Election Snippet 4: links to the past severed?

Chris Read and Jon Trickett in the Yorkshire Post, have made claims the ‘old guard’ have been ‘put out to grass’, but are their claims credible?

Jon Trickett stated;

“TROUBLED Rotherham Council is aiming for a fresh start as Labour sift through their local election candidate list – ditching those with links to previous regimes.”

“It is unusual because the boundaries have changed and it is an all out election but we have to convince people in Rotherham”

“The Labour Party was determined that any candidate that stood for the Labour Party was absolutely clear of any of the problems that the area had faced. So it was very rigorous, very tough. Some long standing councillors were no longer able to go onto the list.”

“Jon Trickett, said the party has tried hard to sever links to a handful of past councillors.”

The conclusion I come to is, Jon Trickett has either regurgitated the Party line, or his briefer didn’t entirely come clean with him? Either way it is obvious, Labour are still ‘in denial’ and therefore are still ‘not fit for purpose’!

A failure then in all respects for Labour, caught out being less than candid or truthful about their panel of candidates.

Among Labour’s candidates this year are:

Atkin, Alan
Beaumont, Christine
Beck, Dominic
Ellis, Sue
Hoddinott, Emma
McNeeley, Rose
Roche, David
Rushforth, Amy
Russell, Ann
Tweed, Simon
Whysall, Jennifer
Wyatt, Ken

This list is not exhaustive, but it stands testament to Rotherham Labour’s failure to put together a panel of candidates we can place our faith in. A vote for Labour this year will change nothing and the message here, be very careful who you vote for this year!

The Yorkshire Post story: 22 in Labour rout as it cuts ties with Rotherham’s past

If readers have their own nominees, please leave them in the comments, Rik.

The rest of the Election Snippets: https://rotherhampolitics.wordpress.com/the-rotherham-elections-2016/2016-election-snippets/

There are two more groups of Labour candidates still to be tackled. The ‘musical chairs’, presented as ‘new’, candidates and the ‘ we owe our loyalty to outside interests’, candidates. Readers may wish to read this previously published post for information, Labour’s Entrist Infiltrators. Should a reader fancy some writing to start discussions on this, please send it to Rothpol by email, thanks.

17 thoughts on “Election Snippet 4: links to the past severed?

  1. What is John Trickett on about? The boundaries haven’t changed – though plenty of sitting councillors have jumped ship to safer seats – and a significant number of councillors involved with the “old regime” are still standing and will no doubt continue with their well heeled positions in the Labour Group and on council committees after the election. Ann Russell is still standing and she was actually suspended from the party for 18 months as part of the CSE inquiry, for example.

    Spin and BS from the party, to be frank.


  2. How can the whistleblowing Labour candidate Jayne Senior work and be part of the same team with these people some of who was part of the cover up that is something I find very hard to grasp it just does not add up


    • Well read her book – she’s not exactly the sharpest pencil in the political box is she, considering how she allowed herself to be mainpulated and brought under the control of Thacker and her underlings.
      She may have done good work with the girls , but a political animal she definately is not.


      • I’m inclined to agree with your comment on the basis of what I’ve read so far

        I recall back around 2003 one of the mothers who kicked up a stink in Bradford was given a job by the council.

        If dissent can’t be eliminated then an alternative method of dealing with it is to co-opt it, this is especially so in a crappy one party state which controls access to employment and other goodies.

        As LBJ put it, “better to have him(or her) pissing out of the tent than pissing in.”

        How can Labour be reformed anyway? How do you reform a rabid dog?


    • @Greg

      lets look at what does “not stack up”.

      let’s also discuss what a “whistleblower” is.

      Does not stack up:
      1: you’ve been working within for many years, to protect vulnerable people, probably since the mid 90’s.
      2: for one reason or another, let’s assume things aren’t going your way, let’s say in and around 2004 you can’t continue without results.
      3: let’s say in 2005 (infamous 2005 summit) you tried to hold your bosses to account.
      4: lets say your many years of work went missing, infamous missing laptop’s.
      5: let’s say that you were disbanded in 2009, probably by the same who didn’t listen to you in 2005.
      6: let’s say after you were disbanded, charges were brought, and a person was convicted and charged and sentenced, probably in 2009/10.
      7: let’s say the first infamous gang CSE Rotherham, charged and sentenced 2010/11.
      8: let’s say that in 2011, as a consequence of the previous court report, problems were to be resolved.
      9: let’s say towards the end of 2011 the local authority was to take real initiative and face up to its responsibilities. As part of the responsibilities (safeguarding) new thought process was established, and let’s say that by the end of 2011 the councils position was untenable.
      10: let’s say that in early 2012, a follow up of late 2011 was sought.
      11: let’s say after this the council to some degree, is starting to open up to the possibility of an independent inquiry.
      12: let’s say that intervention is sought through the local government select committee.
      13: let’s say all doors rattled after this at Riverside House and the Town Hall.
      14: let’s say very late 2012 after all the above, people were being sought to answer at the select meetings.
      15: let’s say someone was so rattled by this, that they sought media intervention.
      16: let’s say with a bit of wind from the media intervention, that by early 2013, Independent Enquiry CSE Rotherham announced.
      17: and the rest is history.

      What is a “Whistleblower”:
      look it up, it certainly isn’t what we think, although I salute those who are truthful, even if that means eventually.

      I think they will continue to be a happy family, at least the cobwebs are out of the closet.

      And finally let’s say, only use the above as a guide. All personal details have been removed, further analysis consult Jay/Casey reports.

      Open to all.


      • Perhaps anyone intersted in Jayne Senior should read Chapter 17 of her book. There you will find that it was the father of a victim who spoke to Jayne Senior regarding Andrew Norfolk from The Times, who had become interested when investigating the redacted report regarding the death of Laura Wilson.
        Jayne Senior had left Rotherham Council’s employment for a new venture – the Swinton Lock Project.
        I am not for any instant criticising the good work that Senior did with the CSE victims at Risky Business, or during Operation Central, but no one should get the idea that she was a firebrand determined to see heads roll at the top of RMBC. On the contrary, she left whilst it was still being covered up.
        So let’s get it right.


  3. I met with Jayne and Councillor Roche recently as I was having similar problems getting heard as a wb in Adult Social Care. 2012 to present day….I felt similar problems happening, not safe to speak up about abuse and makes no difference. eg no police investigation.. confessions at tribunal with evidence . I had a meeting at the town hall. Jayne is well educated she has a law degree. Made no difference though. I have no confidence the council has improved. I’m sad I can’t have confidence in Rotherham Council. Sad for vulnerable adults. My MP JH was supportive but again made no difference.. Really hope that there will be a healthy mix of councilors after the next election. I have noticed too that in Maltby it says new councilor, yet he has just moved from another area. My own evidence shows me culture has yet to change. Needs more transparency.


  4. I am a whistle blower spoke up three times about abuse in Rotherham adult social care as it was happening. Lost my job twice.Won tribunal last year, well founded, no contributory fault.They lacked candour, atempted to mislead tribunal, their barrister said they took the wind from his sails! Had to represent myself against a barrister. Abuse upheld… Made no difference the people still have their jobs! . I was just doing the job I was trained to do. Ensuring vulnerable people were safe. Press ran my stuff twice, private eye and bbc shef. Made no difference. If the culture is poor it will continue as it does.Hate the label whistle blower it should just be the norm, it is for me. Defensive culture in Rotherham. Sickened me to find the police did not investigate,Had to complain there too. Yep I still complain as the wrong doing is not put right. That is what wb is about and.
    being decent. honest. Caring. Responsible. What ever happened to those values?


    • I wonder what Robyn Simmonds has to say about these revelations about adult social care. It seems that he has been around the union scene in Rotherham for many a year and must have dealt with frontline staff making allegations and also needing union support. His comments often leave me feeling that he hasn’t the stomach, or the will, to take on his close allies in positions of power within the council.


  5. Sally
    So you had a meeting with Roach and senior I wonder why Senior was involved in such a meeting with Roach he is the cabinet member but why Senior she is nothing to do with the council or adult social care very strange
    The plot thickens just what is going off here t smell a rat which I think needs more looking into
    I would have thought the meeting would have included Roach, director of adult social services, Legal department and a representative of Sally or at least a friend Union rep
    Not a Labour Cllr and a wannabe Labour Councillor ?? Just what is going off here


  6. I had contacted someone, i needed someone to speak to, that would listen and give me an independent view on what was happening. They agreed it was not me and not acceptable. I shared some evidence ( sought safeguarding advice). I was grateful they listened. She said Jayne would know what to do. They put me in touch with Jayne, her friend. I thought finally i would be heard. Jayne said Mr Roche would listen as he wanted to become an elected member. Jayne said she could leak to the press if he didn’t she had contacts. Jayne said they listen to her.I said they should listen to everyone? Jayne arranged the meeting at the town hall. At the town hall, lots was said not reflected in the minutes. I sent them back with the additional content and pointed out Mr Roche should not be using his private email address to address such matters. He sent it to the same investigator, the one i had complained to before. I have requested job descriptions. Maybe if adult social care was compliant then abuse would be less likely to occur and wb would not be necessary. Speak up and do not let it go as not put right and you become the problem. My experience has been that it is very difficult to raise safeguarding concerns in Rotherham, I saw a report think 2013/14 1556 alerts in adult social care 85 upheld..Abuse happens, I’ve witnessed that.
    Even if it is upheld… People do not realize what can happen in care homes.
    Should not be so hard to speak up about abuse. Not surprised people don’t. I always would and have.. OUCH! I had no union rep, always fought for the vulnerable and then myself, could not afford legal help. That’s why I had to face a barrister aka the silent assassin.As for the council helping me with their knowledge of what had gone on. Commissioner Manzie said it was an employment issue. She never met me, got her assistant to write to me. No mention of the shocking care , abuse and thefts. Very nice. I have all evidence.People do not know the type of people that run and manage our care homes. Roche said they cannot sack an MD and manager… I said that is a very good place for an abuser to sit then You cannot help if they do not agree there is problem? They are a very tough nut to crack. Defensive culture. The standard you walk past is the standard you accept,
    The public are paying for this.
    I fed back to the lady who put me in touch with Jayne by email. No contact since from them.
    The support I got was from a charity that attended my tribunal and a transcript was taken.
    I am very grateful to them. They had previously written to the council .Prior to this tribunal, I had sent evidence to Eric Pickles about similarities in adult social care.
    He said he had passed on to Louise Casey. I brought it up to Jayne and Jayne said it was not in her remit.
    Really needs a culture change in Rotherham Council. I am disappointed.
    I’ve seen stories this year in the press ( advertiser ) of how a care home resident was crawling across the floor for food. Another story had a lady bruised after going into a home for respite care… I just thought, can easily happen!
    How very caring.


  7. Can we get back to the Labour numpties, Tweed in Dinnington, was an adviser to Shaun Wright, Falvey, dare not stand in Dinnington, parachuted into Sitwell ward, was an adviser to Shaun Wright. It is total garbage to say the old guard has gone.
    Dave Smith


  8. Tim Roberts

    “April 23, 2016 at 7:49 pm
    Perhaps anyone intersted in Jayne Senior should read Chapter 17 of her book.”

    I see from that chapter that she wasn’t the only source for Norfolk, and that apparently he had another informant within SYP who provided Norfolk with a “police intelligence document”.

    The effect of Leveson and Operation Elveden has got to be to greatly decrease the prospects of such disclosure in the future.

    “Disclosure hotline” – yeah right




    This is seriously alarming to put it mildly. Richard Littlejohn notes the “shocking conspiracy of silence” over the Kent gang rape

    ” Ever since the Leveson Inquiry and the absurd Filkin Report into police-Press relations, coppers have had it drummed into them that saying anything to a reporter is tantamount to a career-ending criminal offence.
    Not so long ago, someone from Dartford CID would have had a quiet word over a pint with the crime correspondent from the local rag, filling him in on the background to the incident and subsequent arrests.
    The briefing would have been off-the-record and no confidences would have been betrayed. If the reporter was barking up the wrong tree, he’d have been put straight.
    If these men were Millwall fans, it wouldn’t have taken six weeks for the story to come out
    Equally to the point, an alleged gang rape — for want of a better expression — at one of Britain’s biggest shopping malls is surely a matter of national, not just local interest. So why keep it quiet for six weeks?”


    Nor has Andrew Norfolk been overly impressed by Leveson

    “Journalist of the year Andrew Norfolk told last night how he believes Lord Justice Leveson disregarded his child abuse investigation in his report because it was “not without controversy”.


    This is dreadful – hamstringing the press by cutting off their sources means that the country morphs into a politically correct soft totalitarian crap hole with rape gangs roaming free even faster.


  9. all that remains of this letter in the online Yorkshire Post of 27/04 is a broken link

    YP Letters: Rotherham scandal taints Labour old guard
    Yorkshire Post-16 hours ago
    The Jay report highlights the child sexual exploitation seminar on April 5, 2005, as being an event where councillors who attended must have known of the …


    cached copy available courtesy of google, no idea why it would disappear:

    From: Michael Sylvester, Garbroads Crescent, Thrybergh, Rotherham.

    YOUR story “22 in Labour rout as it cuts ties with Rotherham’s past” misses a major point (The Yorkshire Post, April 22).

    Labour have not cut ties with the past and much of Labour’s candidate list for the town suggests “as you were”.

    The Jay report highlights 
the child sexual exploitation seminar on April 5, 2005, 
as being an event where councillors who attended 
must have known of the 

    Nearly a fifth of those who attended are again standing as Labour candidates this year.

    The Casey report highlighted the machismo and bullying culture in the council. Yet 
several cabinet members who held their posts prior to 2012 remain on Labour’s slate this time around.

    The suspicion must be that these councillors are being allowed to stand to ensure a full slate of Labour candidates in Rotherham.

    In allowing them to stand culpability for accepting 
what has happened in Rotherham now lies not just with the district, but the regional Labour Party.



Leave your comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.