Remember the good old days, back in the 1980's when Looney profligate councils were those run by Labour zealots in London and grim cities up north.
Well some time ago things changed, and now here in Kent, I have the suspicion that somehow things have gone completely bonkers, in Kent governance, I wont bore you with a catalogue of past eccentricities, but suggest you take a gander at this story of typical KCC excess (my opinion) in which KM reports on Kent's latest top management appointment of " Shake up Manager " £165 PA
Its worth reminding ourselves that A) a new chief exec (MD in KCC speak) has not long be in post, B) there are blimin big cuts needed in spending, C) by any standards Kent has been extraordinarily inept in the treatment of staff from fat pay offs or as in this case, creating unnecessary management positions to manage organisational change surely the job of the Chief Exec
The sooner Eric Pickles sorts out Kent Tories, the better in my view. Remember its your money being frittered away and KCC still can't stop itself spending? I suggest you contact your local County Councillor and ask them what they are doing for £14,000 a year for few hours a month, meals, mileage expenses.
You have as much chance of Eric Pickles sorting Kent out as pigs flying , might as well face the truth
ReplyDeletethat history is repeating itself.
http://www.henrymakow.com/adolf_hitler_--_agent_of_zioni.html
Coming closer to home, I have just read - elsewhere - Mark Nottingham's allegation about free food and drink provided at full Thanet Council meetings. A simple question to the Tory Councillors (Moores, Wells and co.) who visit this site... Is it true?
ReplyDeleteShame to see Cllr Nottingham trying to throw 'mud'. Why should the facts spoil a good story?
ReplyDeleteThe Chairman of Council, on occasions provides for a few sarnies and a glass of wine or fruit juice out of her own purse, and all councillors are invited after most full councils. Shame upon Cllr Nottingham.
Where did Mark write that?
ReplyDeleteI found it on his 'From one end of kent blog.http://marknottingham.blogspot.com/
ReplyDeleteHe was actually reporting on a story from 2009 and that is made quite clear in the post.
Great to see that he has effected change and that disgraceful waste of money is no longer happening then Anon 09:50.
Well done Cllr Nottingham. From what I have been reading on this website its a shame your own party don't value your contribution to saving ratepayers money and have deselected you.
Like many other business, KCC employs consultants that are part of the "scratch my back and I will scratch yours" network. There is nearly always a personal connection and its just human nature that these associations come from old school, secret societies and more recent the CP.
ReplyDeletePublic bodies should not be like this and declaration of interests apply to councillors but dont seem to apply to paid senior staff.
We really can't help throwing away our money can we?!
ReplyDeleteIf that is true, Anon 09.50, then perhaps one of the Tory Councillors will visit this blog and confirm it. That will kill the story stone dead.
ReplyDeleteOver paid officials/councillors and this seems to be the reason why they are getting away with it.Are they really acting unlawfully and taking the mickey out of all of us?
ReplyDeletehttp://www.blogtalkradio.com/universalawareness/2011/03/01/the-truth-is-setting-us-free
Essentially anon of 0950 has it right. It is the Chairmans invitation and can be heard being issued at the start of most full council meetings. I have not seen the Labour members attend for some time, courtesy I believe of a row during the ezekiel era.I would admit to being ambivalent about it offers chances to settle any silliness that was part of the meeting, but can also be used as evidence of waste if desperate for things to attack.I don't know the annual cost must be in Chairmans accounts somewhere.
ReplyDeleteThank you Cllr Wells for that straight answer but Anon 09:50
ReplyDeleteDo I detect a little spin here...
so the 'out of her own purse' is actually out of an allowance which has been paid? and there was I thinking how generous, dipping into her own pennies....
Who was trying to make mud stick I wonder
Strange there was me thinking this post was about KCC but true to form people bring it back to there own issues and axes to grind. Tony I am amazed KCC are still spending money as if they have a tree at the bottom of the garden. To employ someone to shake things up surgests they know something is needed but WHY BRING IN A NEW PERSON. they really are bonkers
ReplyDelete1124 I can confirm
ReplyDeleteAnon 9.50 and Ken Gregory you are both wrong. 9.50 could have posted on my site for quick clarification but instead hijacks a thread to help their Tory friends.
ReplyDeleteI will write another post with more detail on this but my sources were senior Conservatives and the Chief Executive's office through Freedom of Information requests.
It is public money and shows that we are not all in it together. Conservative councillors clinging on to free perks while they cut jobs.
Plus ca change.
Aaaah the delicate stench of bullshit has reached my sinewy nostrils.
ReplyDeleteMr Never-done-a-real-job in his life, AKA Lived-my whole-life-off-the-taxpayer is crowing about saving £7.50 per council meeting and listing that as an achievement!
He's obviously never shopped on a budget!
People are losing their jobs and all he can talk about is sandwiches & cheap plonk.
Consider yourself Reaped!
http://onearseinkent.blogspot.com/
Mark, surely you are not suggesting that no Labour politicians ever have a free lunch or dip their hands in the expenses pot. Current events would tend to dispute this somewhat.
ReplyDeleteMark, I have attended meetings of things from governing bodies to charitable organisations, where beverages like tea and coffee are regularly supplied and sandwiches when a long session is anticipated. I am quite sure most reasonable people would not begrudge members of such refreshments.
ReplyDeleteIf, at the moment over some childish spat, Labour councillors do not partake of the offer then that should not be construed as evidence of a saintly attitude to public monies. Indeed, I know of one local Labour grandee who became known as 'Mr. Buffet' for his tendency to stuff his ample chops at every free feast going.
At the moment, Mark, you enjoy a lot of sympathy from both sides of the political divide over the way you have been treated. Do not spoil it now with childish point scoring alllegations over attitude to public money. Labour does not have a good record on preserving public funds and currently ex Labour MPs languish at HM pleasure for hands too deeply in the pot. Socialist no more than conservatives can claim the moral high ground here.
Since we have Ken's attention maybe he can answer the simple question. Does the chairperson pay from her own pocket or do we the tax payer foot the bill through the chairperson's office?
ReplyDeleteFor those that think this is a trivial matter councillors already get adequate allowances and paying for their own food and drink after work is what the general public have to do.
Over at KCC they spent £12,000 for free lunches for the 84 councillors at full council meetings and I dont think the chairman paid for this.
Obviously my comment about most reasonable people did not include 4:34 PM.
ReplyDeleteSorry, I agree with the earlier poster, I don't think its reasonable for the public purse to pay for food after meetings. Particularly when people are losing their jobs. In my job, nothing is provided, we take our own food and in this day and age we are grateful to have jobs.
ReplyDeleteSorry, but Councillors Wells and Gregory have not settled this. The simple question is are these refreshments paid for by the Chairperson out of her own private funds, or are they "official". Wells suggests the latter by referring to the cost appearing in the accounts. So please, Councillors, be clear.
ReplyDeleteFor the avoidance of doubt, does the Chairperson pay for these refreshments out of her own, non-taxpayer supplied pocket, are they paid for out of her basic allowances (to which she would be entitled anyway), or are they a separate cost? Why do they appear in the accounts?
Irrespective of who actually pays for the refreshments, Mark Nottingham's allegation appears to be that Conservative councillors partake of them whilst Labour ones do not.
ReplyDeleteIt is this claim to holiness that sticks in my throat especially having seen a few Labour MPs in court over their expenses recently.
Let him who casts the first stone, eh Mark?
The chairman of the council will inevitably have an allowance for costs and entertaining as do all the town mayors. I would assume it comes out of that as it does at KCC.most mayors will tell you they usually spend more than their entertaining allowance during their year in office. I would not be surprised if the chairmen were similarly placed burt having no interest in either position don't honestly know,
ReplyDeleteThe original post was raising the point of money being wasted. Especially when people are losing jobs. Creating pseudo jobs is a waste. Conservatives or any other party for that matter having free food which is unnecessary is a waste and an abuse of taxpayers hard earned money. Don't matter who reported it, people need to grow up, stop trying to point score and stop unnecessary spending. Maybe the chairs allowance should be cut so he/she thinks more carefully whether to splash out on this or that buffet. Police, social services, the NHS and education are having their budgets slashed so why should the council be wasting money in this way?
ReplyDeleteGood that the labour councillors stopped partaking in 2009, now is time for conservatives to do same and its stupid to talk about Labour politicians in court. you could just as easily talk about local conservatives. It all just tries to avoid this topic about money being wasted. Grow up people.
So it now seems clear - thank you Councillor Wells - that the refreshments are NOT provided "out of her own purse" but are paid for by the public. What Anon 09.50 offered and Councillor Gregory confirmed is wrong and, presumably, was intended to throw enquirers off the scent.
ReplyDeleteWhatever Councillor Nottingham's motives might be, clearly we are paying for these nibbles, and there is a "case to answer".
Oh dear. I wonder why smokescreens have been attempted?
Nottingham is getting a lot of flak at present. You'd expect it from the opposition but strangely it also seems to be coming from his own party.
ReplyDeleteAnon 09:50 The shame is on you for your weak efforts at hiding the truth
Thanet reaper, your post is just a pathetic collection of Innuendos and slurs.
All credit to Nottingham and Wells for their posts even though they are different parties - both are being respectful towards the readers of this blog and not treating us as idiots.
Then why are you getting so upset about it anon 9:49?
ReplyDeleteI don't even bother with pathetic things. Unless I can wind them up!
Nottingham wingeing about some curled up sarnies and wine in plastic cups is just trying to cover crapping on his own party and doing bugger-all for the people he's supposed to have been representing.
Can't believe you're so gullible, even for a mere mortal!
As I see it, members of the council get an allowance for performing their duties. If the Chairman of council chooses to spend some money on sandwiches and a glass of drink that ia their privilage! Much the same as Cllr Nottingham chooseing to spend some of his allowance to pay for web access to promote his political ideals, or to publiscise his currant 'spat' with Cllr Hart
ReplyDeleteSorry Councillor Gregory, but you endorsed a post saying that the Chair pays for the refreshments "out of her own purse". That clearly is untrue. She is using Council money and it is reported in the accounts. Your attempt to fan further smoke by another jibe at Councillor Nottingham does absolutely nothing for your credibility. I would suggest you quit now and leave comment to those who know and are prepared to answer factually.
ReplyDeletePerhaps instead of caveats such as "essentially" and "as I see it" there is someone who can just set out the truth.
ReplyDeleteI'll have a go at that 10:12; this archaic feudal system needs flushing down the drain and replacing with something more constitutional.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.thebcgroup.org.uk/content/british-constitution
10.11 am. oops, sorry you have missed the point. An allowance is like pay. it goes into someones bank account, along with things like salary cheques, pensions, winter fuel allowance and or , benefits. It is then up to the account holder how they spend it (beer, fags, special brew, or even perhaps child care and food)
ReplyDelete'SIMPLES'
Sorry Councillor Gregory, but that was not the sense or sentiment of 09.50's post nor of your endorsement of it. No point was missed.
ReplyDeleteSo what you are saying here is that the Chair pays for the refreshments out of her Councilllor's allowance - either her basic allowance or her special responsibilities allowance - and there is no separate top up from other Council funds.
Please confirm that this is absolutely the case - without caveats such as "as I see it" - and then explain why the refreshments feature, as Councillor Wells says they do, in "the accounts".
You have to give it to Ken he keeps on trying when clearly he does not understand that the refreshments are paid for out of the fund set aside for the chairperson to spend on entertaining and other out of pocket expenses encountered in her duties as the chairperson. Nothing to do with her allowance and additional allowance for being chairperson.
ReplyDeleteWhether this fund is intended to feed hungry councilors of TDC is another matter.
As an aside the council publishes details of bills over £500.
Its interesting that the Chief Exec has had a bill for £960 paid to Phileas Fogg Restaurant Ltd in January. I hope he wasnt taking out councillors or staff. But come to think of it who was he treating?
But, and it is a big one, do most people really care. There are some 130,000 plus people in Thanet, many of whom have internet access, yet probably no more than a couple of dozen of us regularly sparring on the blogs. Kind of puts things in perspective.
ReplyDeleteWith the politically motivated trying to score points over who paid for the tea bag and the conspiracy fraternity calling for the peasants to rise up, how many of our fellow residents really give a toss.
Sobering thought, not that I am suggesting we lay down our sabres for I enjoy the cut and thrust, but perhaps we should take on board that few are listening (reading if you prefer). That makes us pretty unimportant and unlikely to change the world, or even Thanet.
Not many people comment on Thanets blogs but rather a lot of people view them.
ReplyDeleteAs an example thatnetonline received 17,379 pageviews last month.
It only takes a few comments to flag up issues that concern all of Thanet. It may be teabags to Bluenote, but many hard pressed residents should not be taken for a ride by TDC excesses.
pigs & troughs spring to mind !!!
ReplyDeleteBluenote, your unprincipled defence of anything Tory is becoming really rather funny. You are becoming really rather funny. You say nothing about the points scored against Nottingham by Gregory, yet you quickly gird your loins and start defending those with whom you ally yourself politically and cry foul against others.
ReplyDeleteThe questions here are legitimate and have exposed an as yet unresolved disparity between the versions offered by two Tory Councillors. If a factual response can be offered to the questions, the matter can, and will - at least as far as I am concerned - rest there. There is no point scoring involved, but it suits your rather predictable "defender of the Right" stance to cry that there is.
As to what interests the people locally, your Party has majored on "waste" nationally. Even with your dark blue blinkers, you must see that it is fair to pursue the same issues locally. The fact that it does not suit you - because the facts don't look too good this far - to see this particular story pursued is, frankly, your personal problem.
If you want to make yourself useful, get on to one of your Tory Councillor friends and have them sort themselves out, then publish the FACTS.
A big part of the problem is that very few people even know of the existence of any Thanet Blogs...
ReplyDeleteAs you so rightly say that many people in Thanet are now on line, yet ask anyone what BIGNEWS MARGATE is and they wil just shrug their shoulders.
Now, if the local blogs were to widely advertise, maybe on the side of all the local busses etc... then you would see an enourmous rise in activity on the sites.
I know from personal experience that it's like finding a golden egg in a maze, but it's well worth finding once your there.
This council would be in for a real pasting if the electorate were to get together online and start discussing some of the current issues, at present they are drip fed news by the local papers who lets face it are always pulling the council line in fear of losing there valuable revenue.
So, in conclusion, ALL of the weblogs in Thanet need to get together and find away to alert the people of Thanet that you are here and listening, LONG LIVE THE REVOLUTION.
You are so right. I read several now and only found them by accident. I rarely post but its great information in general talking with mates. I know things about my local councillor I would never have known and I never realised how corrupt the party I would have naturally veered towards was. I often mention the blogs now.
ReplyDelete10:53 PM, I was really commenting on the limited contributions to blogs, something subsequently endorsed by another later post, but you leap on it as though it is some defence of the right.
ReplyDeleteYes, I make no secret of my right wing views but I frequently have criticised some actions by the present government, particularly on defence. You, however, choose to pick on those that offend your more lefty stance and sling around accusations of unprincipled defence. So be it. I just happen to think aircraft carriers, or the lack of them, are a bit more important than who bought the sarnies.
As to Mark Nottingham, I would have to admit to a bit of admiration for his re-appearance fighting Labour's corner after the way he has been treated by his local party. Still don't dig his politics though and there is a man, if you want to see bias, who can see no evil in socialism through his red specs.
Bluenote,
ReplyDeleteMy mother used to say 'Take care of the pennies and the pounds will take care of themselves' so the 'few sarnies', which everyone knows is a little bit of spin to trivialise the matter, do matter. Cutting out the waste could keep several people in jobs at 'the coal face level' making a difference to people in Thanet.
And your quote re Cllr Nottingham doesn't actually hold much ground either. If he is so biased and can 'see no evil in socialism through his red specs' then how come he whistle-blew about the corruption in his own party, knowing at the end of the day that it would do him no favours?
And still no answer, unfortunately, from those - ie the Tory Councillors - who are in a position to resolve this. What a shame.
ReplyDelete10:15, strangely enough my mother also said "take care of the pennies...." so maybe we are related!
ReplyDeleteI think we have flogged the question of who pays for the refreshments to death and I am none the wiser than you. Perhaps it would help though if Cllr. Nottingham could confirm, with proof, that there were no post meeting refreshments when Labour ran the TDC a few years back.
As to the motive behind Cllr. Nottingham's post highligting his tiff and deselection, I think you are being naive if you consider that anything but self career preservation. He has friends in higher places than Thanet, like Labour's NEC and Brussels, and I am sure he will be back. The current blogging and new site is all but of that campaign.
If the polls are to be believed we will soon find out again what happens under TDC.
ReplyDeleteSince most locals dont read blogs or local rags they will just vote according to whether they have jobs and how the cost of living has risen.
And may God preserve us all!
ReplyDeleteA couple of red herrings or smokescreen or whatever you prefer to call it to deflect off the topic about council spending and potential savings to tax payers money but still no answer...
ReplyDeleteIf they are red herrings, and they seem to have the potential to be both red and blue, surely they are the development of the discussion.
ReplyDeleteReading through them, one person seems to be responding to another so hardly a deliberate attempt to change the subject. Perhaps it is you 4:49 is obsessed with the thread that takes your fancy. After all, Tony kicked off with a post about Kent and it has somehow got switched to TDC. Which was the red, or blue, herring.
Bluenote, you have previously dismissed references to the political past as irrelevant and have made scornful remarks about any attempt to take discussion there. You are now trying to deflect attention away from the issue at hand by spurious references to the past Labour Administration in Thanet. You are a complete hypocrite.
ReplyDeleteThe question of refreshments after Thanet Council meetings has not been "done to death". It became an issue because two of your Tory Councillors issued conflicting stories. They have since remained silent rather than clear up the "confusion". One can only speculate about their motives and your rather crude attempt to curtail discussion.
Perhaps either Gregory or Wells would answer the very reasonable questions posed in this thread. The lack of an answer can only leave everyone with the conclusion that local taxpayers are paying for their elected representatives to eat and drink at the voters' expense. That is not what austerity means.
Like, wow, Booboo! OK to sell off the gold reserves for a song, raid the pension funds, open the immigration floodgates, launch into illegal wars and nigh on bankrupt the country but, hey, it pails into insignificance compared with having a free cup of tea.
ReplyDeleteDo you expect to be taken seriously or what, Anon 8:38?
Careful, 8:38, your red undies are showing.
ReplyDeleteIt has nothing to do with political orientation, Anon. Suggesting so is simply an attempt to distract readers from the issue.
ReplyDeleteThe Majority Party in Thanet - which happens to be Tory - appears to be funding refreshments out of the public purse. Questions have been raised about this. Very different accounts were offered by two Tory Councillors. Some contributors have asked for clarity. Simple.
It is small "beer" compared with what is going on elsewhere in the world, but it is small beer about which Coalition Ministers, and indeed local politicians, themselves make a great deal of noise. If you make that noise, then you need to be prepared to tell the truth, not lies, when challenged.
If it has nothing to do with party orientation, Anon, why have you not been so ferret like in pursuing the truth over the delection of Cllr. Mottingham, raised now many times. Similarly why are you not pressing Cllr. Hart for an explanation as to why he has failed to honour his pledge to resign.
ReplyDeleteI said before your red undies are showing. I was wrong. They are not just showing but you are waving them above your every utterance like a red flag.
Firstly, Anon, how do you know I have not been? It is impossible to distinguish between the many contributors who choose to be "anonymous" so, again, how do you know?
ReplyDeleteI happen to think - and have said - that the truth about the squabble in the Labour Party should be made public; that the public should not be treated like children. I also said that about Councillor Latchford's "standing down" at the last Council elections. Politicians should stop being so dishonest and machiavellian in their treatment of those who elect them.
As for "ferreting", all I have done here is ask reasonable questions, and then commented on the differential answers offered by Councillors Gregory and Wells. Nothing elaborate or intrusive. But neither of them have answered, of course.
4:24 PM Are you not the same anon who accused me of referring to the past yet here you go digging up the old Councillor Latchford case again. Why don't you go the whole hog and resurrect Jonathan Aitken, murdered kittens and drink driving. Go on you know you want to.
ReplyDeleteFrankly you are pathetic with your self righteous stance. I am right and you are left so let's be honest about it.
Bluenote. Point to you in that round on your last comment!
ReplyDeleteI am Left but agree that the labour squabble should be made public. And I am not the only Leftie either who thinks that.
The truth will out and those responsible for the cover-up will wish they'd never started playing their power games.
Please don't think we are all corrupt. There are bad apples in every party.
PS don't get carried away. I only concur with the wit of the last sentence on the rest I write 'cos you're wrong.
ReplyDeleteAnon, misinformed sometimes but I accept you are not corrupt. I think we probably agree that it would be good to see a more open approach and honesty in politics but, unlike you and I in our exchanges, the professional politicians never ever give straight answers to questions.
ReplyDeleteAt least the red undies comments have stirred nature boy out from his studio. Didn't Nat King Cole sing a song about him once?
Bluenote, you mustn't get so riled when your blatant hypocrisy is exposed so publicly. And "pathetic" is a rather tired insult - probably number 7 or 8 on the long list that comprises the Thanet Right's armoury.
ReplyDeleteBoring though it will be, I need to make you understand that you are the one who has carped over others' references to the past. I have no problem with the practice; I believe in learning from experience. When you then make historic references to support your arguments, it is entirely fair to point out the hypocrisy of that.
Now enough of our latest spat - as you say we will never agree on much. But two things. Stop fantasising over red undies, as it may lead you to nicking stuff from washing lines and we can do without another Tory scandal locally - you've listed some of them and we don't need more. And get your Tory Councillor chums to get off their arses and resolve the problem they have created over the Chairperson's cheese and crackers and wine and beer.
Well, Anon, how this highlights the problem of anonymous postings, one nevers knows who one is talking to and there was me naively thinking we had reached some accord. Evidently another Anon!
ReplyDeleteFor the record, I admit to being on the right of politics but that does not make me a Tory nor do I have Tory councillor friends I can approach about your tea bag answers.
As to the red undies, well that was not started by me, yet another Anon, and seems to have turned into a bit of humour (much needed in our drab bankrupt world) by the arrival of Margate's music man and naturist.
Try to lighten up a bit, it is only chatter on a blogspot.
You really are an old tease Bluenote, always throwing back the points that are made to you in the first place. But if that - plus red underwear - is what passes for humour in the Blue House, and is what turns you on...who am I to curb your enjoyment. Have fun.
ReplyDeleteAnd hey look, we've contributed to Tony having a 60+ strand. That will probably make the ever-competitive Westgate Wonder chew on his earflaps with envy next time he's up in his flying machine taking pictures of people's back gardens.
ReplyDeleteNottingham has posted a detailed breakdown here
ReplyDeletehttp://marknottingham.blogspot.com/2011/03/should-thanet-councillors-have-free.html
Wells half right, Gregory wrong.
You have to credit Nottingham on this one.
Not really and if all Nottingham has to attack the present administration over is their refreshments that's not much of an opposition. Be more interesting if he could tell us what Labour would do for Thanet if elected. Don't hold your breath on that one.
ReplyDeleteThe issue is not just the - yes very small - expenditure involved, but the Tories attempts to cover it up, to mislead bloggers, and to run away and hide when they are caught out.
ReplyDeleteLabour have recently shown themselves to be of questionable merit as a potential Majority Party on the Council. But by God the Tories definitely are unfit.
The Clive Hart resignation saga just goes on and on...like this thread.
ReplyDeleteHey, I'm comment number 67!
Even Clive has only notched up 40 (days) since he pledged to resign back in January!
So 9:03, what is your solution? To replace one unfit administration with another!
ReplyDeleteDo you seriously think that a leader who has clung on despite pledging to resign, who has consistently failed to come clean and provide answers and who, quite evidently, does not have the confidence of many of his own party, is really fit to lead Thanet council.
As to the sandwiches, Cllr. Wells have given an answer over on One End of Kent. Maybe that is not of your liking but it is an answer. More than one ever gets from Hart and Poole.
Anon 09.17, Wells has provided further thoughts. Nothing more. He has not answered the questions nor provided clarity. It clearly does not suit the Tory Party's purpose to do so.
ReplyDeleteHe and "Gregory the Misleader" remain in hiding.
As to the local political solution, I have said quite clearly that neither the Labour Party nor the Tory Party have demonstrated a fitness to run Thanet - in my personal view. My own preference would be Labour, but I agree that they have a great deal to sort before they could plausibly "run the show". The only alternative - perhaps a completely fresh approach with more independents. But that is an unlikely scenario, especially with so little time until the elections.
Anon 1:09
ReplyDeleteChuck out the corrupt core of local labour and then it might have a chance.
And although I'm probably going to get flamed for saying this, I'd bring back Mark Nottingham.
Ok, the Tories don't like him 'cos he's Labour and has a few brain cells which makes him dangerous and the Labour bods who hold the power don't like him because he whisteblew on their crooked ways but at least he had the guts to stand up and be counted and genuinely works for the good of the local people. No one can honestly dispute how hard he worked for Northwood residents.
Evidently Hart did and the party machine favoured the elusive Kay Dark. According to Poole there are also a string of complaints about Nottingham and, although we are not told what they are, one can only assume they are pretty serious if they justify deselection of a hardworking councillor.
ReplyDeleteSee over on Thanet Life a mini gunpowder plot by a Labour group has been sort of exposed. Perhaps we could change the electoral system whereby all the candidates sit a MENSA type IQ test and the highest scorers form the council. That should sort out a few and the one with the highest IQ becomes the leader.
Confused in Thanet...
ReplyDeleteJust to make you more confused, There were no complaints about Mark or his conduct at the time he was deselected.
The complaints have all come recently I believe because he has exposed the lazy elusive Ms Dark
Poole wants you to think and assume the complaints are serious. I doubt they 'justify' anything. It would be easy for Clive and Alan's chums to concoct a load of complaints. further smearing of a good councillor by his jealous rivals more like. Mud sticks and they are certainly working hard to try and get it to do so.
ReplyDeleteAnons 4:13 & 4;24 you have lost me. If there were no complaints about Cllr. Nottingham before his deselection why was he so deselected? Was he ambitous and seen as a threat to the leadership? All something of a mystery.
ReplyDeleteAnon 4.34
ReplyDeleteNottingham never had ambition in Thanet from what I've heard.
But there are 2 stories that might fit. One many people were asking Nottingham to stand as Labour's Parliamentary candidate (I know several who did so that part is true). Hart wants to be a MP.
Second Nottingham had said he would like to be a County Councillor. Poole wants to be that again even though he's in his 70s.
deselecting Nottingham and making him look a bad councillor suited both Poole and Hart for their own ambitions.
A nasty busines politics.
Whichever way you look at it there was skullduggery.
I can second 06.15
ReplyDeleteKay Dark found herself as one of four councillors standing for reelction in Northwood Ward. Mark Nottingham has complained about her laziness in the past. To make sure she was re-selected for the next term she needed to smear someone else so she got the votes. Mark was the obvious choice as he was a thorn in her side.
I hear what you say about Ms Dark needing to smear someone but she still had to have support in high places to pull it off. After all, Mark Notingham by all accounts was the committed one who had local support and she was the absentee councillor.
ReplyDeleteI too have heard the stories of a clash of parliamentary candidate ambitions and reckon that is much more likely to be the truth behind this situation. Pretty shabby whatever and certainly deserving of a bit more explanation than has been forthcoming from the leader and his deputy.
Whats needed is real people in positions of power like this man not the elitist puppets who skirt around issues and are only after a free lunch.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RP4RlHNBcYs
And yes this blog is read widely probably far more widely than some would like.
Thanet truth seekers not really for those only interested in tea & biscuits
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9YeCBSrWVVA&feature=player_embedded#at=518
9:15 PM It would probably be even more widely read if you didn't keep popping up and boring the panys of everyone.
ReplyDeleteI see that the Tory "Doctor" of spin has rallied his supporters with lots of predictable snorting and finger-pointing over on Thanet Life. The Tory Party has lambasted this sort of waste elsewhere, and has successfully demonised large arts of the public sector over costs since forming a Government last year. And much of their onslaught has related to small items of expenditure.
ReplyDeleteHere, they have been caught out over a similar small item expenditure locally, but the defences have gone up and they are arguing that it should fall "below the radar" because it is insignificant compared with bigger issues floating around. That is just blatant hypocrisy which would be laughable if it was not such a serious - and sickening - feature of their policy and strategy.
What is even worse, but is quietly being swept under the carpet by Tories Wells,, Moores, and Gregory, is the attempt that has been made on local blogs to mislead readers by the suggestion that all of these refreshments have been paid out of the Chairperson's own purse. That was clearly a lie intended to throw everyone off the scent. It was a lie specifically supported by Councillor Gregory, and it was a lie ignored by Councillors Moores and Wells, the latter running and hiding as he usually does.
Whatever mud is travelling around local Labour at the moment - and there clearly is some - is also evident in the Blue pool.
Nice try 8:39 but it doesn't wash. It is evident that the refreshments are funded out of the chairman's allowance, all councillors are invited to participate and Labour did not seek amendment to that allowance in the budget debate.
ReplyDeleteWhere is your problem or is this simply something you perpetuate to divert attention from the Hart saga.
Anon, this strand was originally nothing to do with Labour's mess locally. It was to do with waste at KCC which extended to waste at TDC. So I am not trying to divert attention from the strand or indeed the Hart saga. I have no information on that and can add nothing of value.
ReplyDeleteThe point you are missing is that the refreshments are not, it seems, paid for out of the goodness of the Chair's heart and out of her personal allowance. She has an additional refreshments allowance, which is apparently reported on in the accounts - if you believe Councillor Wells. Councillor Gregory - who may have been shooting his mouth off prematurely - says something completely different. Councillor Moores's take on it seems broadly to align with Wells.
So you have the costs covered out of a discrete bit of the public purse despite all of the Tory Party's war on this sort of thing, and you have Councillor Gregory endorsing a lie to divert people from the issue. Bit niffy in my view, but if you are ok with all of that, great.
All very fine but it still does not explain, if it really is a bit niffy, why the Labour group did not seek an amendment on this cost in the budget.
ReplyDeleteIt would seem that only Cllr. Nottingham is pushing it which tends to make one think it is more about his personal campaign than anything else. Hence the association with Hart.
Personally I feel the newspaper cutting headline on One End Of Kent 'STORM IN A TEACUP' says it all.
Anon 1.56
ReplyDeleteActually it is not Cllr Nottingham who has been 'pushing it'
I've been reading around various websites. There are those who have an interest in deflecting criticism on to him from Conservative and Labourists groups alike...
He put a post up on his one end of kent blog to highlight his council work on a new website. A picture of previous media coverage was included comparing council waste to how that money could be used for facilities for kids in his Northwood Ward which he has been campaigning for.
Obviously not well received by conservatives as it touched a raw nerve or by Local Labour as its embarrassing for them that they are getting rid of a good councillor in favour of one who has been shown to do very little (a bit of old boy network there methinks)
On this Bignews website, Cllr Nottingham was asked to explain his justification for the statements he made on his website.
He did so thoroughly using facts and FOI results not innuendos.
If having the decency to back-up his original statement and replying to another poster is considered as 'pushing it' then he is guilty as charged.
The 'storm in a teacup' is exactly what people here and on other websites have made this story. If Gregory et al had just clearly answered the questions which they were asked we could have laid this to rest yonks ago.
I do lean to the left party politically but anyone with a bit of commonsense and an open mind can see Cllr nottingham is just being used as a scapegoat to muddy the waters
'Any one with a grain of commonsense' would be able to see that Councillor Nottingham is primarily promoting his own image as a hard working councillor in order to highlight the injustice of his deselection.
ReplyDeleteIt is Labour supporters, loyal to the local party leadership, that are seeking to attack and discredit him. Conservatives, in the main, are keeping out of it being more than happy to let the other side tear themselves apart.
A few of our local mischief makers are also enjoying the situation and sticking their oar in. All of which poses the question about whose best interests is Mark serving by not maintaining a dignified silence. It certainly is not that of the Labour party in Thanet.
Anon I agree that the Labour Party locally needs little help from outside its ranks to perpetuate these differences - and damage its electoral prospects. They are not treating the electorate with the respect they should.
ReplyDeleteBut you are wrong to say that the Tories are standing silently by and letting it happen. Many clearly Tory supporters are keeping the subject alive and egging on either one "side" or the other. And Councillor Moores is intent on keeping the fire stoked with his waspish and meddlesome interventions. Of course that's politics, but when he is on the sharp end of that sort of behaviour, be screams "foul" and starts bandying around threats of legal action and shouts of rules being broken.
Not quite as you present it.
Hmm,
ReplyDeleteI think Mark Nottingham has been very 'dignified' as you put it considering how the local party has behaved. Yes, he's done a website to show the work he has been doing as a councillor. Why not?
Would you stand aside and allow the smears against your reputation to go unchallenged? I'm doubtful that you would.
I'd love to see a website of the work that Kay dark has done!
And it is the corrupt core of his own group who should be ashamed. Clive Hart, Alan Poole, Michelle Fenner. Keeping a lazy councillor because she is a 'yes person' and an old friend even though she does no work for her own ward is wrong. Allowing someone to lie and distort the selection process and then 'exonerating' her is wrong. Claiming that a 'thorough' investigation was completed when you know that it was one-sided, is wrong.
Mark Nottingham has done a dignified protest and has not slagged his colleagues off in public. I'm sure he could spill a lot of beans if he chose to.
Biggest shame is that this Blog post was not called 'Thanet Council Bonkers or What?'
ReplyDeleteOne of the few brains on the local council has been deselected 'cos he is a challenge to the aspirations of those in his own party
And those in power prefer to keep an ineffective and dare I say dishonest councillor because she is no challenge to them?!
Not only that, they are prepared to keep trying to cover up the obvious errors of judgement which they have made, apparently oblivious to the damage they are doing to themselves?
Now that is Bonkers
I see someone attacks Simon Moores and accuses him of stoking the fires of the Labour split. If you actually take the trouble to browse through his blog it mainly comprises snippets of local news and information on some council issues like Hartsdown Park and the caves.
ReplyDeleteIn all fairness, like most of us outside the local Labour party, he probably mainly stands back in amazement at the madness of it all. What credible political party would engage in this kind of infighting in the run up to an election. Surely they can bury the hatchet for a while and then scalp each other, if they wish, afterwards.
Bother, I posted a comment saying exactly what I thought of Clive Hart and Alan Pooles actions on 'One End of Kent' and Nottingham didn't post it! Have to say I'm impressed that he is still faithful to the local group and holding back. More fool him.
ReplyDeleteMark my words (excuse the pun),
As much as local Labour would like, this will not be buried in a hurry. Someone posted on another thread that
'The Truth will out'.
and I'm sure it will as more and more of the picture is being exposed.
There's enough story here to cover the whole pre-election period and Labour will be mopping up the damage for a long time after.
Interested that someone else has also found Nottingham very choosy about what he publishes. He has in the past claimed not to receive items (mysteriously) or to have not published others because they constitute libel even though they name no one.
ReplyDeleteI think he is a lot more devious than he cracks on.
Anon 07:45
ReplyDeleteActually thinking about it, he might have a life -we don't all check our internet hourly do we
;-)
Yes it could be used by Hart and his supporters to claim that he was being libelious and with so many backstabbers around He can't be too careful. If he doesn't post it by tomorrow I'll post it here and see how quickly it gets deleted!
Not sure where you get the 'devious' bit from. They're the sort of slurs which reveal your true colours.
Is Mr Pickles in a pickle ?
ReplyDeleteGovernment could abolish all council social care duties
http://www.communitycare.co.uk/Articles/2011/03/10/116434/Government-could-abolish-all-council-social-care-duties.htm
Pity he wasn’t so vocal about the child abuse happening in the Kendal Childrens Home scandal in Kent ?
(MP of Teresa Cooper www.no2abuse)
[Ignore child abuse, pretend you used to be a solicitor, and be promoted within the Conservative Party , somethings never change ?]
Anon 8:13, the one with a life who has to be wary of back stabbers, is of course Mark Nottingham in covert mode.
ReplyDeleteNow do you understand what I mean by devious. Having said that, I do appreciate you have a nasty battle on your hands and how you fight it is up to you.
As to my colours, well it would seem, at the moment, that you are more likely to be attacked by the reds than the blues so you choose.
Anon 12:40 were you an abused child for you certainly seem obsessive about it. Not that I would suggest that such should ever be tolerated but somehow you pop up with your allegations regardless of the thread of the debate.
ReplyDeleteYou are not, by any chance, the same person who leaps in, invariably out of context, on the Deal Bombing, perjury by councillors and illegal cadet ranges.
Whatever lights your fuse I guess, for I only really chipped in to try to help get the comments on this post to the century.
That is indeed an interesting point 8:13 for how can you post something here, that was offered to but not published on One End of Kent, if you are not Mark Nottingham. How else would you have access to it or know its content as you imply.
ReplyDeleteThink I agree with the other Anon that you are being a bit devious.
Also not very bright if he thinks we cannot see through his underhand tactics.
ReplyDeleteBill Richards(?)
ReplyDeleteyou said:
'how can you post something here, that was offered to but not published on One End of Kent, if you are not Mark Nottingham. How else would you have access to it or know its content as you imply.'
Sorry don't mean to insult you but of course I could repost the comment if I choose to because I know what I wrote last time!
And I am certainly not Mark Nottingham which is exactly the point I was making... Certain people are determined to slur Nottingham. and as for 'devious', I think the boot is on the other foot trying to imply I am someone I am not to make Cllr Nottingham look bad
Anon 5:12 not so bright either!
anon 12.40 & 1.44
ReplyDeletenot having read the whole thread, I cant help but wonder if this is why Kent has been run for many years by the Tories
a simple google search of Kent forced adoptions brings up shocking results and Brian Gerrish is the man who is doing a good job exposing it
crooked mps,councillors and officers can never be trusted to supply honest services no matter what party they allude too especially when they all work together
Nice try 5:17, but it doesn't wash.
ReplyDeleteYou are too aggressive towards other commentators to be the victim of mistaken identity. The problem of posting anonymously, but, then, that is something I am about to do myself.
Also, if I might give you a word of advice, I think you are out of your league trying to take on some of the contributors to this blog.
Anon 7:11
ReplyDeleteI see you are up to your old trick of responding to one of your own earlier comments at 12:40 to make out there are more than one of you. Please credit us all with a brain cell or two.
anon 7.37pm
ReplyDeleteNice try !
Some have far more brain cells than others, unfortunately you appear in the latter camp with the rest of the brotherhood "KENT COUNCIL BONKERS OR WHAT?"
anon. 7.17
ReplyDeleteCould say the say for you
'Since the parasite is smaller and weaker than the host, he must control it principally by guile. And because he is out-numbered, he must depend upon active agents among the chosen few who operate via "chatham house rules"'
11:26 PM What exactly does "Could say the say for you" mean. Reckon you should top up your distilled water for the cells are malfunctioning again.
ReplyDelete"He who becomes overly repetitious has lost the ability to think across the wider spectrum."
ReplyDeleteAnon 11:26
ReplyDeleteAs the real target of your comment, do you mean the Royal Institute of International Affairs or the big red brick one up Chatham Street. I know little or nothing about the former, or its rules, but did spend some seven years in the latter. Did not realise the old school was training agents!
Everybody knows where there's politicians lies & corruption follow.
ReplyDeleteHow strange and sad to ask if someone was abused as a child because they pointed out institutionalised child abuse in Kent paid for from council taxes. It is obvious many children were abused but why did Mr Pickles do nothing that is the question that should be asked?
If you look at pickles history dating back to the late 70's he is not a man of honesty or integrity and why pass himself off as a solicitor when he wasnt qualified how many other scandals has he been involved in ? Seems to have been one of maggy thatchers little "pets" why was he suddenly promoted to his high position within the conservatives after it was highlighted to every mp that he had ignored Teresa Cooper a victim of Kendal House Children Home in Kent? Many get promoted for ignoring abuse just like hodge and others, seems to be the way to go. The more an MP ignores abuse the more they are promoted
ReplyDeleteWhy don't you every answer a question you boring old f**t instead just droning on with your endless and unsubstaiated rants. I am not normally of the hanging and flogging fraternity but I could make an exception in your case.
ReplyDeleteNot sure who you are directing your question to, but so could I in this case, it does look increasing like the Tories are full of 'old farts' !
ReplyDelete“I am not normally of the hanging and flogging fraternity but I could make an exception in your case.”
The Tories are clearly all off their rockers !!!
Sex offenders including paedophiles should be allowed to adopt, Theresa May told
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/conservative/8201521/Sex-offenders-including-paedophiles-should-be-allowed-to-adopt-Theresa-May-told.html?sms_ss=facebook&at_xt=4d7ce55544162276%2C0
"Rules which bar sex offenders from working with children are ‘unfair’ and even convicted paedophiles should have the right to adopt, a leading legal academic has said."
How much abuse of power is actually being carried out in Kent under the Tories rule???
Totally unsubstantiated rubbish 21:00 which you trundle out with monotonous regularity. Registered sex offenders cannot adopt and no one, Tories or any one else for that matter, is proposing they should. Just because some academic fruit cake writes that they should be able to does not mean it is going to happen.
ReplyDeleteTest -
ReplyDeleteTony I have been trying to post on this site with no success since yesterday.
Posts appear in comments section then disappear again!
Part 1 (having trouble posting longer post!)
ReplyDeleteAnon 7:17
Actually when I first started commenting on blogs I didn't post anonymously but soon realised that that's what you need to do because of the way Labour and Conservative supporters would have an abusive go at you just because you didn't agree with their particular point of view at that time. It went beyond debate.
I don't think I am aggressive but being anonymous does mean you can be bolder. I actually apologised to Bill Richards when I disagreed with him as I obviously knew it was ridiculous to say I was Mark Nottingham.
Of course words only convey 7% of communication, you can't see my body language or voice tone or you would know I did not intend to post aggressively.
Part 2
ReplyDeleteAt times I have previously agreed with Bill Richards who I now realise is very much Conservative having seen what he's like on Thanet Life. I have also agreed with Blunote, another Conservative.
I posted:
Sat Mar 05, 10:18:00 AM and Mon Mar 07, 10:15:00 AM
which is where I began following this thread.
I actually started out here just interested in the waste of Thanet council money as my job is on the line but then realised there is a lot of skullduggery going on which is not anything to do with budgets. Yes, having read it all in various places I have come down on Cllr Nottinghams side as I don't see any evidence that stands up not to.
I shall give up on this thread having revealed my colours, whatever they are, as I'll probably be shot down again now.
Part 3
ReplyDeleteIf you (collectively not specifically you anon 7:17) want more local people to post on these threads and blogs perhaps you could encourage open debate without making accusations which leave people little option but to give up posting.
Obviously I am not going to be in the same 'league' as you said or have the political knowledge of people that do politics for jobs but surely that doesn't mean my opinion is totally invalid.
And with that, I shall give up on this thread which I have enjoyed contributing to,
Thank you for the opportunity Tony.
10:36
ReplyDeleteLook, far be it for me to say who can or cannot post on this blog site for that is entirely at Tony's discretion. You post to your heart's content if you wish, but all I object to is unsubstantiated accusations.
Sometimes you seem to rely on something you have read, treating it as gosbel. What you must appreciate is that for every expert who supports something there is another one who disagrees.
In the main, most things are opinion.
If you write 'in my opinion' then, whilst folk will agree or disagree according to taste, that is fine. However, you have shown a tendency to claim factual accuracy when clearly that is not the case.
Typically, there is absolutely no evidence to support your earlier claim that promotion within the Conservative party is in any way related to ignoring child abuse.
There has been abuse in homes all around our land, but it was not confined to the term of office of any one political party.
Hope to have some good debates with you in future.
09:55
ReplyDeleteOh dear, having said I wouldn't post again, I'm afraid I need to clarify...
I posted PART 1,2,3 in response to the people who were accusing me of being Cllr Nottingham.
Sorry if I have confused you but I am definitely not the anon who posted something about conservatives or child abuse.
Nothing which I said was unsubstantiated.
Please re-read my post referring back to 'Sat Mar 12, 07:19'
After this post there was a flurry of accusations as I was 'attacked' (only word which really describes it) on this blog by anti Nottingham supporters trying to make out I was Cllr Nottingham and basically calling me 'devious'. Bizarre really.
I had trouble posting the long post on this site (which is why I had to split it into 3) and now realise that was probably the same reason my post didn't get through to 'One end of Kent'!
As I said I noticed there are some people who seem to want to twist everything to anti-Nottingham. All very bizarre really.
More deflection away from the abuse of children within a KENT childrens home, and why exactly did Kent Police do nothing ???
ReplyDeleteWhy didnt we hear about this years ago and how many children have suffered or are still suffering as a result???
Fraternal organisations operating in secret may be ???
Too many secrets and none of the transparency Eric Pickles has been bleating on about !
Well, as so often, the resident nutter killed off that debate, but not before a whopping century plus.
ReplyDelete