Friday, August 19, 2011

New crowd pleaser for Labour–Animal Welfare?

Labour crowd pleaserAs far as I can tell, perhaps the only thing that unites Thanet councillors apart from drawing expenses is the distaste and antipathy they share over the recent export of animals from the port of Ramsgate.

It’s good to see that people are prepared to stand up and be counted like Labour bod, Cllr Ian Driver to organise and protest a cause. However part of being human is our individualism, we can opt in or opt out of being part of the herd.

I have firm views and priorities, I pursue my own interest via this blog, which is, for me an effective way for me to contribute to society (as distinct from Cameron’s biggun).

So, I’m taking a gander at this weeks Thanet Times, and there on the front is a report of last weekends protest, against live exports, with a photo of  Cllr Ian Driver, obviously whispering gently into his microphone, apparently he mentioned that neither council leader Bob Bayford, nor Laura Sandys were present, to which the crowd cried shame.

We’ll here’s where I’m going with this, it seems a shame, that Cllr Driver thought it necessary, apparently to mention the absences, do you or I give a toss whether Labour Leader Clive Hart or Ramsgate Mayor were present no of course not. Suffice it to say, enough people were encouraged to express their objections to this trade, which makes us a whole more human.

What worries me, is this is a very emotive issue and some animal rights campaigners have forgotten humanity and resorted to extremes, which might be a reason, even those opposed, might be reticent to attend, what could develop into a rabblerousing event.

Cllr Bayford has written to the Government, asking for a maximum journey time for animals, should we castigate Cllr Driver or Hart etc if they haven’t done the same.

I’ve never met Ian Driver so I don’t know but maybe he’s better at motiving crowds than corresponding with government. Fortunately for all we don’t live in some Stalinist world so we don’t have to do what doesn’t suit us. Lets just hope Labour “activist” aren’t just playing to the gallery in a cheap  “I’m more concerned than you” sort of way.

63 comments:

  1. As always with Labour this is more about political posturing than animal welfare. If it were not there would have been no reason for Cllr. Driver drawing attention to the absence of well known local Tories.

    It is the same with Manston and night flights. With East Kent now having an enterprise zone, a flourishing regional airport becomes even more important but not so to Labour. For them it is all about gathering up the votes of the anti-Manston brigade and sod the jobs or local facilities to businesses considering moving here.

    But then, that is Labour. Turn us all into benefit dependent voters who are afraid to vote other than Labour in case our income gets cut. The only trouble is, the purse has a nasty habit of becoming empty in the socialist world and what then? They never did work that one out which is why they offer a load of Balls as our potential financial saviour!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Tony I have to admit to being in a difficult position over this one, particularly because I have children, this is something that means we consume large quantities of cows milk.

    Obviously a by product of milk production is a huge amount of unwanted calves, and with very little demand for veal in the UK and not much in the way of a UK veal industry I don’t really see what the alternatives are.

    At the moment I am still putting milk in my cup of tea and still keeping my head down, mostly hoping that the journey times can be reduced without generating the £ pinta.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Did Clive Hart turn up?

    It's not like him to turn down a photo opportunity

    ReplyDelete
  4. Difficult position Michael? I love wiener schnitzel how do you think I feel.

    Yes I feel sorry for those Veal calves particularly the ones in dutch farms in boxes.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Clive is still only learning... from Iris, who turns up to the opening of an envelope

    ReplyDelete
  6. I am sure Cllr Driver has his own agenda!!

    Laurence Davies

    ReplyDelete
  7. Cllr. Driver's agenda is to become the new Stalin of the Thanet Socialist Republic.

    ReplyDelete
  8. The knocks about who was and wasnt there is typical for local politics and will continue for a long time whether we like it or not.

    I think its good to see Cllr Driver pushing hard on something he clearly cares deeply about. His background is a matter of public record and Im sure the commenters have read it too. I very much disagree with his views, but if thats how he feels, then so be it.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Cllr Driver is standing up in public & speaking about what he believes in; several people (or the same person?) constantly write snidy anonymous remarks about people.

    Guess who I admire the most?

    ReplyDelete
  10. no doubt its me Peter, I don't think anyone need apologies for being a carnivore, its how we look after animals that counts.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I appreciate your point about not making an issue over who was NOT there, but I should have thought Roger Gale would have been saying something about this trade, given his very public stance on animal welfare issues. Does anyone know what he thinks about it?

    ReplyDelete
  12. Oh how sweetly naivé some commentators really are. Do they really think Ian Driver gives a toss about animal welfare? It is public posturing in the same way that other politicians are going to be tough on crime.

    Before the May elections we had demonstrations against the Broadstairs Community Centre and Thanet Earth with signature gathering and noisy meetings. Once the election was over it was all replaced by a deafening silence.

    Animal transport is just the new scene for drawing attention to the party cause - nothing more or less.

    As for Peter, I don't suppose many commentators are bothered who you admire, but don't give your admiration lightly to the wolf in sheep's clothing (or should that be calf's?)!!

    ReplyDelete
  13. Thanks Anonymous, I always suspected that Gale doesn't give a toss about animal welfare either. Guess it's just a possible vote-catcher for him too.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Of COURSE politicians jump onto causes for publicity (& not just Labour either), but the way I see it is we can use THEM for our own needs too. I'm sure animal welfare groups are very pleased to have Ian on their side, whether his support is genuine or not (& I don't know enough about him to comment either way).

    ReplyDelete
  15. Why don't you Two Anons actually ask Roger Gale what he thinks? He's a very approachable & nice man.

    ReplyDelete
  16. The comparisons with Stalin are appropriate given Comrade Driver's political persuasion. And this from a man of the people who lives in a nice posh house in Broadstairs - who pays for that?
    His presence probably encouraged the Vegan Liberation Front to launch their attack on the hot-dog seller during the protest march - gives you an idea of the sort of society that he and they would like us to live in.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Isn't interesting that councillor public servants at least pretend to 'care' about the welfare of animals yet clearly couldn't give a dam about children, sickening really.

    'let him who is deceived be deceived' - we are not stupid

    ReplyDelete
  18. Good idea Peter

    Dear Mr Gale

    I am Anon. Would you reply to my anon address re-vealing (see what I did there) your position vis a vis animal exports.

    Yours snidely

    Anon

    ReplyDelete
  19. Anonymous organic vegetarian cowardSunday, 21 August 2011 at 09:29:00 BST

    Michael nails it precisely.

    The HYPOCRITES who enjoy cheap supermarket grub are blissfully ignorant of the suffering of the animals, struggling farmers and low paid employees who supply that grub.

    However, the last laugh is on them because that cheap supermarket grub is slowly killing them and making them dismally stupid.

    ReplyDelete
  20. I cant understand what the uproar is the transport is legal full stop. You dont stop Michael from opening his shop because you dont read books or stop Tony from going to work because you dont use the trains. Farmers sell livestock it is there career choice and now people are trying to stop them earning their living. Dont blockade the port campaign against it at Government debate the issue

    ReplyDelete
  21. Because animals are suffering unnecessarily Don, I would've thought as a so-called Christian it wouldn't be so difficult for you to understand...and just because something is legal doesn't make it right (it used to be legal to discriminate against disabled people, was that OK?).

    ReplyDelete
  22. Retired taking the moral high ground... wow!

    ReplyDelete
  23. The answer is really simple and would stop the Conservative TDC supporters club etc, (snide) remarks.

    This country can introduce more Abattoirs of the high tech variety at the new Enterprise Zone or alternatively at Manston Airport - after removing of course...Infratil!!

    Sniding off now...ooops Signing off

    The real Malcolm

    ReplyDelete
  24. Peter we have the highest level of care for animals in the westernn world and farmers are not going to endanger their crops be it chherries or cattle, it results in NO income. The levels of distances traveled,breaks etc are set by Government departments and if you want them changed lobby Government dont endanger a Farmers livlihood by silly protest. By you same concern cattle transport within the UK should be stopped and we should go back to Drovers taking cattle to market.

    ReplyDelete
  25. I care more about animal welfare than farmers livelyhoods. Let them grow fruit & veg instead.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Peter
    What a silly statement and not becoming of you. Until someone confirms to me that Homo Sapiens' meat tearing teeth are merely for show I shall continue being an omnivore and that, I'm afraid, means farming animals for slaughter. However, I see no reason why they have to be transported halfway round Europe first - on the hook better than on the hoof.
    I was at the rally and I can assure everyone that Ian Driver's speech was just an anti-Tory rant. Indeed, our MPs weren't there but why should they be? The rally will have achieved nothing except give Comrade Driver a bit more publicity, which was the whole point anyway. He no more cares about animal welfare than he does about the future of the Bullingdon Club - in fact he probably has a more honest opinion on the latter rather than the former. The man is just a blowhard troublemaker, and the sooner the people of Thanet, the voters of Northwood Ward and the Thanet Labour Party realise this and do something about him the better.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Eh, Mr /Ms Mingles? I didn't say people shouldn't eat meat.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Perhaps TDC Councillors should put their money where their mouth is and donate all the port dues etc received from the animal exporters to the RSPCA or some other animal charity.

    ReplyDelete
  29. 28 comments on the subject of calf transport.

    As 11:18 alluded to, if only the great brainwashed of this country were as vocal on the issue of our children being carted off by the ss, we might be getting somewhere.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Returned from a long exile, too busy writing my memoirs, to find the same old people getting their same old knickers in the proverbial twist. At least some have worked out Cllr Ian Driver's slant on life - typical hard left anti-capitalist ranter who lives a very capitalist lifestyle himself. Scargill, Prescott, Blair, Kinnock, they are all the same. Into office on the backs of the poor and then live off the fat of the land.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Suffering you make me laugh these animals are breed to produce food the fact they are driven for a few hours is in your mind suffering get real. Look around the world at real suffering and do something about it rather than Grandstand on an issue just because it is local. The fact Cllr Driver is so hot under the collar is just pure showmanship and he wants his five minutes of fame. I you want to do something about suffering animals go to Somalia and save a cow whilst watching children die. As for my Christian views Peter I would always resue a human from a burning house before returning for the pet. Maybe you would do it the other way round?

    ReplyDelete
  32. should read if your want to I you want to do something about suffering animals go to Somalia and save a cow whilst watching children die.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Bluenose, just because people care about one issue doesn't mean they don't care about others.

    And Don, if it was you in the burning house I'd certainly rescue your budgie or goldfish first.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Don, your contributions are often contradictory, but it is disappointing to see you (now) posting pure rubbish. As for the comments about Driver, you and the other blue commentators are entitled to express them, of course, but they have the same status as comments about the bandwagon antics of lacklustre MPs like Gale. Just right and left groups criticisng those characters they do not like.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Exactly anon 11:52, I wish people wouldn't turn everything into a right vs left debate.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Thanks Peter you know I would do the same for you.

    ReplyDelete
  37. The comment about so called champions of the left turning into fat cats themselves is not opinion but fact. Look at Mandelson!

    As to turning everything into left right debates, well surely Ian Driver did that in his anti-Tory rant at the demonstration. It was supposed to be a protest against the transporting of animals, not a party political broadcast.

    As someone more concerned about these unfortunate animals than the antics of local politicians I agree entirely with Tony. This is simply Labour's new crowd pleaser and I shall not attend again myself to listen to such ignorant ranting. I will concentrate on writing to MPs and press and leave Comrade Driver to do his own rabble rousing. He borders on riot incitement!

    ReplyDelete
  38. Anoon 11:52:00 please enlighten what is pure rubbish, Animals around the world endure hardships far greater than a few hours in a lorry. You may not like it but it is true.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Disabled people shouldn't complain about poor parking or lack of access. After all it's much worse in Somalia where people can't even afford food.

    ReplyDelete
  40. I think it's unhelpful and destructive to start to pick off different groups and interests within society and set them against each other. The latest comment drawing in disability is, in my view, therefore a bit off the wall.

    Equally, the "I'm all right Jack" and "I really only care about myself and the groups I personally support" - so typical of the "christian" community - is unacceptable. Don!

    Don, your pure rubbish is your suggestion that as the transport is legal, it is ok. Going on to suggest that protest should only be in the form of letters to legislators is also plain daft. Would the disabled have won the rights and equality they now have without more concerted action? No. Would those in the LGBT community have won the rights and equality they now have without louder protest? No. The same is true of many other sectors of society.

    Lobbying legislators is certainly a part of it, but legislators of various political colour have failed in the area of animal welfare. Nobody has said that human suffering should take second place to animal suffering. But unlike so many "christians" many of us have a broader base of issues about which we are concerned. Narrowness seems to be your problem.

    ReplyDelete
  41. See those calves in that truck? That's us, that is.

    See those innocent, slaughtered Iraqi's? That's us, that is.

    See the 100 million murdered Russian and Ukrainian Christians under Stalin? That's us, that is.

    See the 6 million Jews, Gypsies,homosexuals and disabled folk slaughtered by Hitler? That's us, that is.

    Christianity was originally a political movement for liberty and equality. Of course the official church version, has been manipulated and twisted into a tool of the elite.

    Truth is, we are being, and have for a long time been, played for suckers by a handful of evil, greedy bastards at the top of the food chain.

    It is high time we put a stop to it.

    ReplyDelete
  42. "Power to the People" in my best Woolfie Smith voice Come the revolution Peter, come the revolution

    ReplyDelete
  43. What do you mean "Come the revolution," Don, for surely we had it a short time ago or was all that rioting and arson just for a few freebies? There's me thinking perhaps all those hoodied knights of the streets actually had a cause! How stupid can you get but then, some folk think Ian Driver cares about calves.

    ReplyDelete
  44. You may well be right, Anon about Driver not caring, and by the same token, clearly Gale doesn't really care about animal welfare either. Clearly both benefit from having their pics taken with cuddly furry creatures.

    ReplyDelete
  45. See someone is determined to bring Gale into a debate about the anti-animal transportation protest being Labour's latest crowd pleaser.

    Yes, no doubt Mr. Gale does get his picture taken with the odd cuddly creature from time to time (and I do not mean Cheryl Cole)but at least he is a country sort who keeps pets. Comrade Driver is hardly cuddling the unfortunate calves, he is just standing there howling through his hailer about nasty Tories. What has that to do with animal welfare. It is pure rabble rousing politics, nothing more or less.

    ReplyDelete
  46. Tom Clarke, the point here is that a Labour Councillor - and given the headline post the wider Labour Party - stands accused of jumping on the bandwagon of animal welfare and making party political capital out of it. Many of the commentators on this thread have made the point without any evidence, but purely as a matter of anti-Labour rhetoric, and because of a dislike of Driver.

    Their judgement and assessment may well be right, and they are entitled to dislike the man, of course. I have simply drawn a parallel with the supposed interest in animal welfare - and similar party political point-scoring - demonstrated so freely and frequently by Gale. The point being that both Tories and Labour appear to be capable - guilty? - of precisely the same practice.

    ReplyDelete
  47. And the fact that "country sorts" are better placed to comment on animal welfare is a laughably inappropriate premise on your part.

    ReplyDelete
  48. Do we know for sure that Cllr Driver doesn't have any pets? Not that it makes any difference...I don't like having animals in my home, but I still care about animal cruelty.

    ReplyDelete
  49. The parrallel is drawn because Cllr Driver used this occassion to engage in anti-Tory rhetoric instead of concentrating on the subject of the demonstration. As far as it goes, there are people right across the political spectrum who oppose this transportation.

    Politicians generally have a habit of jumping on bandwagons or taking up causes they think have some popular appeal. It does not make it any less hypocritical for Cllr Driver to do so by suggesting that some Tory had a photo shoot with a cuddly creature.

    As to disliking Cllr Driver, well I simply do not know having never met the man in person. What I do know is that I dislike his hard left politics and the way he is milking this animal welfare issue.

    Actually, I don't like the far right either and think the world would be a far better place without political extremists of either persuassion.

    ReplyDelete
  50. Tom Clarke, I know it suits you to continue to press your anti-Labour views - in this instance linked conveniently to the activities of Councillor Driver - without ever accepting that the Tory Party plays exactly the same games and employs exactly the same tactics. But that is my point here.

    You are claiming - possibly correctly - that Driver is riding on the back of the live exports issue purely to bash the Tories, and that he is exploiting animal welfare for political purposes. My point is that MP Gale does exactly the same.

    And before you, or anyone else, demands the evidence, I would say that little or no "evidence" has been brought forward here to support the argument against Driver. It is simply anti-Driver rhetoric.

    But no issue with that. Just accept that both Parties, and Driver and Gale, are as bad as each other.

    ReplyDelete
  51. The suggestion that Roger Gale MP has any short comings concerning animal welfare is nonsense, as my original posting suggested it is unfair to make this a political issue.

    I have no reason to suggest that Cllr Driver is not sincere in his objection of mistreatment of aninmals, most of us would not consider it unnatural to be any other way.

    Roger Gale has as I understand a long history of involvement with animal welfare, for myself I'd prefer that he was similarly active in support of say, civil liberties, human rights etc. but he does what does, as do we all its part of our humanity, it doesn't suggest that other issue are not supported.

    I dont know whether Cllr Driver has an equal record of involvement in animal welfare, perhaps he has, it just seemed bad judgement and poor taste to suggest that somehow we have to become brainless automatons and blindly follow the lead from some relatively unknown Labour bod with a microphone.

    Even more irritating given that it seems the likes of Clive Hart couldn't be bothered or anyone else in Thanet Labour.

    ReplyDelete
  52. Anon, you seem to be guilty of preaching to the converted for have I not already accepted that politicians of all parties tend to jump on band wagons and declared my distrust of extremists. That, I would suggest, is not anti-Labour but more anti-politicians in general and extremists in particular.

    You talk of lack of evidence in the criticism of Cllr Driver yet we have amongst the comments eye witness accounts of his public rant. His far left track record is something easily researched and verified on line. Likewise early on his own blog he declared his seeming dislike of all things he associates with so called middle England, and even his religious intolerance, whilst living a very middle class lifestyle himself in leafy Broadstairs. Again easily verified.

    There are danger signals here, ones we should recognise from history, of a man with extremist political views and an intolerance of certain groups of people. Those, I might suggest, are not views one comes to expect of the Labour party in general but more Militant Tendency.

    Where you are really wrong is in drawing a parrallel with Roger Gale, a fairly middle of the road Conservative I would suggest. Cllr Driver's opposite number is more Nick Griffin and I find both equally distasteful.

    ReplyDelete
  53. Sorry, Tom Clarke, but Gale is far from middle of the road. As Tony has implied, he is far from being a moderate in the area of civil liberties and in the area of equal treatment, where his voting record on issues like age of consent and equal rights for those in the LGBT community is to the right of Attila The Hun.

    Those on the extreme right like Nick Griffin are typically racist, xenophobic, and homophobic. Where is the parallel with Ian Driver?

    ReplyDelete
  54. Driver and Griffin are opposites, not parrallels, but both extremists in their own way and both intolerant of what they perceive as different to their own ideology. Is racism any more unacceptable than religious intolerance? I think not for both are equally dangerous viewpoints.

    You earlier accused me of being anti-Labour yet it is you that show your anti-Conservatism. It is not anti-Labour to question the motives of an extremist of the Left like Driver any more than it would be to critcise Stalin. It is anti-Conservative to bring Gale into the debate for he is certainly no Hitler whatever his views on certain civil liberties. Indeed, there are plenty of Labour members who feel that liberties have maybe gone too far at the expense of our collective and individual responsibilities.

    Be honest, anon, you simply cannot accept criticism of anyone wearing the Labour badge, irrespective of how justified, without countering with an attack on a Tory.

    ReplyDelete
  55. We will not agree on the issues and principles here, Tom Clarke, so let's just agree to differ - as we have on many previous occasions.

    ReplyDelete
  56. Anon, whilst I am more than happy to agree to differ, I am mystified by your "as we have on many occassions" comment. I am a new boy to this blogging world so there have been no previous occassions with me. Presumably you have crossed swords with others suggesting, perhaps, that your views are not universally popular?

    ReplyDelete
  57. I beg your pardon, Tom Clarke, I thought (from your style and presentation) yours was a new identity in the series chosen by the blogger known as Bluenote etc etc etc. If you are new to blogging, then no, we will not have exchanged views before.

    ReplyDelete
  58. And I doubt my challenges are popular with those of a diehard blue disposition.

    ReplyDelete
  59. Pardon granted, Anon, until the next time, always assuming I do not get totally bored with this scene.

    On your further comment about diehard blue, not applicable to me for I am prepared to give any party or individual a chance, extremists excluded. Experience suggests, however, that there is little to choose between the modern breed of careerist politicians. They all seem to ignore the wishes of the public at large.

    ReplyDelete
  60. anon 23 august 10.26

    could have put it better myself the truth speaks volumes

    "Truth is, we are being, and have for a long time been, played for suckers by a handful of evil, greedy bastards at the top of the food chain.

    It is high time we put a stop to it."

    ReplyDelete
  61. So Ian Driver is back on the campaign trail. After years of lamenting the passing of the soviet union followed by his communistic campaign alongside Comrade Scargill in Wandsworth, he resurfaces complete with megaphone in Thanet. Should be interesting to see what next he can turn into a political posturing cause.

    ReplyDelete