Custard Pie Anyone?

It was with much amusement that baffled Strood voters were posted the latest September edition of the In-Touch from Strood North Conservatives.

Page two is particularly interesting. Perhaps they are a bit out of touch with developments...

It seems that the news of the Cllr Craggs resignation has not quite reached the inner-sanctum of the Strood Conservatives. Indeed there appears to be many smiles all round on this happy snap.

Labour activists do need to get their act together to take the Strood seats in May 2011, but a few stories like this clanger wont do the local Conservatives any favours.

Perhaps we could see a retraction on the oft read Strood Conservative website, which is of course updated on a regular basis

What is going on?

Front page article calling for Cllr Brice to resign... yet he still sits on the Council!

The issue of errant Councillor Dennis McFarlane has been resurrected for one last outing on the widely read and award winning blog from Alan Watkins.

Dennis McFarlane was correctly dismissed as a Councillor and removed from the Labour Group as soon as the issue of benefit fraud became apparent. As this blog stated last week, no one political group has a monopoly on honesty and Mr McFarlane was convicted and found guilty.

According to Alan Watkins, what he did was 'dishonest, lacked integrity, brought the Council into disrepute and failed to uphold the principles of public life'

He was rightly shamed for his actions.

It is then with a slight sense of bewilderment that whilst the issue of Mr McFarlene has been correctly raised and dealt with by the Standard's Committee, we are not seeing the such swift response to other Councillors who have also led themselves into 'disrepute and failed to uphold the principles of public life.'

Noticeably the numerous numbers of Councillors who happen to be members of the ruling Conservative group.

Former (said very very loosely) Conservative Councillor Nick Brice, who continues to wear a blue rosette, has still not been called to book for what on the face-of-it is a shut book case. Cllr Brice was caught kerb-crawling by Kent Police in River Ward in November 2009. He admitted to the offence and was given a conditional caution.

To the general public at the time this was a simple case of resign as you can read from the press cutting.

There are also incidentally further cases pending of staff bullying, problems with leading cabinet members disclosures and accusations of skullduggery over the recent primary school re-organisations. Each of these involves Conservative Councillors.

So why is it taking the Council so long to actually deal with the Cllr Brice issue?

The mere fact that it is Tories that seem to be getting of the hook is seemingly becoming visible to all. We need to see Cllr Brice held accountable.

In issues such as public accountability, no individual from any party can be above the rule book. It is simply not in the public interest for Cllr Brice, who has sullied the reputation of the Council and himself to be allowed to sit in a position where he is making decisions on vulnerable adults and children.

The Conservative Party locally have closed ranks behind all those who still stand to be called to the Standards Committee. Cllr Brice, the most public, meanwhile still continues to sport his rosette and still votes with the Tory whip (though not as a formal member).

This blog, the local media and the public have all been calling him to honourably resign. Unsurprisingly, he has not taken the advice.

Incidentally, the issue of kerb-crawling is very much a concern in parts of River Ward.

Perhaps the new River candidate [Mr Alan MacKness] can give his opinion to the press on the delay for action which impacts his potential residents, and what punishments should be meted out to kerb-crawlers in his ward?

It seems like they are getting away with it from this bloggers angle.

Cllr Brice thought at the time that he was 'down but not out'

It looks like he might be right

Tories Personal Attack on Police

Click for full image

Residents in River Ward have this weekend received a shocking leaflet from Medway Conservatives launching into a personal tirade against Kent Police chief and public servent Ian Learmonth.

Ian has been a police officer since 1976 and has served in Essex, Strathcylde and Norfolk Constabularies. He has served the community for close to three decades upholding the law and working for residents.

This strange leaflet, posted through doors this weekend by the blue-rinse, directly attacks Kent Police Chief Constable Ian Learmonth and follows the resignation of David Craggs less than two weeks after being elected in the recent by-election in River Ward.

The personal attack, featuring the photo of Ian Learmonth with his policing award, comes days after the announcement that up to 1,500 jobs could be lost in Kent Police which would undoubtedly have a direct impact on crime rates, victim support and combating anti-social behaviour that blights parts of the ward.

The leaflet targeted Ian Learmouth directly and did not once mention the newly selected Conservative candidate for the ward by-election. It linked to a dated Police Manual written over five years ago, without any mention of the fact that the Kent Police website makes very clear that 'the list is not exhaustive. For more information contact the Special Constabulary recruitment department'.

Medway Conservatives and the the presumed River Ward candidate Alan MacKness support cuts to magistrate services, the politicisation of the Kent Police Authority and the front line cuts to bobbies on the beat across Rochester & Chatham.

Medway Labour Leader, Cllr Paul Godwin said

“As a member of the Kent Police Authority I have witnessed the holding of Kent Police to account in a robust manner by a mixture of local Councillors from the three main parties and independently appointed members. This has been done in a non partisan way to ensure that there is no party political interference in policing. However the recent antics of the local Tories following the debacle of their candidate resigning his Council seat in River ward two weeks after the election has sunk to new depths.”

Cllr Godwin continues;

“Why did they not clarify the position properly before the election rather than wasting local Council taxpayers some £10,000. Whatever the legal rights or wrongs of a special constable being an elected as a Councillor on behalf of a political party there is also a moral issue. The political impartiality of the police is critical to the health and well being of our democracy and any attempt to undermine it sends all of us on a very slippery slope.

Last year a Tory Councillor was cautioned by the police for kerb crawling in Chatham. Can you imagine if one of the officers involved in catching the individual concerned was another Tory Councillor and the potential conflict of interest that would arise.”

Cllr Vince Maple, Labour Election Agent for River Ward added;

”What the local Tories should be concentrating on is the impact of the 20% cuts to the policing budget over the next few years which will substantially reduce police numbers; rather than trying to blame someone else for their own incompetence.”

It is time the Tories stopped attacking the Police in River Ward and started to work with local bobbies to tackle the anti-social behaviour which is blighting parts of Rochester and Chatham.

Labour activists have been canvassing across the ward and the overwhelming message from voters is that the Tories should repay the money and that we now need someone who is going to work with the police and council to improve River ward.

The leaflet also patronises voters by suggesting that Labour will call the by-election. Residents will be aware that any resident can request a by-election independently and that it is likely that some will do so. That glaring fib raises the very serious question about other untruths within the statement.

Medway Tories have not apologised for their failure to vet the eligibility of the previous candidate and does not give any indication as to when they will pay the £10,000 cost of the by-election.

Hague Statement. Overkill?

This blog has refrained from discussing the incident with William Hague. Indeed, the fact that this blogger was a contemporary of Chris Myers at Durham University, has perhaps meant it sensible that it has not made any remarks.

The sexuality or otherwise of politicians, married or not, in the case of Crispin Blunt, are for themselves to deal with.

It is sad though that some politicians still feel unable to accept themselves. There is always a nagging thought around those that do 'come out' late that if you could have concealed a truth for so long, what does that say about you, and about the transparency of your character. The best policy is to be open about who you are, and just get on with it as if it wasn't an issue. Obviously, it is not always as easy as that, but the general sentiment remains.

However, there is no denying that multi-millionaire William Hague showed poor judgment in even “occasionally” sharing a hotel room with his 25-year-old special adviser Chris Myers. This was an employee, who was subsequently offered a job working in Hague's office in Whitehall. William is not a poor man and probably could afford a few single rooms if he so chose.

Yet in this bloggers view Hague showed even poorer judgment, in what must be categorised as the oddest press statement in modern political history. Clearly Coulson had not been involved as the press statement was made very briefly after a lunch meeting, with that ever so competent, George Osborne. It was so extraordinary because the rumours on his sexuality were not mainstream and were never going to be thus. A statement denying he was gay and revealing very personal details of his wife's miscarriages was a perhaps step too far, almost you could say, overkill.

The press have gone on overdrive and now most of the general public are at least aware that there is smoke in the general vicinity of the foreign office. The fire is yet to be found but the chasers are now out there.

The statement was unbearably sad but it proved nothing. This blogger has very little desire to find out about the sexual activities of the Foreign Secretary or indeed what he may or may not have been getting up to behind Hague's privately paid for hotel door on more then one occasion. Nor incidentally did it want to know what goes on between his marital sheets, but it was unbelievably naive of him not to foresee that it would provoke groundless speculation about his private life.

And if nothing untoward happened, why did Myers feel so suddenly that he had to leave his job?

The politics of 'room sharing' has always been a fraught business. Tories are shameless when it comes to sexual infidelity, Tory MP David Ashby resigned in 1994 as a parliamentary private secretary after it was revealed that he had holidayed with a close male friend in France — sharing the same room and the same bed. Ashby claimed there were no homosexual connotations: he was seeking to save money, had often shared rooms with parliamentary colleagues and accused his detractors of having “dirty minds”.

“We went to two hotels. In the first one we managed to find twin beds and at the second one we didn't. It doesn't make any bloody difference. It was much cheaper, it halved the price.”

Ashby subsequently sued a newspaper for saying he was gay but, unfortunately for him, his own estranged wife gave evidence against him and he lost the case.

Austerity may be an admirable motive for room sharing but you can end up paying much too high a price if it results in you besmirching your reputation and/or losing your job. In the end, it is just not worth it.

Appreciate that on the campaign trail it is sometimes, for the sake of no available rooms, be forced to share a room. By why always Chris Myers and why was it always paid for on a private tab. Why did the other associates of Hague always stay elsewhere. Did he share a room with anyone else. If he did, who? If he did not, why only Myers? The endless questions around this continue to swirl.

His denial that he has not had any gay relationships with a man must be taken on face value. However dalliances in a bedroom is not a relationship and just because you have a wife means, well as Crispin Blunt will tell you, not as much as you would think.

The smoke has only got thicker after the press statement. He has made it mainstream for the tabloids.

As an aside; in the interests of austerity and promoting cross-party harmony, perhaps Lib-Dem and Conservative MPs should be encouraged to share rooms during the forthcoming conference season.

On second thoughts. I don't think they would make good bed fellows. One would be restless and marginalised whilst the more dominant partner would steal all the pillows.

Coulson in the spotlight

The Tory spin machine is tonight chugging and puffing away on overdrive as new insights are revealed from journalists working for News of the World former editor, and Tory spin supremo Andy Coulson.

Andy Coulson was employed by David Cameron to be his spin-chief extraordinaire after he resigned from his job, after it became clear that journalists in his office had been hacking into the phones of thousands of celebrities, royals and politicians.

In exploits which make the Draper incident look like shrivelled whitebait, this was organised spying on an industrial scale.

The allegations in the New York Times are so damning that Cameron must now do the honourable thing for the public and the electorate.

This is a major test of judgement for our young and inexperienced Prime Minister. He must fire Coulson.

The NY Times article makes clear that Glenn Mulcaire, a junior journalist at the time, had hacked his way into the messages of the royal princes, the aire-to-throne of England Prince William and his brother Harry. He went to prison, and although Coulson denied all knowledge of it, he subsequently resigned as editor. All along, the line of News International (the newspapers' owner) has been that this was just one bad apple, but the clear evidence is that it was a far more sustained campaign.

Two things remain truly disturbing from the article:

First, the Metropolitan police have failed to pursue the investigations with anything like the full vigour of the law. Despite having evidence that the tapping and hacking may have been far more extensive than Coulson or Mulcaire admit, the police have only investigated further or prosecuted in relation to a tiny proportion of those almost certainly affected.

Second, it seems extraordinary that Coulson is still the prime minister's director of communications. He has admitted that under his watch News International paid police officers for information. For all we know this was a regular habit. The New York Times claims that during his time he freely discussed Mulcaire-style "investigations" with his journalists and that these unlawful news-gathering techniques were pervasive.

This blog finds it hard to believe he didn't know how his scoops were being sourced, and if this is the case he has corrupted himself and the Prime Minister whose judgement on hiring the man must now be in question.

The most worrying aspect of all this is that unless the police take proper action, these illegal practices will carry on. And unless David Cameron sacks Coulson, he will be openly condoning some of the dirtiest politics in Britain.

Tory cuts savage the Police

The new Chief Constable of Kent Police has told staff 1,500 posts could be cut as a result of the Conservative and Liberal spending cuts.

One thousand of these would be civilian and 500 police.

It comes as the force is faced with a possible funding cut of 20 per cent, with final figures due to be announced when the Government completes its comprehensive spending review at the end of October.

Chief Constable Ian Learmonth has written to the county’s MPs explaining the scale of the cuts.

“The Home Secretary has said her department may have to save a significant proportion of its current budget and we have to prepare for that," he said.

"All areas of the force's business and budget are being examined.

“Clearly this is a very sensitive area for everyone and we must never lose sight of the fact we are dealing with peoples' jobs and peoples' lives.

“We have to be honest with everyone about the challenge that faces us and we will be."

"We are working on a new policing model that safeguards the front-line and focuses on cutting crime and reducing risk and harm to the public.

“A number of possible structures and options are being considered and work is still underway.

The Conservative war with the Police locally is undermining the ability to cut crime locally. Cuts to police numbers, slashing of magistrate services and introduction of short sentences will only increase crime.

Tories pay £10,000 for by-election?

YourMedway Headline 01/09/2010

The strange and unexpected resignation of David Craggs is front page of YourMedway after a week of accusations and counter-accusations from Conservatives, the Police and the opposition. Everyone is now asking the question, when will the Tories pay the £10,000?

The Kent Police press statement indicating that they had always a clear and unequivocal position that Special Constables could not serve as Councillors is the clincher. The Police are politically impartial and according to the Kent Constabulary they see politics and policing as separate.

For better or worse that was the position in advance of the by-election and is the same position now that David Craggs has resigned. A clear position which meant that David Craggs was ineligible to do both.

The Conservative Party would not have selected David Craggs had they known of his eligibility so for them to claim a moralistic position is simply hubris. The Medway Conservative Group had no position prior to this byelection on pushing for Special Constables to be Councillors. This argument, post-event, is simply trying to cover for a massive blunder in administration.

The pious statements by River Ward Conservatives last week where they claimed that Tories were 'totally vindicated' shows a serious lack of ability to read a situation correctly. A simple apology would have sufficed and could have closed the issue; instead the RSSCA clearly want a war with the Police and in full public. Rumours of legal action continue, though this blog would be very very surprised if this again were not just hubris.

The key to a potential split within the Tory ranks on this issue was ironically from the press statement last week. The press statement came not from the Medway Conservative Group rather the River Ward Conservatives. One group is simply acting on its own.

This blog however would like to make clear that it disagrees with Kent Police on why politicians can not be Councillors. Indeed, it is likely that the NPIA (National Policing Improvement Agency) will be clarifying a position shortly.

There is likely to be a by-election and for these reasons it is appropriate that democracy be allowed to take it course

- David Craggs is not on the ballot paper. He is rumoured to have had enough of local politics and though this blog does not know for sure, it would position that the Conservatives will be presently looking for a suitable candidate to fill his boots, so to speak. A new candidate needs to have a mandate from the people they seek to represent. People should vote for the new candidate and this process should not solely be a rubber stamping exercise from the Rochester & Strood Conservative selection panel. That would be inappropriate given the below point.

- Secondly, the poor judgement of the RSSCA over this issue will be absolutely on the ballot paper as opposed to the August election. Make no mistake, the Tories did not vet the candidate and his eligibility suitably. The cost of the £10,000 by-election falls solely on their shoulders. People deserve to vote again on the judgement of the Conservatives in light of farcical resignation.

To just simply anoint a Conservative simply whitewashes the reasons why we needed to have an election in the second place. It is an insult to the electorate to ignore the fault and posture.

The first election was entirely justifiable. Bill Esterson was elected as a Member of Parliament for a Merseyside seat and could not undertake his work in the House and on the Council at the same time. The second point incidently which falls on Councillors' Reckless and Chisthi. Both could, and indeed it is likely, be absent from important local votes.

For those reasons we deserve to have a democratic election. The cost of which directly billed to the Rochester & Strood Conservative Association for they have wasted the time and money of activists, the public, the Council and all the support staff including ironically, the Police.

It was their mistake which led us to a repeat of this by-election. It was their mistake to attack the Police rather then simply apologise. It was their mistake to pick a candidate without checking his eligibility.

A litany of mistakes which make the next result very much more in the balance.