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
When Rotherham Politics learned of the withdrawal of the planning application to build a Gospel Hall and School for the Exclusive Brethren’s exclusive use, we realised that this withdrawal was strategic rather than permanent. So it has proved to be.
Withdrawing the doomed application was presumably just a cynical ploy to push the next application on to a more favourable legislative framework? The presumption in favour of development, comes to mind.
It has given them also, time to explore amelioration of some of the issues raised by objectors, with planning officers? Remember the Brethren are not short of a ‘bob or two’, so anything that money can pay for, to ‘smooth’ the way is possible!
It must have come as a blow then, for the Brethren to learn of the existence of extensive archaeology, Roman and pre-Roman, if the surveys are correct, extending over most of the proposed site.
Another blow for the Brethren came with the Borough Council Elections in the Anston & Woodsetts Ward this year. The Brethren’s, ‘useful idiot’, Darren Hughes, had lost his seat to the Independent, Clive Jepson! Who, it should be noted, is adamantly opposed! The Brethren appear to have invested their hopes in Darren Hughes. How let down they must now feel?
Current thinking, we believe, is to give up on the School idea for now and push ahead with a Gospel Hall, built on the part of the site with no apparent archaeology underneath it. With the option of coming back for more, when the archaeological situation was sorted out!
This sounds a bit to us, as essentially the same as the ‘Trogan Horse’ of antiquity!
We have also learned that local opinion is resolutely opposed to any development on this green belt site and locals are preparing for the battle to come!
Previously on Rotherham Politics: ‘Cult’ wants to build school on Anston’s greenbelt!
Some sound advice by email:
“One thing always worth remembering is that any “pre-submission” discussions between RMBC people and your Exclusive Brethren friends, must be disclosed under an FoI Request.
I would make the request very general to cover “any communication with …. or their agents, or regarding …. ” or some phrase like that.
Some councils do have a formal system for giving advice and in those cases everything is routinely disclosed in the documentation. Rotherham doesn’t do this as far as I can see, but pulled out everything relevant when I once asked for information on another application.” Rothpol is very grateful to our source.
For those eager readers waiting for full analysis of this years Rotherham local government elections, disappointment, I am afraid is inevitable! It takes time to do this.
The highlight of the night came at the very end of the counting session, with the declaration of the result for Anston & Woodsetts ward.
Clive Jepson, the doughty Independent, had beaten Darren Hughes!
What the voter giveth, they can take away again!
Selling out Anston’s green belt to the Brethren Cult, was never going to make Darren popular! It’s that kind of place, that and the simple fact, that they wouldn’t be taken for fools! Not twice!
Elections can be wonderful occasions! Revenge of the ‘duped’, perhaps? Or even Rotherham’s very own ‘Portillo’ moment?
More on this story later, when I wake up properly!
The results are here on the RMBC website.
We have to give Darren one thing, his single minded determination to con the voters of Anston and Woodsetts Ward into re-electing ex-Tory boy, this time, as a Labour candidate!
Darren Hughes campaign materials up to now are consistent in containing mostly deliberate half-truths, inaccuracies and frank deceptions!
We at Rotherham Politics were very surprised to learn therefore, that Darren Hughes lodged a Police complaint about the nature of statements made in his Independent opponent, Clive Jepson’s, election address!
The complaint took issue with Clive’s assertion that Darren Hughes had been, I quote:
“Working to get a private religious school built on green belt land at Anston.”
We though the reports to be a joke when we first heard them, but they proved to be accurate.
Is Darren Hughes on the same planet to the rest of us? These are his own words on the subject in an email reproduced in this post:
“I’ve been working with the proposed applicant at all stages of their planning over the past year or so.”
The ‘fair comment defence’ is more than necessary to put paid to this ridiculous and spiteful complaint from this odious man! That or the ‘Arkell vs Pressdram’ defence! Scroll down a little way, we should warn you in advance that base language is present.
Whenever Rotherham Politics even so much as mentions that elections are to be contested by Independent candidates, Labour Trolls come out of the woodwork and criticise anyone who has the temerity to challenge them!
Dave Smith is challenging Simon Tweed in Dinnington Ward and we understand Clive Jepson is up against Darren Hughes in Anston and Woodsetts Ward. At this time these are the only two Independent candidates we are aware of. There’s still time to put your name forward if you are quick about it nominations close on April 4th.
Labour in Rotherham totally dominate the Borough Council and most of the parish councils too. They have become accustomed to their hegemonic position and have wielded power with little in the way of constraint since Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council was established in 1974. In short, they think they own the Town!
Reading the responses to this post from September last year, Specially for Independents thinking of standing next May! and the very recent, Vote Dave Smith – Independent Candidate Dinnington Ward, clear themes emerge showing Labour’s ugly side, which has been termed, ‘Scum Labour’ by Michael Elmer, referring to Gerald Smith’s antics during the campaign leading up to the elections of last May.
Readers will have been able to draw their own conclusions about Labours Democratic credentials from the discussions referred to above, I would like to focus on Rotherham Labours fundamentally undemocratic attitudes, best exemplified by this comment:
“dave by you going up against simon tweed for rmbc this will cost local rate payers thousands of pounds in election costs and you say you want to save money . so how does this work dave?”
The notion that democratic elections are too expensive and therefore shouldn’t happen, is quite outrageous and very idea that the sitting (Labour) Councillor should be returned without benefit of a democratic mandate acquired as a result of a contested election, equally outrageous!
Labour’s hubris and control freakery has to be challenged by right thinking people!
Labour’s arrogance will be challenged by the likes of folk like Dave Smith and Clive Jepson and with the help of local community activists and Rotherham Politics, will be heard for a change. Refreshing, don’t you think?
Dave Smith’s Campaign Site will appear here shortly, http://davesmith4dinnington.wordpress.com/
JOTTINGS FROM “A QUALITY PARISH COUNCIL!!”
Tell the children that the pantomime season is now well and truly over.
Our theatrical performers have now moved into a new genre. THE FARCE.
THE FARCE – which is – Anston Parish Council
Scene 1. Act 1
Question: Why did Cllr.Liz O’Brian do a cover up job for Iain St.John?
Answer: Maybe she practising to be a magician!
Question: Did she blush beetroot red whilst telling her very elaborate story – That Iain St.John did leave the room after he declared “An Interest!?”
Answer: YES – BRIGHT RED
Question: Did she turn round 180 degrees to see him leave the room?
Answer: NO: she had her back to the door.
Question: Did Iain St.John leave the room?
Answer: NO NO NO – Members of the public emphatically state – He walked over and stood looking at the map which is by the door but in the meeting room.
See Pantomime post of December 2011.
Lying, covering up, dissembling? – All part of the tatty tapestry that is Anston Parish Council.
Scene 1. Act 2
TOO MUCH INTEREST Councillor Joyce Brindley
Question: When did it become acceptable for a parish councillor to comment, in a meeting, about the private life of a member of the public, who was present?
Answer: Never – Cllr Joyce Brindley’s behaviour has in the past, been less than professional and she continues her spleen venting, this time on a member of the public.
Question: Should Cllr Joyce Brindley avail herself of some standards?
Answer: Yes she should – and that goes for the majority of this less than trustworthy lot.
She has been buying into false information – She should ask for a refund!
Scene 1. Act 3
Anston Village Green:
Question: Did a member of the public ask when the track on the south side was going to be repaired?
Queston: Did The Clerk, say it had been repaired?
Answer: Yes he did
Question: Was this contested?
Question: Did Anston Parish Council allow this track to be deliberately damaged & destroyed?
Answer: Oh yes, despite being advised, repeatedly.
Question: In the past did Robin Stonebridge say that he personally would not do any repairs on the village green until hell froze over?
Answer: Absolutely he did – discrimination again.
Question: Has not the Clerk, said in the past, the council have no obligation to repair this track?
Answer: Oh yes he has.
Question: Does Anston Parish Council have a duty to protect & maintain the Village Green which is vested in them?
Answer: Most certainly they do
Question: Then why did they allow a resident of Anston Village Green to systematically destroy the area?
Answer: Good question.
Watch this space good people and learn much more.
This is Anston Parish Council’s repair!
End of Scene 1.
Scramble to the bar. We need a drink to fortify ourselves for what is to come.
Lights down, Curtain up.
Scene 2. Act.1
Question: Did The Clerk say the Green had been litter picked that day?
Answer: Yes he did
Question: Then why is there still a substantial amount of litter on the perimeter that has been there for a very long time?
Answer: Because we are waiting for the wind of change! This then will blow it away!
Question: Did Chairman John Ireland say to the effect “There’s more to Anston than the Village Green. Would that be the Loyal Trooper public house by any chance?
Answer: Make up your own mind audience.
Scene 2. Act.2
Boy Wonder – Booming Beck
Question: Who is this young person trying to impress by booming out unimpressively loudly and aggressively?
Answer: Probably Iain St.John, It does appear he has donned his mantle, shame it’s not the cloak of invisibility.
Question: Does this boy not realise he is emulating Yesterday’s Men?
Answer: Does not care?
Question: Is it appropriate for Booming Beck and Judy Dalton (Vice Chair) to sit sniggering in a pathetic congratulatory way when Booming Beck has delivered one of his tirades?
Answer: NO – but then who cares about decorum – it is Anston Parish Council!
Scene 2. Act.3
The Hapless & Hopeless Chairman Ireland
Question: What on earth or moreover what planet, any planet, is he on?
Answer: Who knows – the only hope for Anston is that he will be sucked into a black hole!
Questions: Did he remain in his seat as Chair during a complaint against him?
Did a member of the public point out his error?
Did the Chairman refuse to take note of correct procedure?
Did he fail to ask for a seconder before evicting Cllr Thornton?
Did he say he didn’t need to?
Did he then realise he should have done so?
Did he then say he already had – and it was Joyce Brindley!!!?
Did he then over look Joyce Brindley “co-operating” with Iain St.John to say she had?
Did he then………………
Oh well – you get the picture
Answers: YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES & YES
Question: Who had planned the ambush?
Answer: Surely not Iain St.John!
Question: Did Joyce Brindley just happen to have her Standing Orders before her and open at Section 50?
Answer: Oh yes – You bet she did
And why – Because Cllr.Thornton was, yet again, pointing out the errors under which Anston Parish Council was operating.
To quote Corporal Jones – “They don’t like it up em sir.” Should that be cur?
SO HERE WE GO AGAIN – YES WE DO – YET AGAIN – yawn – and again
Voting to evict Cllr.Thornton from the meeting.
Question: Did Iain St.John turn in his chair to face Cllr Thornton as he was leaving?
Question: Was he grinning and gloating?
Answer: As a child might after a playground spat.
Question: Did Cllr St.John then become very full of himself and start showing off in the meeting?
Answer: Well what do you think
Question: Do we need to know he has been out on his bike?
Answer: Don’t give a twopenny toss – Not relevant to the meeting, like so much of what comes out of his mouth.
(Fado would have had endless material from this lot of “under” performers!)
HOW VERSATILE THIS LOT ARE! Now from Farce to Tragedy
That Anston has this majority of under performers, playing to and for benefit of The Master Puppeteer.
Question: Has Chairman Ireland admitted to being Ian St.John’s puppet?
Answer: Oh yes, on a number of occasions.
Well we will see how Anston Parish Council is themed at it’s next performance. Come, come and see, if you can stand it. Why should we suffer alone? A good night out! Entrance free.
Lights up – curtain down – NO THUNDEROUS APPLAUSE AND PLEEEEZE NO ENCORE
To paraphrase Rogerson:
If drama were a person (St.John)
He would be a stern and noble fellow (Not)
If it was a comedy (St.John)
He would be a jovial chap (Not)
But if it were a tragedy (Most definitely)
He would be like a solemn girl. (Sure thing)
If drama were a tree (St.John)
He would be a grand old oak. (What a joke)
If it were a comedy (St.John)
He would be the merry beech (Nut)
But if it were tragedy (Most definitely)
He would be a weeping willow. (Surely Twisted Willow!)
Michael Gazur – clerk
Liz O Brien
Iain St John
Mr D Smith and his Professional Heckler Mr Brian Lewis – Dave Smith did not speak.
Bill Brindley husband of Joyce Brindley. At odds/verbally aggressive/confrontational with Brian Lewis.
The Chairman allowed Bill Brindley to speak at will, despite not being a parish councillor, his status at the meeting was that of a member of the public. He certainly should not have had a go at Stuart Thornton.
The Chairman – Ireland, as you might expect, did bugger all about it!
Representatives of The Brethren were there!! But did not speak!