How can we get our local politicians and other public servants to post regularly in this forum?

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Protheroe O'Shea on September 28, 2014 at 11:07

By not voting labour in the next local elections.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Chris Setz on September 28, 2014 at 11:20

One thing we know for sure is that people in Haringey vote Labour and have voted Labour consistently for decades.  'Not voting Labour' will have no effect at all. 20% of us did that, but 20% of us did vote Labour - the rest didn't even vote.

You need to be the change you want to see, not run away and hide.  Labour are in power at least for the next three years - do local stuff that shows what your values and principles are. People elect those who they believe in.  If you can't do that, you're wrong.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Philip on September 28, 2014 at 11:39

There are very few people who 'believe' in Labour. Labour don't even know what they believe in any more. The opinion polls show a drop in support for them after Conference! Milibean is so awful that it would be better if he never spoke! 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Gordon Peters on October 3, 2014 at 18:45

As Prospective Parliamentary Candidate of the Green Party for Hornsey and Wood Green, I am happy tp post on this forum.

One bit of immediate news is Greens coming third in Woodside ward by-election yesterday, still  behind Lib Dems here but catching them up fast [as nationally polling at about same on 8% mark] and Woodside probably our weakest ward. Offering alternative to the mainstream austerity and cynicism, and at same time squeezing out the right, Tories and UKIP, in Haringey

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Chris Setz on October 3, 2014 at 19:41

Thanks Gordon!

Can you say why it is worth your while to post here?

I see the Woodside result posted on http://voting.haringey.gov.uk/woodside-by-election-2014/ :

Candidate	Party	Votes
Charles Wright	Labour	1,331
Dawn Barnes	Liberal Democrat	482
Tom Davidson	Green Party	191
Andrew Robert Price	UKIP	161
Scott Green	Conservative	140
Vivek Lehal	TUSC	35
Pauline Gibson	Independent	23

Percentage turnout: 25.03%

The byelection was caused by the sad death of Cllr Egan - the results from this ward in May 2014, five months ago were:

Name of Candidate	Party	Votes	Elected
ADAN Bee	Independent	61
ALLAN Kirsty	Liberal Democrats	361
BROWN Craig	Liberal Democrats	418
DEAN Kathryn	Green Party	406
EGAN Patrick Alphonsus	Labour Party	1,947	Yes
GAUTAMI Jack	Trade Unionists and Socialists Against Cuts	100
GRAVETT Jodie Louise	UK Independence Party (UKIP)	259
MEEHAN George Francis	Labour Party	2,018	Yes
NOBLE David	Conservative Party	271
PEARCE Laurence	Conservative Party	244
RENNIE David	Green Party	342
SHAUGHNESSY Mike	Green Party	254
SHEEN David	Conservative Party	207
SQUIRE Roxanne	Liberal Democrats	393
WATERS Ann Margaret	Labour Party	1,865	Yes

Percentage turnout: 35.30%

--------------------------------------

Was any aspect of the campaign affected by the internet, do you think?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Philip on September 28, 2014 at 11:14

Can there be question more relevant to the crisis in our public life today? I have no idea of the ideas and attitudes of our local or national politicians other than bland soundbites. It is part of the great 'disconnect' where there is a wholesale transitioning of public policy and decision making into the private sector while our politicians stand idly by, scratching their arses. Nothing epitomises this more than David Lammy. He debates with nobody. He doesn't reply to emails or letters. Now he wants to run for Mayor or London. However, he still plans to stand as MP in the next election, but only resign if he fails to win! So if he wins, it will force a byelection, and if he loses, he keeps his overpaid job. Hardly a ringing endorsement of his commitment to the people of Tottenham. He has recently called for the lifting of the sanctions on the borrowing by local authorities of funds to build council houses, a move brought in by Thatcher. However, it could have been overturned by the last Labour governent, of which Lammy was a member, but the silence from him then was deafening. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Chris Setz on September 28, 2014 at 11:43

Do you not like David Lammy then :)

I don't see how you can complain about him when he is not doing anything wrong.  He is perfectly at liberty to conduct himself as he wishes and all MPs must be being particularly well-behaved as scrutiny of their every private move is more intense than it's ever been.

You seem to have a personal grudge against him because he is doing things you don't like - that's crazy. You live here, follow the rules - our reps are allowed to do more or less whatever they want - respect that. What you should not do is:

a) Speak for the people of Tottenham - you don't have the cohones to stand up for election and even if you did, you wouldn't get in, so who are you to pronounce as to what the poeple of Tottenham want, like, should or should not do?

b) Make unprovable grandiose generalisations and state them as facts. What you have is a personal opinion.  Assuming you are not a professional politician, you have no claim whatsoever that anyone should even consider what you say, let alone respond to it.

c) Make accusations that are patently false and expect to be believed. You wrote:

>>He doesn't reply to emails or letters. 

Oh come on Philip - enough with the stuff and nonsense! You want him to reply to you with your nasty opinions and obvious dislike for the guy rather than deal with those in real need? You can get him to do what you want, if what you want is what he wants.  He is elected to represent us and has been a Cabinet Minister as far as I recall.  He seems like a perfectly capable politician to me - I don't agree with the other David (Cameron) but I respect and support his right to ram whatever he wants down our throats. I hate war but he's gone to war on my behalf - I take responsibility for that.

You don't seem to and seem to live in a fantasy world where shouting abuse means something - it doesn't.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by markb on September 28, 2014 at 12:31

After a few back & forths with David Lammy (well, his office), the summary of my experience is:

- Bet hedging: I've yet to receive an answer from him where he takes an an actual position on anything. Philip Foxe's point on running for Mayor / MP, adds to this.

- Glory hound: When asked why he wasn't supporting an Early Days Motion by (Tom Watson, Labour. I received this:

".... However, David prefers to focus his time on leading parliamentary activity and policy on his key issues rather than dividing his time across hundreds of issues. Naturally, he cares about this important issue of... ". 

Plenty other MPs, cross party, signed the EDM, he's clearly doesn't care enough if there's no glory to be had.

- Whipped: Tows the Labour party line. "He will of course, support his Labour colleagues who are calling for reform on the very issues you have raised by voting with his party, so as long as it consistent with his conscience. " (Notice the non-committal stance)  Said EDM was followed by a vote on a directly related issue, where he just towed the party line, despite  'caring' and 'supporting'.

So, either David isn't like this and his office does a bad job articulating his position/actions - or he's just one of those carreer politicians that weasels his way up the political ladder.   Actions speak louder than words, so I'm going with the latter.

"I hate war but he's gone to war on my behalf - I take responsibility for that." 

Why? If you didn't vote for Cameron, what more could you do other than write a letter that gets promptly dismissed? In this profoundly broken first-past the post pretend democratic system you have no responsibilty for the actions of the clowns at the top. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Chris Setz on September 28, 2014 at 13:21

Please don't post rubbish - your opinion really, really doesn't matter- it's what you do about it that counts.

>>Bet hedging

So, because he didn't answer he's hedging his bets?  This is fantasy - he does nothing that is in any way related to you or your thoughts about him. Do you really believe this judgement you've made about him is true for you and may be true for others?  

>>Glory hound

Again, your judgement is so poor as to be irrelevant - where are your supporters?  Who else agrees with you? Just flinging insults because your attempt to manipulate a senior politician failed doesn't make you right, it makes you weird.  Basically, you are unable to make a balanced judgement, you are blinded by your own prejudices but worse, if you were able to reach a balanced view, it would not matter one way or the other - he presents the view of the electorate whether you like it or not. If his representative view is not yours, that does not mean you have a right to supplant his democratic view - get over it.

>>Whipped

All the major parties whip - look at what was written in response - that is precisely what every MP has the right to do - you, by refusing to accept the reality, make your views unworthy of a response.  Yet you got one, even though the responder knows it was a waste of their precious resource trying to influence you - I think that is a tribute to them.

You can go about campaigning to abolish the whip, but why do you think it is still in place after centuries?  Your MP is obliged to follow it as a condition for joining their party - what are MPs supposed to do?  Drop out and cross the house to sit as independents on day one? Is it because politicians are stupid and only you can see what ought to happen? If you were elected, say, to the Council, would you follow the whip, or not? If you don't follow the whip, you'll never get any responsibility and are cheating the party that selected you to band together with the other elected reps.

>> what more could you do other than write a letter

You miss the point - it's not so much what I think is right, it's accepting that I am not alone, but part of something I alone cannot control - it's done in my name because I have given up some of my rights.

By living here I accept the right of Cameron to decide to do things that I can be blamed for, even if I am dead against him - collective responsibility.   Think of the family who loses someone in an RAF drone strike abroad - do you think they will reason, "I blame Cameron but Chris on HoL objected, so he's excused?"

As to what you can do yourself, where to start? Karl Mark was a foreigner who lived in abject poverty with a big family in Clerkenwell and is buried in Highgate Cemetery. Orwell got many ideas for 1984 from the view of the UCL Senate he passed on the bus every day. Tony Benn gave up a peerage to devote his life to the people and is probably the most famous politician in our history. More recently Owen Jones wrote a simple book about ordinary people and has gained great respect for his views. Laurie Penny wrote a blog.  Jack Munroe lived in Southend on £10 per week for ages (with a small child to support) and wrote about how to get by. Then there are the people who organsie and participate in the many and varied forms of direct action - UK Uncut, Occupy etc etc, even the Greens. There are loads of them and they matter - they change things for the better in various demonstrable ways - you?

Changing things is incredibly difficult - you have to be a genius because we are all full of different opinions and ideas, yet people who try were mostly ordinary people when they began. You seem to think it's easy, just write whatever occurs to you - imagine the chaos 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by markb on September 28, 2014 at 16:02

I'll only dive into a couple of your points - there are too many straw men and other logical fallacies in your argumentation to address them all.

"part of something I alone cannot control - it's done in my name because I have given up some of my rights."

You didn't give up any rights, you never had that right - you were born into such a system and you never had say in the matter. Why would you accept any responsability for it, unless you perpetuate said system. It's equivalent to calling every German or Russian responsible for the atrocieties of their 20th century regimes.  Pars-pro toto fallacy.

"Think of the family who loses someone in an RAF drone strike abroad - do you think they will reason, "I blame Cameron but Chris on HoL objected, so he's excused?""

The halfwit-in-the-street may not have a nuanced view when attributing blame, but every individual is responsible for their own actions, so yes, you're excused :)

This is especially important when you're trying to build bridges in a conflict situation.  Most people, and politics & media in particular often reduce conflict to simplistic "us vs them"  arguments that perpetuates conflict and ignorance.  The detail, the individual matters.

"he presents the view of the electorate whether you like it or not."

Really? 35% of the electorate voted for him/the Labour candidate in the 2010 election, or 60% of those that could be bothered to vote. Which is a very solid result but still leaves 65% to 40% are stuck with a representative they didn't vote for. Being generous, he at best presents a bit more than half the electorates view, that still excludes a lot of people views. Do you think that's a good thing?

Of course I accept that he's my representative, just one that is not much use in changing things in a way sympathetic to my world view. In practice that doesn't make him much of a representative other than in name.

"They change things for the better in various demonstrable ways - you?"

'for the better', depends on your world-view (though I tend to align with the groups you listed). And yes, I do support & participate in various think-tanks, spanning topics from drug policy reform, civil & digital rights and power-concentration.

I'm a firm believer in the unrepresentativeness & oppressiveness of the large party-political system. The recent cross-party agreements, combined with the whip system puts power in the hands of party leaders and effectively disenfranchises all voters. It's a complete stichup, as Tom Watson MP called it.  The end of this way of governance cannot come soon enough.

Devolve & decentralize power. It's good for democracy, if not that, then at least it will be a bit representative.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Chris Setz on September 28, 2014 at 16:45

I think you've tried to dismiss all my arguments as valueless, yet I think you agree with me. It would really help if you 'came clean' and used your real name - are you, in fact, a well-known pundit?

Assuming you vote in Harringay: when the opinion of the electorate is asked for in a debate on matters that affect them, Cllrs give that opinion on your behalf.

They don't give your opinion (say, on a 20mph speed limit). They give their own opinion based on whatever criteria they wish - they do not need to speak to a single voter if they don't want to, agreed? That is a matter of fact.

Now, if the 20mph limit turns out to do real damage to the borough and costs us money in some weird way I can't think of at the moment, we all, including you who may oppose it, have to pay for this mistaken policy implementation.

The central idea is that:

you have ceded rights to your representative, whilst remaining responsible for their actions.

I think you have , you think you haven't, right? 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by markb on September 29, 2014 at 7:53

I can guarantee I am not a well known pundit. I've never worked in media. For fun though, which one do you think I am?

We are agreed that councillor & politicians can do whatever the hell they want. I think the scope is limited to the platform they ran on, that's called the mandate.

You think you're responsible for their actions. I don't and I take none, unless I helped vote them into office.  I also don't I have ceded my rights. That was decided well before I showed up in this world.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• …
• 11
• Next ›
• Page