All political parties, that don’t perform as well as hoped, squabble afterwards. At the local level, this has manifested itself as infighting which has broken out and we now have a new Independent group consisting of Martyn Parker*, Clive Jepson** … Continue reading
I raised the issue of Respect taking soundings of its chances in Rotherham weeks ago, well before the downfall of MacShane, the reception from disenfranchised voters was encouraging.
The feedback I had from individuals who stopped to listen was that their message was taken onboard by all sections of the community.
Yvonne Ridley is a formidable individual with the fire in her belly to stir up the voters, for far too long Labour has taken its Northern power base for granted, the Town’s MP has been a disgrace, Labour Councillors have made RMBC a laughing stock, she will be pushing against an open door when it comes to encouraging voters to move away from Labour.
Who knows, a new Respect MP followed in the local elections of Respect Councillors in Rotherham East, West and Boston Castle?
It would be ironic that one of the key officials in the Rotherham child abuse scandal manages to get elected to a £80,000 a year post and the official Labour by-election candidate fails to win the seat because of a range of factors including the child abuse scandal.
Rotherham Labour Party has a lot to thank Shaun Wright for!
Next week at Bramley Parish Hall, Independents from around the borough, will be meeting at 19:00 next Tuesday 27th September to begin the campaign leading up to next May’s Borough Council elections. Everyone welcome!
Rotherham Independents are part of the National Independent Network and are committed to the ‘Bell Principles’ as the foundation for their activities.
They are a ‘self help’ group for Independents, member led and committed to providing support not normally available to Independents at a local level. Fighting elections can be very expensive and a minefield of obstacles are placed in the way of Independent candidates, staying legal can be quite a challenge as recent experience has shown.
“Rotherham Independents cordially invite all members of the public considering standing as or wishing to support Independent candidates standing in the Borough Council elections next May, to join us at Bramley Parish Hall, Next Tuesday 27th September at 19:00.
We will be beginning our preparations and this meeting may well prove useful to all Independents, even those who do not want to be part of our group, may well find this evening very useful later on.”
Spokesperson Rotherham Independents
Update: I thought this information piece might at the very least excite some comment – little did I expect to shake the two Labour members out of hiding that it has.
Firstly Community Champion, a Labour member who hails from Conisborough and a callow youth and secondly Stewart Platt, a Labour member From Maltby who is also a Maltby Town Councillor and who is definitely old enough to know better, have been misbehaving while the shop was left unattended! I hope these two miserable Labour specimens, might reflect on their evident foolishness, childishness or even worse and apologise, on behalf of their party for bringing Labour and Maltby Town Council in to disrepute and subject to ridicule!
The attitudes displayed are an affront to democracy especially when coming from members of ‘a mainstream left-wing democratic political party’, they display all the arrogance of power, Labour dictatorships in both their home boroughs, a basic disdain of anyone who challenges them at the polls, or their opinions or indeed even asks questions!
In the wake of the local elections this year and the dirtiest campaign, from parts of the Labour Party, ever in Rotherham! Much has been made of the fact that Rob Foulds did not live in Rother Vale Ward where he stood as a Rotherham Independent candidate last year. Labour has taken every opportunity to draw attention to this fact believing that this would be damaging to Rob Foulds’s reputation.
Rob Foulds stood in the Rother Vale Ward, which he can see from his front window, because Richard Russell was a ‘bussed in’ Labour candidate from far away West Melton, just next door to Brampton Bierlow, part of the Dearne Valley and not the most ‘local’!
Richard Russell was also a decidedly poor candidate, rejected by his home ward of Hoober, where Labour Party members deselected him after 28 years as their councillor because they already had quite enough of this insufferably arrogant, ignorant and greedy**(See note below) Councillor, whose abilities appear to be in inverse proportion to his ego! A right numpty, in fact!
Interestingly and very illuminating, Richard Russell always gives as his address Wath-upon-Dearne. Say that to the neighbours, and they will tell you they live in West Melton or even Brampton Bierlow! What planet is he on? His wife Pat is also a councillor, representing the far away Silverwood ward. There seems to be a pattern emerging don’t you think?
The fact that Labour members from the Rother Vale ward selected this dud, previously rejected candidate, to represent them is evidence that Labour is completely contemptuous of the voters! And the stupidity of Labour members in Rother Vale was also made abundantly clear by their outrageous choice.
Another factor was also important for Rotherham Independents, the clamour from residents of the ward for a more able and local candidate. The resentment in the ward, even among fiercely loyal Labour voters was clear. This was eventually persuasive and crucial in deciding to contest the Rother Vale ward last year, I understand. This resulted in Rob Foulds reducing the Labour majority and gaining 1,700 votes, quite a surprise in this most tribal of Labour seats and with the backdrop of a simultaneous General Election, very surprising indeed!
When it became known that Wickersley Labour Party had selected a candidate with no local connexions, from far away Swinton, Rob decided to take a stand on this issue and made it an important plank of his campaign! Rob Foulds lives in the Wickersley ward and was fully entitled to be aggrieved that Labour was not fielding a local candidate but one from the only point where Rotherham, Barnsley and Doncaster meet, the Dearne Valley! To add insult to injury, Chris Read cannot drive, which will make serving the residents, difficult if not impossible, in the long term! Wait until winter comes!
Labour made the decision to do everything to conceal this fact from the Wickersley voters, the issues involved will be explored in detail in a later posting. The result reflected this but Rob’s vote put him in second place pushing the Tories into third place! Quite a result!
Notes: Greedy** Richard Russell made into third position in the greed list for last year receiving a total of £29,127.72 and Pat, his wife and fellow councillor, received a total of £13,640.64. Between them they got £42,768.36! Plus any benefits accrued by sitting on outside bodies, a not inconsiderable sum to add to their pensions! No wonder Richard Russell and Pat Russell became ‘carpet baggers’ to get on the Council, in Pats case, or to stay on after being deselected by Hoober ward members who know him best!
I opened my Advertiser this week. On page 3, I was surprised to see Reg Littleboys’ face grinning, rather vacuously, out at me as part of a story entitled ‘We’re all in the same boat’. I read on with amazement and not to say increasing ire!
What a stunt to pull! A cut of 1.1% for all staff including the Chief Executive, Martin Kimber. A cut of 1.1% in councillors allowances, so they can claim to be sharing the pain equally! Even the Tories on Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council were well out of touch with public sentiment on this issue proposing a miserly 5% cut for the next financial year.
The people of Rotherham were expecting a grand gesture this year from their community leaders. A recent canvass of views on this, indicate that significant reductions in the ‘fat cat’ salaries, expenses and allowances were favoured by most and the most popular figure indicated as the minimum acceptable cut being 20%.
It is little wonder then, that most consider their community leaders to be motivated largely by personal greed, certainly not public service!
This stunt, to put it into some perspective, will likely not be enough to save even one whole job, big deal! Do they think we are stupid? They are certainly taking us for a ride! For the Town Hall ‘Fat Cats’, the ‘gravy train’ still runs from the station, it would appear?
As far as I am aware, only one political group in Rotherham is in touch with public mood on greed. They have called for reductions of significant proportions, of the order of 40%! This group are the Rotherham Independents and some of Rotherham’s voters will get the opportunity to vote for one of their candidates in May.
I suppose getting the worst result for a Labour MP, against a self financed Independent at the May General Election, might even get through to Denis!
As I promised readers, that I would publish the Advertiser letters on this blog, I now do so.
On 14th May 2010 The Advertiser published the first two letters I draw your attention to. Mike Britland’s letter makes an attack on the person of Peter Thirlwall apparently authored by him as a member of Joe public!
The truth, I believe, is much more interesting than that! Read on below.
Peter Thirlwall has evidently ‘trodden on someone’s corns’!!!!
I also reproduce my letter of the same date, thanking our voters and promising to be back next year stronger and more able to take on the forces of inertia that prevent real change from happening.
Peter Thirlwall himself made a response in the next edition of the Advertiser on 21st May 2010.
Time to establish some facts:
Firstly, the results in question
|General Election 2010|
The breakdown for Independent local election candidates in MacShane’s Rotherham Constituency.
|Rotherham Constituency Local Elections 2010|
|Rotherham Independent Candidates by Ward|
|Brinsworth & Catcliffe||594||10.6|
|Rotherham East||No candidate|
|Rotherham West||No candidate|
Rotherham Independents, you will note above, fought only three Wards out of seven that make up the Rotherham Constituency. Is the ‘MacShane Camp’ seriously suggesting that Peter Thirlwall only received support from the Wards where we had local government candidates?
This part of his argument is at best, seriously flawed at worst, a deliberate attempt to misrepresent the facts?
Research indicates that Independents do much better in local government elections than in General Elections. Why is this? The publicity that Independents can attract at the local level can be considerable compared with the exposure during a General Election where all but mainstream candidates are drowned out by the television campaign.
It was thus across the country, where without a campaigning group to back them, they polled on average a rather meagre couple hundred votes, even Esther Rantzen did poorly. Many Independent Network, Parliamentary Candidates indeed did not get even a hundred votes.
MacShane had promised a similar outcome in Rotherham, but the ‘I will wipe the floor with Thirlwall’ did not materialise. Quite the contrary, in reality, once the electors voice was revealed for what it was, a lacklustre electoral performance by a sitting MP, with only44.4% vote share a meagre 16741 actual votes cast.
This is a disastrous result for MacShane however you put it, a total of 10,111 votes have gone AWOL since 1997! The BNP and UKIP votes were not suppressed! Nothing to boast about there then.
Neither was Peter Thirlwall ‘put to the sword’ metaphorically. Peter Thirlwall’s 2366 votes, a 6.3% vote share, was the truly remarkable outcome in a national context therefore! The best result for Independents in comparable circumstances, anywhere in the country! and he easily saved his deposit of £500!
Denis MacShane is a record breaker and now has the singular distinction, of getting the worst result for a sitting Labour MP against an Independent, in the whole country!
Little wonder his ego was damaged and bruised!
|Mike Sylvester fought Wingfield as a full independent.|
|He is NOT a Rotherham Independent|
Below is the aggregated ‘Independent’ votes including Mike Sylvester, who was not part of the Rotherham Independents but shown here to give the lie to the erroneous claims in the letter of 14th May. It should also be noted that the ‘MacShane Camp’ are not very good with calculations, 2 plus 2 making 5 perhaps?
|Basis of claim in letter above.|
I thought it would be interesting and would complete my analysis if I presented the local election votes for the Labour Party for comparison.
|Rotherham Constituency Labour Vote|
|Cast at local elections May 2010|
|Brinsworth & Catcliffe||2610|
Not sure what they really tell us apart from the fact that Denis received nearly a thousand more votes than the local government candidates did on the same day.
I now turn to the claimed author, Mike Britland.
|Who is Mike Britland – The author of the letter of 14th May 2010?
Well, well! Mike Britland does not, after investigation, appear to be an ordinary member of the public, at all!
Certainly no unbiased commentator is Mike, but as I will demonstrate, he is revealed as a professional, Labour Party activist and member of the ‘MacShane Camp’!
As is this from Denis’s website:
“This site is using MelMel WordPress theme created by andrastudio. Promoted by Mike Britland on behalf of Denis MacShane MP,* hosted by one and one Internet Ltd”.
Finally for now, he shares the same home address as Labour councillor Barry Kaye, very much a Labour loyalist.
Mike Britland then, is not as presented to Advertiser readers. By omission, he misrepresented himself.
Did he also misrepresent himself as author?
Textual analysis would indicate that this letter was put together by more than one contributor and as we also now know that Mike Britland is a fully paid up member of the ‘MacShane Camp’, perhaps that is not surprising!
The pejorative construction placed on the use of words such as ‘charismatic’, ‘ego’ and ‘allowances’ and the general tone of the letter is deeply personal and may be the crucial clue as to why this was sent for publication.
Additionally, the author clearly harbours resentment at Peter Thirlwall’s high profile in the Advertiser!
The preoccupations that are being exercised here would appear more in tune with those known to be held by Denis MacShane than those of any third person? The spiteful nature clearly indicates that the ‘MacShane Camp’ was deeply upset by MacShane’s result and the magnificent 2366 votes Peter Thirlwall polled, very embarrassing!
I finish with this thought, I started with. It is worth repeating!
Getting the worst result for a Labour MP, against a self financed Independent at the May General Election, might even get through to Denis!
A quick internet search of references to Denis MacShane reveals a new website http://www.denismacshane.org.uk/. This was registered as a domain on 14th September 2010. This domain has been registered in the name of Mike Britland.
Incidentally, the same Mike Britland, who had a letter published under his name in the Advertiser of May 14th, just after the May elections, ridiculing Peter Thirlwall’s result** and asking him to stand down from the Council because he was elected as a Labour Party candidate.
I wonder if he is asking Denis to do the same now he is an independent? Although I don’t expect he will, as he is presumably paid by Denis, with our money!
I will do a review in a later post, when I review all our local MPs Web presences.
My! Denis has been busy on the internet!
I wonder if he has stopped his buy up of domain names, we shall see in due course no doubt? He has yet to add http://www.denismacshane.net, http://www.denismacshane.org or perhaps surprisingly http://www.denismacshane.eu to his portfolio of domains, mmmm?
Other Denis MacShane Sites you might be interested in:
Denis on epolitix there was a time when nearly all domains pointed in the direction of this site.
Denis Parliamentary information Confirms his present status as Independent.
** Peter Thirlwall in fact had a magnificent result, getting a 6.3% vote share, saving his deposit with ease. The fate of most Independent Candidates in May was a mere few hundred votes at best and over 95% lost their deposits!
Peter was the only Independent Network endorsed candidate, without the benefit of a pre-existing campaigning organisation and plenty of money behind them, to save his deposit!
It is now obvious to me, that the person that was humiliated in May, was Denis MacShane himself!
Getting an employee to send a letter to the Advertiser is a low trick indeed! No more that can be expected of Denis though!
The Letter will be published here as soon as I have found it. Now that it’s authorship is open to question, it’s contents may be very revealing indeed!