expect,the attacks made in your blog show what a small minded person you must be, how about addressing the key subject CLLR CLIVE HART

  27. Anons 12:56 and 1:00 pm, nice try to divert attention by attacking the two identifiable Tory conributors to this debate, but their comments are more relevant to the discussion than your one which, frankly, is puerile.

    As the last comment points out, this is about Clive Hart, his undertaking to resign and his failure to do so. It is about the spat between Hart and Mark Nottingham and is of concern to many Labour supporters as well.

    Hart needs to respond properly to Nottingham's accusations, with evidence if he has any, and to stand down as leader until this is resolved.

    You attack Wells & Bluenote but they are but two of many critics of Hart's performance. If your concern is for your party I would suggest you query the ammunition Hart is handing to these opposition activists in the run up to local elections. It is him you should be attacking not them.

  28. 12:56

    Actually I think both Cllr. Wells and Bluenote have made reasonable contributions to this discussion and your response is very much motivated by colour prejudice - you hate blue people which might concern Harriett if she knew about it.

    There are many other comments far more disparaging of Hart than theirs so why have you not attacked them. Not sure of their colour perhaps!

    No, it is you that is out of order. Colour blind utterance comes to mind, if I might borrow your over used term. Or, who is that bigotted person, perhaps!

  29. Anons (recent), I agree there are questions for Clive Hart to answer. If someone says they are going to resign, they should - whether that is Clive Hart now, or Roger Latchford at the time of the last Election. And therein lies the point that either you fail to grasp or it suits your own political bias to ignore.

    It is hypocrisy. It is double-standards.

    It is about someone like Chris Wells hushing up, ignoring, window-dressing or whatever when things are bad in the Tory bit of the playground, yet piling on the bandwagon when Labour play-mates are in the mire. And yes, Labour folk do the same. When politicians start to say "yep, that's wrong, and it's in our bailiwick and the person should go (or whatever is appropriate", support for ;politicians may increase. I am minded of the TV ad a couple of years back which traded on a politician saying "I got it wrong, because I am incompetent".

    Sadly all you are doing is perpetuating that level of behaviour.

  30. 4:46 PM

    This issue is about Clive Hart and his much publicised resignation which didn't happen. Most people commenting have stuck to that subject.

    What Latchford, Disraeli, Thatcher or Pitt may have done before is irrelevant to this topic and it is you that is using the so called hypocrisy of some contributors as a Red Herring.

    Hart does have questions to answer, questions which are probably of more concern to Labour supporters, than to Wells or Bluenote. All the time he avoids the issue he feeds the opposition cause.

    If Hart had a shred of regard for his party, and the office he holds in it locally, he would honour his pledge to resign, at least until the issue is resolved. That he seeks to wriggle and squirm suggests his ego is more important than the political principles he claims to hold. Others hypocrisy does not excuse or justify his behaviour.

  31. I would not normally wish to comment, but believe me when I say that many Labour Party members are becoming sick of what's going on. Mark is not blameless, nor is Clive and others.

    Things will change

  32. Anon 6.49, you are simply playing the game and ignoring valid views. Fine, get on with it and enjoy yourself.

  33. Likewise 12:04 and are you not simply playing for the other side?

  34. Sack them all they are all a bunch of CON artists , remove the allowances and none of them would turn out !

  35. Quite clearly the last commentator has some fanciful idea of the size of the allowances paid to local councillors. They could get more in benefits for sitting at home like some of our resident 'do nothing but whinge' brigade.

  36. Defacto parasites running defacto parties who are ruining peoples lives shouldnt be paid anything.

    Allowances claimed by councillors account for a massive portion of the so-called council tax bill paid by honest hardworking people who have every right to whinge.

  37. Actually, Anon, according to the Council's website, the gross expenditure this year is planned to be around £119m. The link below takes you to how much was spent in 2009-2010 on Councillors' Allowances. Not quite a "massive proportion", but certainly worthy of scrutiny in value for money terms.

  38. Doesn't appear to include the back-handers and jollies ?

  39. If you have evidence of any why not produce it so we can all enjoy the clanging of metal doors or is it, as I suspect, just the usual unsubstantiated hearsay that graces these pages all too frequently.


  41. at last people of thanet are seeing just what sort of person cllr c hart is a big head and a glory hunter all ways in the press with what ever the story may be there is a saying that fits this councillor it goes all wind and water and nothing else

  42. Anon 7.01, I couldn't comment on the glory hunter and big head aspects but just the fact that he has not produced any facts or evidence to back up his self righteous smokescreen of indignation says it all. And for that, he needs to go.

  43. hart will never go ,how else will he get his face in the press yet his name neveris a leader and never will be one so go now hart and let the labvour start again

  44. A month later and we are still waiting for Clive to fulfil his pledge...

    For the sake of the party, Hart, Go Now