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

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Chris Setz on August 4, 2016 at 19:41

I'm sorry John - I wish i could withdraw the inaccuracies by editing my post, but I can't edit it. I like HoL and appreciate everyone who posts (and Admins) - it must surely be one of the most successful local sites in the UK and I'm very glad it exists.

'only a small bunch'  should have been clearer that only a small bunch of active posters post on local politics. You write 'nonsense' - how many are there then?

"decades insulting the integrity of Cllrs'' sorry, it seemed to me that is was decades and I am wrong - I've only been reading the site for around 6 years - I should have put 'year's.

"name calling" I don't want to dignify Alan's name-calling but putting KoberTories in the search box brings up loads and loads of posts in threads where others chime in on similar lines. That's just one example of name-calling, how many more are there?

"publishing downright lies," I do not think anyone will ever sue this site for anything written because the Admins remove anything that would.

However, when someone states a negative opinion as fact, I call that a lie and they are not removed. So, for instance, there have been many posts attributing nasty motives to Cllrs for going to a property event in Nice to do whatever they did there (none of the Cllrs bothered to explain on this site). There was a torrent of abuse poured on their heads, attributing motives that the posters could not possibly have known to be true - I call those posts lies. Same goes for complaints about the cost of Haringey People, the Comms jobs on offer etc etc - nasty accusations posing as facts are almost certainly lies. The more insidious are things like the phrase 'failing council' (gone out of fashion on HoL now) when the evidence was always a mixed bag - it was a lie oft repeated that LBH was 'failing'.

"egged on by the Council's political opponents." it seems to me that if anyone posts anything negative about the council, the Lib Dem and Tory posters can be almost guaranteed to chime in with a reinforcing post - I can't be bothered to point out examples but just wait until the next one - you won't find the non-Labour Cllrs giving any alternative strategies, they'll just echo criticism and implicitly praise any criticism.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Alan Stanton on August 5, 2016 at 0:40

Chris Setz.  I too used the search box for the term "KoberTories". All the entries except one were from me.The exception was your own post above.
I was really disappointed not to find - as you stated - that "putting that term in the search box brings up loads and loads of posts in threads where others chime in on similar lines." Because I was looking forward to getting enough examples for the word to be accepted by the OED.

You are entitled to consider what I write as "name calling". I consider it legitimate expression of my political opinion about a small group of Labour councillors who in my view, are pursuing Tory policies.

Thanks anyway for trawling through and drawing my attention to some old posts I'd completely forgotten. Did you like the one about the rescue of former Cllr James Ryan from a flash flood near Ducketts Common?  I admit this was almost completely untrue and made up by me.
The truthful bit was flooding from blocked drains. But there was no human rescue chain. And it's untrue that former Cllr Ryan ever said "This has been a wake-up deluge to me". Nor was he wringing water from his underpants as he said it, or at any other time . And no, he did not promise free kayaks for residents. But I did think that readers - including you - would realise this was an exaggerated parody rather than a lie.

You say that you call it a lie, when "someone states a negative opinion as a fact". 
If that comment applies to me I can assure you that I do my best to make it clear when I give my opinion. And also to tell the truth about fact. However, in my recollection you have a strong reluctance to accept the truth of some - perhaps many - solid concrete facts about our Council which I post on this site.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Chris Setz on August 5, 2016 at 10:55

You usually state your narrow range of political views as if they were facts, Alan. Here's the first, typical  example I came across from you in the KoberTories search - there are many others: 

"The Kobertories worship the same gods of Austerity and follow the same religious practices as your own Party. Continually making sacrifices of the poorest and most vulnerable to appease those gods."

If you were a Cllr from any party, sincere and passionate in caring about the disadvantaged, dedicated to trying to prevent the Tories cutting not only to ribbons but to suicide, how would you feel about this opinion presented as a fact?

You were a Cllr long enough to have found many Cllrs worthy of your respect yet you denigrate all of them as of a piece. I fundamentally disagree with many Cllrs but I afford them respect - you don't.  The Leader of the Council deserves respect, and gets it from those whose opinion matters - it's almost a prerequisite to be taken seriously and you are not being because you lack it.

Your name-calling disrespect is one reason we'll never get the powerful engaged here. People like you just pour scorn and seemingly will never afford them the respect they deserve, whatever they do.

>>solid concrete facts about our Council

Can you post any facts to justify the opinion I quote, which you state as fact? It's opinion you've drawn highly selectively, often from other opinions masquerading as facts.  Is there a test we can apply? Political truth is consensus - a  test is the voting record of the public - they've never found your opinion credible - they vote Labour in droves.

What better judgement exists?

Perhaps your most serious fault is ignorance. The ignorant characterisation of a whole group of diverse people from all over our borough as 'sacrificing the poor'. That's nasty but so patently untrue  - surely makes people feel everything you post is tainted with the same unreasonable bitterness and thus, not worth reading. It's the sort of thing you might hear a demagogue claim.

One damage it does is that people will reasonably expect more of this diatribe if ever anyone with authority was to engage with those on HoL who jump on your bandwagon. It would take years of patient to and fro to get you to admit it harms you to waste your powerful intellect but nobody has the time or inclination.

A joy of this site is as a platform for open collaboration in community building - please accept that helping engender unreasonable name-calling works against the common good - enough!

The point is to bring about beneficial change Alan, so please make that your principal aim and measure. In my opinion you're a leader, so please consider helping lead us to a bright and sunny future - we're not all doomed, Alan - things can change, and they certainly will!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Hugh on August 5, 2016 at 13:05

As to the FoF, I see their decision not to post here as a bad call - and since they have contacted me a couple of times about this I have told them as much directly.

I can understand their desire not to get embroiled in ongoing exchanges with people who they feel won't listen, but to fail to at least try to put across your point of view is a mistake. Whilst it may just be poor judgement, it communicates either arrogance or insouciance and is certainly not inclusive. 

Just as in a meeting you don't focus on the heckler, on social media you shouldn't get blind-sided by the flamers and trolls. 

If you look at businesses or groups that have been unfairly criticised on here, a balanced reasoned response is almost always met overwhelmingly on balance with a positive response. At the very least those criticising without basis tend to pipe down and, as in the rest of the media, the quiet majority take note.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Hugh on August 5, 2016 at 17:46

I'm not taking any sides here, I'm merely picking up on the issue of deciding whether or not to contribute.

Permalink Reply by Alan Stanton on August 5, 2016 at 23:33

Chris Setz. You accused me of lying. And then you re-define 'lie' as when "someone states a negative opinion as a fact". 

As an example of this form of  "lying" you quote a single paragraph from one of my exchanges with Clive Carter. Maybe you didn't spot that the topic was the policy of Haringey Council leadership to use Finsbury Park as an asset to generate maximum income. And how the Friends Group were challenging this view of local councils' policies towards publicly owned assets like parks.

Well, you may agree with the Friends Group or the Council, But this is not a lie. Or my opinion presented as fact. It was an accurate factual description of two points of view. One stresses the Council should make money, come what may. The other stresses the high risks of a strategy which can end up with no budget for parks; only income targets from lettings. (Or perhaps in the future, selling bits off.)

Underlying these two viewpoints there's a factual description of two conflicting theories about Public finances; and taxation, Social Security and how modern economies work.
Why did I refer to "gods of austerity" and suggest the Council's policies were "making sacrifices of the poorest and most vulnerable? There is a clue in the next two sentences which you left out.
"It clearly works, as Mount Muswell has not recently erupted in anger."

Now, obviously Muswell Hill is not a live volcano and there are no actual human sacrifices. So what point was I making? Simply that the Austerity policy is a magical belief system. Plainly George Osborne thought it works. He and his friends have a magical theory that by "rolling back the State" the market will provide. The Labour Party has never believed in this magic - at least until recently. But our Council Leadership still thinks it works. And the latter is planning to destroy people's homes and jobs and futures as part of the Austerity/Market solution to Tottenham's problem.

Obviously you are not going to be convinced by me.  So please talk to people in Tottenham who are involved in campaigning. Talk to Martin Ball who you respect. Talk to Rev Paul Nicolson who is campaigning against poverty. Speak to people whose homes are threatened by "red lines" drawn on planning maps. Look at the minutes of the Landowners Group, the real policy makers in Tottenham. A non-elected group which meet in secret. Talk to people in 'Defend Council Housing'. 
Chris, there is no "bright and sunny future", under the current Council leadership.  Political truth need not be consensus when there is no middle ground. And please don't assume I'm in the slightest "bitter". Any more than Rev Paul Nicolson is bitter. Though he's a far braver man than me and is prepared to go to prison for his principles.
Nor am I any sort of 'leader'. Simply one man who spent sixteen years on the Council watching Haringey Labour being taken over by a small group of right-wingers whose policies I genuinely cannot any more tell from the Tories.

You seem to find it very uncomfortable that I don't respect such people. Well respect is earned. And in the last five years or so they have earned none. I don't "denigrate" them if by that you mean I spread lies about Claire Kober and her pals. On the contrary I have the freedom and the responsibility to speak critically and speak the truth.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Chris Setz on August 6, 2016 at 11:41

Thanks for the reply Alan.

You asked me for an example of stating opinions as facts so I quoted the first of many of yours I stumbled upon after a cursory HoL search:

"The Kobertories worship the same gods of Austerity and follow the same religious practices as your own Party. Continually making sacrifices of the poorest and most vulnerable to appease those gods."

I ask you to grant your targets respect, to not denigrate them.

You respond that your statements are facts and those you accuse do not deserve your respect.

End of.

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

We are all critics of the council Alan and I'd like you to be more effective.

Were we to sit down together and exchange views, there'd be many, many things the council do that we'd both agree are wrong.  We could go further - we both know what they should do instead in many situations.

More important to me than two old men shooting the breeze is how can we bring about actual, beneficial change? In this thread I sought the means to get politicians to turn up here and engage with HoLsters on political issues that will result in better local government - more democratic control. I agree with Tony Benn's uncle:

"Politics is the art of looking for trouble; finding it everywhere, diagnosing it wrongly, and applying unsuitable remedies."

So they definitely need to be watched, and need correcting. The huge difference between us is that I admire our politicians for their qualities - I don't think they are evil, just often mistaken. I am pretty sure they, like me, genuinely want what's best for everyone and I fully accept responsibility for their decisions. They do stuff in my name, whether I like it or not. The only legitimate thing I can do in opposing (given that I'm not prepared to stand for election) is, by force of argument, convince them to change course. I want a better system (and yes, I know how that would work) but this is the system we have to work with until things change.

The easiest for me would be if they popped up here, laid out their case, debated objections and modified where necessary. I'm particularly keen in my belief that more democratic control is better. People engage less and less. Look at Zena's election as our Harringay Cllr - 25% turnout, only 11% voted for her. That's the mountain I want climbed - getting people to care enough to actually contribute the precious, enriching things we all possess - opinions and ideas.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Alan Stanton on August 8, 2016 at 0:45

Chris Setz, you ignore my response and repeat the same comment as before. Your ask me to grant my targets respect. They aren't my targets, Chris. They are my  political opponents. I believe people earn respect. You admire them for their qualities. I judge them on their actions.
You see yourself as an old man shooting the breeze. I am a citizen engaged with other citizens - young, old, and middle aged - to improve and prevent harm to where we live.
You seem to want everyone to be nice to one another and listen to one another's arguments. Yeah, that would be good. But I did the Mr Nice Guy stuff as an insider for years and years. I can honestly report to you that there are people who believe what they believe with a closed-minded-eyes-and-ears-tight-shut world view.

Don't believe me? Try Prof Joseph Stiglitz. He often writes articles along these lines and wrote one in the Guardian on 6 August. He refers to "market fundamentalism" - also called neoliberalism - as "an unwavering faith in markets". He says these beliefs "are held with such conviction and certainty immune to contrary evidence, that they are rightly described as an ideology".

Okay, I jokingly exaggerated to make the point that we are seeing almost a religious right-wing worldview. They may not  worship a volcano called Mount Muswell. Give them a property developer, starchitect or football millionaire and watch them kneel.
But forget the possibility that, open-hearted and open-minded, they will sit down with either of us and say with genuine curiosity: "Hmm, that's really interesting.  Please tell me more."

You probably know that even Oliver Cromwell, who wasn't exactly wishy-washy about other people's beliefs, wrote on one occasion:
"I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible that you may be mistaken."
You tell me you want a better system and that you know how that would work. You want to try your luck beseeching the KoberTories? Go ahead, shoot breeze.

Permalink Reply by John McMullan on August 8, 2016 at 8:04

"I'm impressed that a small group of right wingers as you call them Alan can take over Haringey labour." <- don't be impressed. I've been warning that the membership was too low and that it was easy to take over a ward with just a half dozen friends.

Permalink Reply by Alan Stanton on August 8, 2016 at 14:29

Thing is, John McMullan, the reason nobody heeded your warnings was that a hollowed out Party suited a few people who treated it as their private entitlement. As I've tried to explain to Chris Setz, asking people to give up comfortable certainties is incredibly hard for them. (Especially so when they've spending their time in a cave trying to make sense of shadows on the wall selected for them by others. But I haven't mentioned that example in case it appears to be lying.)
As for asking people to give up influence and privileges. You'll remember that on and offline we talked about the "big man" structure of power.
I suspect that all main parties may have these sorts of problems in Haringey and elsewhere.
But what a shock to a mouldering system in Labour! All these tens of thousands of people joining or rejoining! In some parts they can hardly find an affordable hall big enough for an all-member meeting.  And so much moaning on Twitter from people who complain that they're the ones who delivered the leaflets and donated the money. And yet here are these young and not so young and even older people who want change and to bring in fresh ideas.
Outrageous. Anyone would think Labour was a lively, buzzy political Party instead of a shrinking moribund private club which met to re-elect the same people, approve the minutes and draw the raffle.

Permalink Reply by Liz on August 4, 2016 at 17:18

That's odd.

Only last week I published a response to my concerns about Downhills Park cafe on here from Peray Ahmet, cabinet member. While people were dismayed at the time it was taking to get the cafe open, they certainly didn't engage in any vitriol or insults to her integrity. There was no name calling, blaming her for everything that has gone wrong or scorn poured on her or any other councillor. Indeed Peray herself was linking to the discussion from her Twitter feed. 

Not too long ago, another poster raised concerns about local residents being excluded from decisions about local heritage and one of our regulars chased up an answer from "the council" and posted it. Job done. No lies, no scorn, no bile. Just regular reporting in a way that perhaps we can no longer expect from stretched and underpaid local journalists. 

Please bring to my attention where downright lies have been published. As John says, we are keen to avoid the courts. 

You don't live in Harringay, Chris, therefore I think its quite hard for you to judge what "impact" the site has. The technology can never claim to influence anything any more than the bricks of a church hall can influence a residents meeting.

What people can get here is advice (see the fly tipping or Costa threads), support, and general discussion. Sometimes, they can get a free mattress, or a new kitten. Sometimes, a charity in need of bikes for asylum seekers gets given free bikes from their neighbours. Sometimes, people who are distressed find some comfort. Sometimes, the overly sarcastic upset people and get their knuckles rapped. Sometimes, people find out about a place or event they never knew about. Sometimes, they have a giggle. Sometimes, people make a bit of dosh selling stuff they don't need. Sometimes, people get an answer to question about something they've seen. Sometimes, they have a chat about the old times under a picture or a discussion of the past. Sometimes, they find a babysitter, a cleaner or a handyman. Sometimes they find a way to volunteer. Sometimes they find a new place to live. Sometimes they are met with silence. This is what people do here. I know this because I compile the mail out every week. Your curious belief that this site is drowning in bile is not borne out by reality. 

As a footnote, take a look at most councillors Twitter streams. Very few concern themselves with local politics or discussing local issues. Most (not all, there are one or two exceptions) prefer selfies of themselves on campaign trails or to get involved with national arguments about politics championing their particular leader choice and where they can apparently handle themselves very well when faced with vitriol if they choose to. Contrast this with councillors from other areas and you'll see quite the difference (e.g. Cllr Philip Glanville in Hackney frequently tweets about housing policy in Hackney and the dull stuff of meetings and committees - he's now running for Mayor of Hackney though so a few more campaign selfies perhaps understandably).

There is a crisis of communication in Haringey but, trust me, it's nothing to do with this site.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Chris Setz on August 4, 2016 at 20:10

Thanks Liz - I don't mean to come across as a critic - I'm someone who wants HoL to be even better.  Most of HoLsters don't actually live in Harringay so I'm in the majority - I live in in a neighbouring ward and often visit.

When I originally posted on this topic I was gutted to have to acknowledge the advice of an expert (Hugh) because of whom I had to suppress my fervent hope that it would be worthwhile for politicians to post on this site. I acknowledge his expertise and changed my view. Things may have moved on but unless they have, it's not worth their while.  This blows a hole in any aspiration that posting here could make a political difference.

You give an example of a response to a Cabinet Member's activity but not of her actually posting on HoL - as far as I know no cabinet member and very few Cllrs have ever posted here on any topic.  

Perhaps a more important point is that we can hold them to account - I guess that's mainly why they stay away - they don't want to have to field the many queries/rebuttals they'd have to make if they raised their heads over the parapet.  They simply don't have time to reply to the endless stream of comments they're get I suppose and that's a real shame - people have a right to a reply.

You write : "The technology can never claim to influence anything any more than the bricks of a church hall can influence a residents meeting."

Then you go onto to list a whole bunch of good stuff that have happened because of HoL. With respect, I think you miss the point. The technology creates opportunities that couldn't have existed before. Lots of things were impossible before telephones existed and some uses of the phone are really bad, so rules are set by those who control the plumbing. Using tech is  beneficial because stuff wouldn't happen were it not used. It's the people who post who count of course, they're the ones that are the real gold but, for example, it's tech like being able to use an alias that emancipates them IMHO. Some wouldn't tell the truth if they had to 'show their face' (give their real names), as you would have to in a church hall. So choice of tech decisively shapes the final offer, It not only influences what but also how people communicate and thus produces better outcomes than previous methods.

Cllrs have begun to post on Facebook though and I hope that means that eventually they will start to recognise HoL as a neighbourhood forum with a wide reach and thus HoLsters they must address. I suggest that we can accelerate that involvement if people give them more of the respect they deserve and accept our collective responsibility to make constructive criticism.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 8
• 9
• 10
• 11
• Next ›
• Page