Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Local Council Elections. Should We Check Facts We Post on this website?
I'm no longer a member of any political party. I still regard elections and voting as important. And I've recently noticed that one member of this website posted a mistaken key fact about the May 2026 election. I consider that as citizens we should try to check and correct such facts if possible.
There are two - NOT THREE - Council seats available in some wards. Including St Ann's Ward.
From the Green Party website it appears that Cllr Paton is not standing as a candidate in May.
I regard it as a fact that The Greens rightly judge Climate Change is one of the major threats to our planet.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Clive Carter
-
NEW-LABOUR's line-up.
A possible reason for the delay in announcing the election candidates of the Party of the Ruling Group, may be down to the rule or policy to maintain a particular quota (proportion?) of women.
If there was a need for such a quota, then surely that need has passed. The leader is a woman and at least two of her school girl mates occupy Special Responsibility (£££££) positions in the Haringey New Labour Council Group.
If gender is the important test, then the Conservative Party have managed one PM and one Leader: Margaret Thatcher and Kemi Badenoch. This is a "better" record than either Labour or New Labour.
It's a bit like buying a UK-made product for the sole reason of patriotism. If It cannot sell on its own merits, then what is wrong with it? If a woman cannot be selected solely on their own merits …
There are local women Councillors who could easily be selected on their own merits without the need for any crutch.
Equally, there are currently women councillors who may have been selected some time ago under preferential treatment rules, but who are now long past their sell-by dates …
-
Permalink Reply by Jamie Harper
-
Nothing like a little seething misogyny to fire up the campaign season.
Fortunately, in this particular case, the Lib Dems and then the Greens disregarded any sell-by date and simply discarded it as 'unfit for human consumption'.
-
-
JAMIE, I appreciate that "seething misogny" is no more than trolling, but I would like to offer a correction to my inaccurate post about New Labour's female affirmative action.
And with special reference to the Conservative Party:
My omissions were Theresa May and Liz Truss.
Thus, without artificial preferment, the Conservative Party has produced three women Prime Ministers and their current leader (Kemi Badenoch) is also a woman.
Meanwhile, the Labour Party has produced … ?
Please don't mistake this as a general endorsement of all Conservative Government policy!
(N.B. alongside his many faults, Boris Johnson significantly advanced climate policy; since retarded by his Conservative successor and by New Labour).
——
I speculate that the need for and existence of artificial devices within the Labour Party to promote women election candidates, was due to Labour's previous resistance to women in power.
In the May council election, I intend to vote for at least one woman candidate (Bethany Anderson). Not because she's a woman, but on merit only.
-
-
Haringey's population is made up of 52% women and 48% men. Labour's policy of having 50/50 men and women candidates is male 'affirmative action'.
Your time at Haringey Council seems to have left some real scars.
-
-
Permalink Reply by Alan Stanton
-
Brian Mahoney, now I must apologise to you.
Given the events in Parliament regarding Mandelson I must make an explicit and wide distinction between your minor mistake which you have accepted and corrected, and the deeper and clearly far more serious breakdown in Mandelson's public behaviour and morality.
All of, us including me - have to take elections, voting, political associations, and public appointments with far more seriousness and care.
They matter.
Whether local councillor, school governor, jury member, or every other public office.
To which we may add U.S. Justice Louis Brandeis' saying that the most important political office is that of the private citizen.
-
-
IT IS hard to believe that our kindly and too-trusting Prime Minister was tricked and hoodwinked by smug Mandelson to the degree that Kier Starmer is claiming.
- There is deep co-operation between the Five Eyes nations
- Further, current staff of the FBI, NSA and CIA have no reason to love the current US Administration and in particular it's mad leader; on the contrary
- It seems likely that for such a critical appointment as UK ambassador to the US, any PM would have received detailed advice and information from our security agencies
- In spite of this likelihood, the PM approved the high-risk appointment on balance ~
The reasons would include glowing reports of Mandleson's effectiveness as Trade Commissioner in Brussels and the knowledge that any ambassador would be dealing with an extreme narcissist.
A candidate of endless oleaginous-ness might fit the bill better than a career diplomat. (residual) Trump-flattery is on full display in Laura Kuensberg's interview with Mandelson, here.
Other reasons for the appointment may have been that the unctuous Mandelson has been a top New-Labour crony and one of the most prominent New Labour figures of TB's New Labour project.
And of course, advocacy by No.10 head of staff, Morgan McSweeny. Who appears to be a budding princeling of darkness.
———
Regard for this mess that has yet to unravel may be yet be reflected in the level of support for New Labour's representative leader in Haringey in the May location election.
-
Permalink Reply by John McMullan
-
Where would you check your facts Alan? What if someone else has different and opposing facts? Scientists training AI models have pointed out that 1870-1970 was the highest signal to noise ratio when it comes to training data. That implies that since 1970, we've been producing a lot of nonsense, and probably still are.
You can check your facts on Grokipedia if you like. It probably has something to say about climate change.
-
-
John, an interesting and for me an enticing question. It may suggest (for me) your own mental model of an elected political party and how it works well; or less well; or fails to work; Among different groups of humans drawn together by varying ideologies and cultures. And other factors.
A preceding question is of course whether either of us is knowingly arguing in good faith. I am; are you?
Gordon Brown is probably wondering about "Baron" Mandelson: Did Gordon once trust him? Should he ever have? Or did he gradually or suddenly become Baron Munchhausen?
Someone on BBC Radio wondered if Mandelson fell in love with Epstein.
My "facts" about the Haringey Green Party are far less wild and exaggerated than Baron M. Checking them for yourself would be easy and dull.
-
-
FACT checking:
I often check things on ChatGPT, not least because ChatGPT often or normally provides sources.
I recently asked ChatGPT how to suppress AI-slop videos on YouTube.
A kind of AI versus AI!
The answer was as helpful as one could hope for.
This morning I asked ChatGPT about Grokipedia. I've reproduced below the response in case anyone were tempted to try this tiny subset of the Internet. I won't be using it for checking facts. I did not post on Elon Musk's X-Twitter in 2025 and I don't intend contributing posts to his cess-pit. Grok is deeply related to X's live data.
———
Grokipedia is an unofficial, community-run wiki about Grok, the AI chatbot developed by xAI (Elon Musk’s company).
In plain terms: it’s a fan-maintained reference site that tries to document what Grok is, how it works, what versions exist, features, quirks, updates, prompts, limitations, and comparisons—a bit like a Wikipedia-style knowledge base, but focused specifically on Grok.
A few important clarifications:
Not official: Grokipedia is not run by xAI. It doesn’t speak for them.
Community-edited: Content is written and updated by users, so accuracy can vary.
Meta-documentation: It documents the AI tool, not general knowledge in the way Wikipedia does.
Similar to other AI wikis: Think along the lines of “ChatGPT wiki”, “Midjourney wiki”, etc.
Typical things you’ll find there:
Explanations of Grok’s personality and design goals
Version history and feature changes
Known strengths and weaknesses
Example prompts and usage notes
Comparisons with ChatGPT, Claude, etc.
So: Grokipedia = a fan wiki about Grok, useful for orientation and context, but not an authoritative or contractual source.
.
-
-
Even school children know to be wary of information provided by chatgpt and other llms. But not you Clive. You're on top of all this stuff. So confident, you regularly spam threads with screeds of nonsense pasted directly from the internet. I don't use grokipedia but even I know that what chatgpt has detailed is incorrect
What you have presented here is false. NOT fact.
-
-
Jamie, which parts do you claim are false?
-
-
Oh, don't rely on me, Clive.
Why not paste it into an llm and ask it? Then please try to find a way to blame Haringey Council for your confusion. That will give us all a sense of completion.
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
© 2026 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
