Letter to the Messenger about Policing in Gillingham South

My letter to today's Medway Messenger regarding the anti-social behaviour and policing in Gillingham. This is the letter in its original format.

---

There is growing anger in the Residential areas of Gillingham where residents are feeling abandoned by the local police. Time and again there is antisocial behaviour on Sturdee Avenue, Valley road, Franklin road and on the High street. Alleyways are haunted by youths smoking and under aged drinking and sometimes worse.The Forrester's hall on Sturdee Avenue was broken into and vandalised regularly and this has been reported to the Police on more than one occasion including by myself on 5th January.

However it took the neighbourhood watch meeting, which I attended as a resident, and the pressure of LibDem councillors Diana Smith and Geoff Juby that the council has acted. More importantly a WPC and PCSO were spotted securing the property on the 28th January the day after the meeting!I tend to agree with one of the residents that if we were living Rochester then the Police and indeed Council officers would have acted more swiftly and attended the neighbourhood watch meeting in the first place!

The people of Gillingham South ward deserve better from both the council and police.

Chris Sams, Sturdee Avenue

Anti-social behaviour in Gillingham South

 

Police patrolling Valley road tonight

Last night I attended the Valley Road neighbourhood watch at the Sturdee Club on Sturdee Avenue. Though I don't live in Valley Road, it was suggested I went along by Lib Dem Cllr. Diana Smith as I knew about a couple of the issues from first hand experience. 

 

Forrester's Hall sits opposite the Cricketers pub and has been used in the past as a polling station and general hall for hire, indeed two of my daughter's birthday parties were held there. In June 2013 the caretaker told me that he hoped to sell it but I never heard more than that until January 5th this year. On my way home from work I noticed the side door open and the lights on. Further investigation showed the extent of the damage with windows smashed, floor boards ripped up and evidence of a fire and alcohol consumption. I duly dialled 101 and informed the police. In the following week I saw students of Robert Napier school (in uniform) entering the hall before school though being late for work I did not have time to confront them and the hall has since been locked.

 

On other occasions I've encountered groups in the alleyways and garages between Sturdee and Valley who have either been confrontational or exceptionally sheepish but never thought much about it, except on one occasion when I was walking my children home from Woodlands. 

 

Last night proved the situation has become much worse. According to the residents of Valley Road, a street I had experienced as quiet and sleepy, a group of youths were causing mayhem. There was vandalism to vehicles, property, theft, dangerous driving of scooters, foul language, under aged smoking and drinking and even drug abuse. They use the alleys and garages as a rat run away from the main roads and escape route from the police should they turn up. The sense of outrage among residents was very clear to see and action is being demanded.

 

Gillingham South Liberal Democrat Councillor Geoff Juby, together with his two fellow ward candidates for the forthcoming 2015 Local Elections and Cllr. Diana Smith, with her fellow Lib Dem candidate for Watling ward listened and contributed to the meeting by promising to look into the cost of gating up the alleyways and the effectiveness of the consultation process. The Community Warden for Rainham North, who was also in attendance at the invitation of Cllr. Diana Smith also agreed he would pursue the matter and was a useful source of information.

 

Residents have been advised to report ALL anti-social behaviour on 101 and all public property damage to the council on 01634 333333. There were a lot of individual experiences of the antics of a small minority of youths but as a community everyone needs to stand up and say ‘No’ and this is what happened last night.

 

There was no police attendance at the meeting last night and despite the PCSO’s letter of apology stating that not only was it his off duty night but he had prior plans (all understandable), there was anger that no stand-in would come. The residents are feeling abandoned and not important enough, strongly suggesting that if we were living in Rochester then this would have been sorted out very quickly. 

 

We will be following these matters up and collectively updating residents at an early future meeting.

Rochester and Strood by-election results

Well, after a very long night and a couple of hours snatched sleep I thought I’d write about what the heck happened yesterday.

Firstly the UKIP victory in the Parliamentary By-election. To be honest it was no big surprise. A month ago when it was announced there was a belief that it was all flash in the pan and that Mark Reckless would be handed an embarrassing defeat at the hands of his former masters or even Labour.

As the time has gone on the amount of UKIP activists, doners and support has grown (or been bussed in) and Rochester has been worked hard. This was met by the Tories and Labour who have had MP after MP down and even the Prime Minister. This was never going to be a normal election.

Ultimately the majority attained was nothing to significant. With a turnout of over 50% Mark only managed to get a majority of 3000 over Kelly Tolhurst (his majority back in 2010 was 10,000). The Tories were celebrating this last night. They know that come May when UKIP will be spreading their activists and money over a larger area of North Kent, especially if Farage is going to stand in Thanet, that Mark will see this lead eroded.

What does this mean for Medway politics in the local election (held on the same day as the General)? Well it could lead to one of two outcomes.

The first is that this victory may buoy up the local party and they will make a valiant charge snapping up council seats drastically altering the shape of the local authority. This is their aim.

The second is that with the removal of resources could force them to make tough decisions. As Mark’s lead is fairly tenuous they may be forced to through what resources they have available to keep him at the cost of local councillors.

This of course is fairly hypothetical we’d have to see.

Needless to say that the Tories are stung and will be coming for them.

As will the Labour party. Naushaba Kahn fought a tough campaign with a lot of support from the local party and Westminster elect. If anything there was a belief that this was Labour's chance to regain the swing seat with the usual right of centre voters torn between UKIP and Tories.

Although they worked hard and attracted a lot of support they failed to make much of a media imprint and ultimately ended well shy of Mark scoring only 6.713 votes.

This has massive ramifications for Ed Miliband and the Labour party, not necessarily the hard working local party.

Labour's main definition at the moment is not the Coalition and let's face it the Tories (and we've signed off on them or are guilty by association) have pushed through some really nasty stuff - badger culls, ATOS, cuts to services, tuition fees... the list is exhaustive and all along, week after week we have to suffer Ed saying he and Labour would never agree to any of this and Ed Balls promising that Labour's economic plan (whatever it is) was much better.

With the extreme views of UKIP and the unpopularity of the  Conservative Government you would have thought the swing seat may have swung back to Labour. The fact it didn't suggests another two things.

The first that voters saw the Conservatives with Kelly Tolhurst's Local girl, local issues campaign as the best alternative and didn't want to split the anti UKIP vote or, and perhaps more alarmingly for Labour, that there is a serious problem with their message.

The whole situation must be even more concerning for the Conservatives. They threw the Kitchen sink at UKIP and although performed really well coming short by a small margin in both the parliamentary and the Hoo Peninsula ward by-election (Ron Sands (CON)  got 1965 against Chris Irvine's (UKIP) 2850) they still failed, despite the resources flung, to make it closer.

As I've said, this could be a temporary blip or it could be the opening of the flood gates. Already some of the old stalwart supporters of the Medway Conservatives have already jumped ship and it might be the beginning of a landslide. There is also a general malaise against the local Tories and should UKIP erupt like a tumour with a handful of Tory Councillors going purple between now and May it could change the face of Medway's Council.

Now with heavy heart I turn to the Libdem result.  It looks awful. Geoff Juby got under 1% in the parliamentary and I gained just over 1% in the Hoo by-election. Geoff's share of the vote collapsed by 15% of its 2010 share. It is being hailed as the worse performance of the Liberal Democrats in a By-election ever...

Now this will sound like a lot of excuses but here is the truth.

Geoff worked hard, and I mean damn hard with a dedicated team of local activists with a few visits from Westminster but this was not Eastleigh. This was not to be our battle ground, not a target seat this time around and Clegg et al did not appear with armies of Libdems busing in from across the country bank rolled by HQ and shadowy donors. This was a local battle led by a local candidate backed up by local activists.

This was always going to be a battle between the Tories and UKIP.

As for me. I am ecstatic about my 1% after all I did absolutely no canvassing or campaigning. Hoo was never a seat we could have won, nor did we have any presence out there. As many regular readers know my son was born on 10th October, had his first operation on 13th and I have been busy with my family settling in George. I'm amazed I got that many votes by doing nothing and I would like to thank everyone who did vote for me, next time will be definitely different.

The two great stories to come out of this election was firstly -

Britain first only got 56 votes. This, although depressing that they got more votes than some of the Independents is uplifting (I got more votes than them in one ward by election!!!) because even the Monster raving loony party did better than them! Truly a laughing stock.

The other is the results of the Green party. They fought a good campaign with a good candidate and scored a respectable fourth place with (1692 votes) in the parliamentary and local (314 votes). This was a great result for them and I've already sent my congratulations via Twitter.

Not to take anything away from them but the rise in support may be because they are now the non-UKIP protest party.  Ten years ago that was the Libdem party (though my Mum always voted Green!) but with the Coalition we've become part of the establishment so people tend to vote for a non-governmental party. If you don't want UKIP then the next best choice is Green. We could see some serious gains by the Greens next year if UKIP continue to develop in the towns.

I know a lot of this is all speculation bolstered with educated guesses but there is so much that could happen that at this moment in time (with four hours sleep) I'm not prepared to tie my colours to the mast until February or even April.

I will however close with a warning however to the other parties. The results of last night belay how strong we are in our wards, getting rid of the Libdems in Medway is going to be a tough proposition.

Tory claims Libdems support Boris Island - er no we don't

I was interested to read the report in the Medway Messenger about former minister and Liberal Democrat Jeremy Browne has stated that Boris island is a good idea for the economy and that the nation should take a risk and will ultimately benefited.

This however is not the view of the National party, who voted in conference not to support the move, and the local party who have always stood in opposition to the Airport in the Estuary and indeed on the Hoo peninsula and Cliffe.

Liberal Democrat Council group leader Geoff Juby stated in the paper that;

It is all very well having these grand ideas, but has he ever run a business? Does he really know what he's talking about? The answer is no. I think a lot of these academics don't understand the practicalities of having an airport at Cliffe.

Ultimately this story is saying that an MP has an opinion, much like the Conservative Mayor of London, Boris Johnson, or indeed the Conservative MP for Tatton and Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne who is said to back the idea - this is not Liberal Democrat party policy nor is it likely to be in the near future...

Which leads me to part II of this post.

I saw a tweet earlier from Cllr Chris Irvine (Con) stating:

Lib Dems throw support behind Thames Estuary airport. You really can't trust them #NoEstuaryAirport pic.twitter.com/W0Mzr3rYHe
— Chris Irvine (@cgi247) April 17, 2014

Just the adding of the letter S makes it look like the whole party are backing this horrific idea that will shatter the fragile eco-systems in the North Kent Marshes and will significantly damage the way of life here in Medway and indeed across the waters in South Essex.

I find this quite interesting as Cllr Irvine is currently attacking Labour PPC Cllr Osborne for being disingenuous on Local  TV about  his housing status and yet here we are with a slightly disingenuous statement that implies Party policy has changed massively to the detriment of the people in Medway and even had the tag line saying you cannot trust us...

Huh...

Pot... Kettle...

Roads before Runways

Livingston Road Canyon.

One of the things to come out of the Rochester Airport debate at last weeks full council was a plea from freshly defected Labour Councillor Andy Stamp who in his report stated that a couple of roads in Gillingham

North had now reached such levels of deteriation that they were now unsafe.

If has been something of a common complaint around the Medway towns, our roads are in a dire straights and I have as many pictures of potholes on my phone as I have pictures of my kids. Some have been there for a long time and Livingston road in my ward of Gillingham South, is particularly bad - made worse because the holes were filled in last year so badly that they have deterioated in months as well as the excess gravel not being cleared away afterwards!

Indeed the pavements are dangerous too having been dug up and filled in countless times with scars that rund in long routes along our byways. The pathment outside the esplanade of shops in Sturdee avenue is cratered like the moon and is a trip hazard for elderly residents and disabled (like my daughter who has walking difficulties and has to wear splints) alike.

Would it not be better to sink the £4.4 million that is going into the Airport reinvestment into making our roads and pavements safe?

I'm not knocking Medway or the airport - just pointing out that there are areas that are in more of an urgent need of these funds - something the Liberal Democrats (and Labour) pointed out to the Conservatives last week.

I understand fiom Cllr Juby (Lib Dem) that he has petitioned to get Livingston Road and Balmoral Road completely resurfaced and many holes are to be filled on roads like Pier Road where cars were bouncing along the road!

What of the rest though? What do the Conservative led Council think the priority for the people of Medway is; an Airport used by hundreds or roads used by us all?

Full Council, Rochester airport, theatre, waste and local politics

Thursday night I went to the theatre. I wasn't watching a musical or Shakespeare or even or one of those modern ones where everyone speaks Dutch and it turns out that lead character is actually a moose. Unfortunately I was at Medway Full Council meeting.

It was awfully entertaining and a member of Democratic services showed me to my seat. I was nervous as I had a question to ask with a supplementary etched out if the answer failed to hit the right point.

The pageantry began on time when we were upstanding for the gold mace, officers and the Mayor and Deputy Mayor. All took their place at the table overlooking the Councillors and the audience quickly followed by opening prayers.

The whistle blew and kick off began with a short debate on the length of Public questions. Vince Maple, leader of the Labour group, argued for 45 minutes instead of the usual 30 due to the number who had come or until we got to question 25 so everyone got to ask at least one. It took enough time for three questions to reach a consensus and then it began. After the preliminaries it got to the public questions.

Up stepped the villains of the piece; Cllrs Chitty and Jarrett. They quashed repeated questions and concerns about the development of Rochester airport. Cllr Chitty has shifted all safety concerns to the CAA and swatted away safety concerns by saying that they would look at the safety measures fully as part of a crash investigation. Cllr Jarrett conducted himself in a boorish manner akin to Herman Göring with refusals to repeat himself and answering with blunt disregard to the situation. At this early stage I could tell that no matter what anyone else thought or said.

The Audience got to participate too with traditional calls of "Oh no its not!"
As well as new ones like;

"Utter Crap!" (my favourite) and "Have you read it?!" referring to a particular safety report that Cllr Chitty seems to be ignoring.

Then it was my turn. Clutching my scribbled notes I stepped up before the bench and tried to steel myself with the Anglo-Germanic Sams stubbornness and belligerence. I was not here for political reasons but first and fore most as a concerned parent.

Cllr Mike O'Brien answered my question politely and concisely and in the manner I should have expected but with the added sting that the 40% cut figure I had been lead to believe was true was in fact false. (proper blogpost will follow when I receive the written answer.)

"Do you have a supplementary question Mr Sams?"

My mouth dry, my notes irrelevant and my resolve crumbling into full retreat I stared at the microphone for what seemed an eternity before shaking my head and fleeing back to my seat mentally berating my cowardice.

The back and forth restarted and when the 45 minutes were up a further debate was had as to whether or

not they could just press ahead and get question 24 and 25 done and with much heaving and sighing it was agreed.

Cllr Chambers' report

When this was all dealt with and some of the public drifted away Cllr Chambers rose to his feet and like Chancellor Palpatine gave his report, soft and gentle, barely audible in the public gallery but full of barbs and excuses - It isn't our fault the schools were rated badly it is because Ofsted moved the goal posts! It is the press only reporting the negative things on us - we're doing a good job really...

Vince Maple spoke well and welcomed Commrades Stamp and Cooper to the mix and spoke scathingly of Tory failings on sure starts and waste on Rochester airport when other services were in danger. Clearly he was very much the hero of the piece.

Cllr Juby spoke briefly agreeing on some points with Cllr Chambers and disagreeing on others but the real limelight was being reserved for Cllr Jarrett's return.

A couple of sly swipes at Cllr Stamp for defecting (again) and continued bluster that impressed no one and made him no more friends in the audience but to be honest I don't think he cares.

Other bit part players came on with Cllr Stamp whining that Cllr Jarrett was making cheap political and personal shots at his expense which gained at least two scoffs from the audience (one being me, get a sense of humour or some thicker skin Andy, as my sister would say "get over yourself"). Cllr Osborne got up and, though I agreed with most of what he said, channelled the party political broadcast. He spoke like an air raid siren droning on and on and addressing the audience more than the opposition in a style that sounded like a party rally or hustings event rather than full council and it washed like a wave over pretty much everyone with no effect.

I admit that I don't know much about what is going on with the airport, I have been to busy worrying about my own problems and the Nursery situation that almost stopped my wife going back to work. However as a layman watching I thought Cllr Murray's amendments to slow agreeing on the future of the airport until after the consultation was finished was a good one. In the past the Council have been accused of holding consultations because they had to and that a decission had already been made. Such was an accusation about the Care homes like Nelson's court where it was pushed through and assurances have been found to be built on sand. Having seen Cllr Jarrett's and Chitty's performances on Thursday I think it is already a done deal no matter what the residents of the Davis estate (who live under the flight path) think or what the rest of us who have had services cut think of the £4.4m that is being allocated to this. Cllrs Cooper (lab), Juby (ld), Gilroy (Lab) Griffiths (lab) and others spoke at length about the services that could benefit with this money especially the elderly and children. Cllr Stamp argued that the Strand that is used by thousands a year could have the sea defences repaired (having fallen into the sea and are dangerous) and the whole area spruced up or a hundred people could benefit from the new airport improvements. Both opposition parties were united and voted in favour but the Tory administration shrugged and voted it down.

I had drifted off into my own world not long after that but Cllr Tollhurst's (con) defence of the airport plans woke me up. She was very passionate about it and condemning the Labour group for what happend some fifteen years ago and their aims to still concrete it over. She argued that if you were against it then you were "Knocking Medway" and we should be proud of the airport - I left not long afterwards somewhat confused and cross.

I've spent time asking myself if I really want to be elected to this theatre and as yet I still haven't found a really compelling answer yet. The only thing I keep coming back to is that things must change. I saw very little representation of the people of Medway there last night. A lot of the bit parts did, some of the leads such as Vince Maple did, probably under all the hot air and party bluster, Cllr Osborne did maybe, Cllr Juby and Smith spoke of it too but the top two or three Conservatives I... I just couldn't see it. They seem to be bulldozing ahead with the scheme and that is it, they know what is best and we will have to agree and see that they're right - yet again just like the bus station, Medway tunnel etc... etc...

Cllr Juby's Column; Do we take Democracy for granted?

We moan about successive governments, whether or not we support any particular party, but I think we don’t appreciate how lucky we are that every five years, we have the chance to make changes.

Democracy only works with the consent of the people, and we are fortunate that we do have a right to organise public demonstrations. though these may cost us, the taxpayer, a lot of money on policing! The fact that we have a free press does mean that it is rare for things to get out of control and the police are accountable.

Yes, we have had our riots with arson and looting, but this pales into insignificance when we look at other countries which are struggling to achieve democratic government.  The whole of the Middle East, as well as some countries in Africa, South America and Asia, seems to be on a knife edge. The only people who pay the price in the end are the millions of innocent men women and children who are either killed or maimed, or end up as refugees causing huge problems elsewhere – and incidentally to us as well in terms of overseas aid.

Politicians of all parties spend a lot of time on doorsteps trying to persuade people to vote and what we all hate is apathy – the ‘It doesn’t make any difference’ attitude.  Parliament is full of mudslinging as to who funds political campaigns – if political parties were funded centrally on their membership numbers it could encourage more of us to actually become involved.  Why should big business and trade unions call the shots for the rest of us?

Everything from cleaning the streets to international negotiations is decided by politicians, maybe some of us need to do some soul searching well in advance of the next elections!

I do tend to agree with Geoff on the issue of Party funding. The current trend at Prime Minister's questions is about Lynton Crosby or Unite and the petty placed questions that have cropped up time and again over the last three weeks have all monopolised this well trodden path and not addressed issues that could/should have been brought to the Prime Minister's attention.

The Liberal Democrats are mainly funded by members for the members and have no vested interests and I think the Conservatives and Labour party need to show the same willingness to cap donations from groups and show themselves as free from direction of vested interests.

That said, I think Parliament also needs modernising and rules changed. Pitt the Younger no longer walks the halls, neither does Earl Grey, Lord Salisbury or Asquith - the rules and language are antiquated and has been used to create this Party partisan fighting that ultimately doesn't help anyone. The public needs to get more involved yes but I think that Parliament also needs to be flexible and actually engage more with the Public and the best way to start this is by cutting the bickering, keep it constructive and actually debate the issues rather than who is responsible for the problem in the first place.

Privitisation of services just not affordable

A few weeks ago Libdem Council group leader Geoff Juby had this to say in his Party People column for the Medway Messenger.

I went on a day trip to France to visit friends living in a tiny hamlet in the countryside. What an eye

opener.

Britain is part of Europe but we don't enjoy the same economic benefits as our partners. First, utilities - water rates where they pay in a year what I pay in a month, and their equivalent of council tax is £140 per year (including TV licence).

As many of our utilities are now provided by French-owned companies, I wonder why there is such an enormous price differential - perhaps we are paying for cheaper service for the French.

It makes one wonder if privatisation has really benefited us, as both Conservative and Labour governments have pursued privatisation with enthusiasm.

Thirteen years of Labour Government forgot the working population as it created a cosy relationship with big business and multiple money-gobbling quangos.

Our NHS is wonderful for many things, but the dental service seems to be cheaper in Europe and much more patient focused - I know of cases where friends travel to Europe for dental treatment rather than pay NHS charges.
In France, electricity is cheap, with lots of wind farms serving small villages (the village is allowed to keep some of the profits). Planning is much easier, but i think this probably because local government MEANS local - a mayor for any settlement of more than 20 people, and has decision making powers.

Here, we seem to going for ever bigger councils and decision-making has to pass through so many layers of officialdom. Also, nobody seems to be accountable for misinformation, as purchaser of blue badges are finding out when they apply for renewals within the two months specified, only to find out it takes weeks longer and they are left stranded.

Indeed, privatisation is forcing average working families into a forced servitude. With ever increasing bills for utilities and even commuting to and from work and with the average wage rising by one or two percent people are getting priced out and have to wonder whether or not to put the heating on or draw a bath.

With the 40% cut to Council nurseries in Medway the fees ware likely to rise by a similar amount which will price many working families out of child care. It will become uneconomic for one partner to work part time as they're wages may not cover the bill of one child and especially not two. This will leave many working families in the Medway towns reduced to one wage and having to make some very real choices as to what they can and cannot afford including utility bills.

What will our Government or Local council do to help us or will we remain as indentured customers to big business.

Cllr Juby: Where is our money safe?

Cllr Geoff Juby's recent column in the Medway Messenger:

The recent crisis in Cyprus, where the more you save the more you lose seems to be called

for by the EU, is putting another nail in the coffin for ordinary people who struggle all their working lives to save for retirement, only to find that their savings are practically worthless.  At the moment it seems that if you are elderly you either have to have a very large savings pot, or none at all. Too many people find that their savings are not giving additional income because of low interest rates, yet they are deprived of benefits because they have a few pounds put by for a rainy day. We are trying to encourage young people to make independent pension arrangements, but what incentives are there for them?

We used to trust our banks, but events over the last few years mean that anyone with decent savings has to juggle money so that if a bank goes bust they don’t lose too much, and now we have the added worry that governments might just decide to help themselves to our cash to pay off debts which were partly incurred by bailing out the banks in the first place.

  Whatever budget steps are taken it always seem that the very rich seem to be protected (like the reduction to 45% tax on high earners). Small local businesses fold because business rates are at an unsustainable level for all except the massive high street chains. They force down the prices they pay for goods to a level which enables them to crowd out independent retailers and still return massive profits.

We can no longer trust in money investment in property, small business enterprise or gold – we will all end  up keeping our rapidly devaluing twenty quid notes under mattresses!

Council disregard consultation and privitise Care homes

Geoff Juby Spoke out against closure

A year ago I stood out in the cold with Sophie as part of a march to try and save Nelson's court care home here in the Medway towns... Ultimately we failed.

(You can follow the thread of Nelson Court posts here...)

Medway Council have officially sold them off now. Councillor Geoff Juby has released the following press release:

Medway council came under attack last night at the council meeting over its sell off of Nelson Court and Robert Bean Lodge residential homes for dementia sufferers. Cllr Geoff Juby pointed out that all the promises to the staff and the residents and families had been broken and that the consultation process was a costly sham.  Priority was supposed to have been given to a non profit making organisation, and though this criteria was fulfilled by two of the three main bidders the sale was made to a private commercial company based in Dorset.  Cllr Juby said this morning that with meetings held in secret behind closed doors, the whole process had been a complete disgrace and was a stain on Medway Council.  He also adds that the savings the council are hoping to make will eventually become additional costs as the private sector will not cope with the more challenging clients and now there is no fall back position for social services to call on except the more expensive nursing homes.

This is a bad outcome for some of Society's most vulnerable.

As I looked through my old posts I also found the following statement from 3rd March last year:

To not only refuse to allow members of the public to speak or ask questions, but to also refuse to allow another democratically elected councillor to address the committee, is dictatorship of the worst kind.  We are quick to criticise other regimes elsewhere for refusing to listen to the public, but the ruling Tory group have totally ignored the overwhelming public consultation on the matter of our care homes, have gagged their staff and are now gagging other councillors and those members of the public who have come to the meeting.

This whole process seems to be a complete sham. It also seems, as was postulated at the very beginning by various politicos and campaigners - Cllr Jarrett et al. had a plan and they weren't going to deviate from it. Whether this is a fair reflection is open to conjecture.

Local Libdem Councillors (Diana Smith, Geoff Juby and Shelia Kearney) did what they could, as did other opposition Councillors and activists from the Labour Party, Greens and even the Socialist parties. All for nought. The Council didn't want to listen to the people and democracy has been basically shown the middle finger.

Now the decision has been made I just hope that those who are in need of care are taken care of and that the concerns of Cllr Juby, and others are proven unwarranted.

I'd like share a sentiment though; I dread becoming old and infirm in this country and definitely in the Medway towns as our Council just don't seem to care about it's citizens, only the revenue.

Lib dem Councillor Juby on EU referendum

Cllr Juby's column for the Medway Messenger:

---

I find it slightly worrying that so much energy and time is being spent on debating the pros and cons of a referendum on Europe.  Most people have definite views on whether we should stay in or come out, but I am getting vibes that the public would rather like to know sooner rather than later. Perhaps not only the public – if I were a foreign investor with a few billions to spare I might be thinking twice about putting my cash into Great Britain, given the fact that half our foreign markets may disappear by the time factories and built and are profitable. 

A few things have really benefitted working people here, the main one being the introduction of the minimum wage.  Also we have a couple of million British nationals who live in Europe, many of them with jobs – not to mention that the cheapest holidays to the sun, all involve travel within the European union (don’t forget that the Canary Islands, Majorca etc. all come in this category). Many Britons enjoy the ski slopes as well, and  we do not know how the rest of Europe will react to us pulling the plug - we may all end up holidaying in the rain here!

 Most of our problems seem to stem from popular objection to the  immigration from Europe, especially at a time when we are desperately short of jobs and houses.  A lot of European countries seem able cherry pick which dictats they choose to obey but it always looks as if we fall over backwards in order to meet the letter of European law!  Perhaps I am wrong in this, but public perceptions are a very powerful force and I am glad that Nick Clegg, for once, has spoken out on this issue.

Disbelief at Libdem abstaining over Gay Marriage motion

Before I start, I want to make it clear that is definitely a personal blog and has no connection to the Local or National party - more a vent.

Last week, at full council Medway's Labour group brought forward a motion to discuss Gay Marriage and urge the Council to write a letter to the Medway MPs urging them to support the motion as it passed through Parliament.

I was unable to attend full council as I had an early (4am) start the following day but I followed along on Twitter.

There was an amendment made by the Conservatives arguing the MPs had a free vote and that the Council should leave it to Parliament to vote on.

Without putting words in their mouth there is the problem of Rehman Chishti MP who also sits on the Council and is opposed to Gay Marriage. You can see that it could be embarrassing and that they'd argue this was a wholly political move.

I, on the other hand disagree with this hypothesis. I truly believe that Medway Labour submitted this as a genuine move with good motivations. After all this is an important piece of civil liberty legislature and has got a lot of support on the ground a fact ignored by Rehman Chishti who claims 80% of responses in Gillingham & Rainham have opposed it despite the petition he received from Mid-Kent College in favour.

Anyway, the chamber descended into a debate which became very heated with one Tory Councillor saying that marriage was out of the question as there could be no chance of children (-I Know! News flash adoption!) and another who intimated that next step would be polygamy!

Labour put in a spirited defence led by the indefatigable Vince Maple but the Tory wall stood firm and in a heated moment and understandably angry Cllr Osborne referred to the Tories as Thatcherite bigots - this obviously caused a backlash amongst the Conservative benchs especially with Cllr Tollhurst who took umbrage at being tarred with the same brush.

The motion was rejected by the Conservative majority and their amendment passed. Only Labour (minus Cllr Igwe who had a convenience break), the Independents and one Conservative (Cllr Watson) opposed.

So where were the Liberal Democrats? How did our three councillors feel?

Who knows? They didn't partake in the vote and abstained on both votes!!!!

When I read Ed Jennings' twitter stream I shared his horror and spent the next day exchanging DMs discussing wtf had gone amiss. As Exec members when been eager to speak to our councillors beforehand at our meeting two days before - unfortunately only Geoff had attended and we'd not got round to it before he left. Our mistake was presuming that a civil Liberty would be backed by Liberals.

The fact that the Council group sat on the fence on something we as a party have agreed as policy was ridiculous!

I could understand if they had voted for or against Labour's motion (not my view but I can respect their opinion) or if Geoff had taken the stand to say that in the group's opinion this was not a council matter or was purely an opportunistic move by Labour (again, not my position but at least it is a position!).

Both Ed and I have voiced our opinions publicly online and our local chair has been contacted - questions will be asked.

I feel the need to apologise for the council group dropping the ball on this, believe me that you aren't the only ones who have been let down by this inaction.

Cllr Geoff Juby on Taxation and TV liceneces

Liberal Democrat group Leader, Geoff Juby's column from this week's Medway Messenger - Needless to say I agree with Geoff on the Taxation!
<hr>

In recent months there has been a lot of publicity given to the subject of taxation and benefits.  Are we in danger of following Greece, Spain and Ireland in running into massive deficits because of an inability to actually collect the taxes due? 

Major multinational corporations pay little or no UK tax – and many of the members of parliament, and the House of Lords,  who should be addressing this problem are themselves in a questionable situation with regard to their own tax payments.

Isn’t it time that companies took a pride in publicising their tax contributions instead of trying to avoid them?  Public opinion is a powerful sales tool – how many of us would actively support a commercial company who boasted of the millions paid into the exchequer each year!


The poor and disabled are suffering humiliating interviews and loss of income because of the publicity around a few false claimants, and it’s costing almost as much as the savings to fund the appeals and administration.  Apart from a very limited number we all pay what is now an unnecessary tax calling itself a television licence! 

Sometimes I wonder whether the BBC might be better accepting advertising like every other television channel – I have not been able to discern any particular commercial bias in the multiple channels available to us. Now nearly everyone has access to Freeserve, and I don’t think I am the only person to comment that the BBC news coverage can fall short of that provided by other channels. 

Proportionately the licence fee falls very heavily on low income families who may rely on television more than those who can afford foreign holidays, theatre trips and other entertainments.  Let’s hope that the Christmas telly is good, and in spite of current hard times, we all manage to enjoy the festive season.

Medway Libdems and the PCC

Ok, I know that this is rather a moot point at the moment as I meant to write this last week before being laid out by man flu.

On Friday 9th November - Yes I know, again, sorry - a letter from the Medway Liberal Democrat's chair, Tony Jeacock was published in the Medway Messenger.

Danger of politicising the Police policy in county.

Cllr Mackinlay states if elected as Police commissioner, he'll take all the salary as he considers it a 24/7 job.

Surely this would mean a by-election in River ward in which he holds a council seat. All six PCC candidates proclaim their independence from party political influence.

Cllr Mackinlay, formerly UKIP, now Conservative, Piers Wauchope formerly Conservative and now UKIP, Steve Uncles an English democrat and Harriet Yeo, life long Labour, while "Independent", Dai Liyanage, a past Libdem, pronounces he has had no political party affiliations for the past two years.

He fails to mention he jumped the Libdem ship before he was pushed because of disloyalry to the party, or that he tried unsuccessfully to get the Libdems to accept him back into the fold during the last six months.

With European Arrest Warrant being a piece of EU Legislation which assisted in catching and arresting dangerous and violent criminals, like Hussain Osman, one of the London bombers, and considering that both UKIP and many Conservative MPs want to opt out of EU measures, it would be worthwhile knowing the position of each candidate on the EAW and whether they would fight to save it.

Libdems in Kent voted against PCCs, as we are against the potential for the Kent Police force becoming politicised and thus distorting policing policy, especially towards the end of the four year term of office when the PCC will be seeking re-election for a further four years.

There was also Cllr Geoff Juby's column in Party People

Role has the power to corrupt.

Whoever thought up the idea of having just one person in charge of a whole police force must have forgotten their history, and the lessons from the past about how total power can corrupt.

The current system of having a police authority overseeing each force may be a quango, something which I normally oppose, but at least it had some elements of democracy and some safeguards. The Police authority is made up of a mix of elected politicians and people from the community so different people can ask whatever questions they like and also request investigations into complaints against the Police.

One person will be expected to cover the work of thirteen people from diverse origin and opinion. I still don't see how it will work or how accountable the system will be. Each council area will appoint Councillors to a "Scrutiny" panel but my experience of scrutiny so far is it has no powers and even fewer teeth!

The Government is pushing the idea of a person independent of political affiliations, a concept which Liberal Democrats locally do agree with and have not fielded a candidate, unlike Conservatives and Labour who have put forward current serving councillors!

What is all important about this new police Commissioner will be his or her integrity. Old fashioned perhaps but in this instance I am hoping that people who go out and vote will put aside political party loyalties, or the natural instinct to vote for a name they recognise, and really research the character and ideas of each candidate before they put a cross on the piece of paper on November 15th

Wise words from both Geoff and Tony on the subject.

As I've said in the past, I like the idealist nature of the Commissioner but in reality I do wonder about the Political nature of the whole thing and whether or not the PCC would listen to party masters on policy and not the people of Kent (All 1.6 million or so).

That's why I voted for Ann Barnes, an Independent.

I personally feel that the campaign was tinged by national politics and a certain amount of scaremongering. 

There was talk on the Twittersphere of voting Labour to stop privatisation of the Police force. If Mackinlay got in surely the Tories would move to privatise certain aspects of the Police force.

I'm not sure that this is possible as surely, Commissioner or no, this sort of decision would have to be taken in Westminster not Maidstone Police HQ. Further to that I haven't seen any evidence to support this theory. That doesn't mean it is not out there, just that I've not found it yet.

It is an easy way to scare people into voting a certain way and is used a lot during National debate and elections. The kind of thing that puts people off politics and may even effect the really low turn out of some 16%!

This is all in the past of course. A PCC has been elected and it is now up to us, and I mean you and I, citizens of Kent, to watch this experiment progress and see what has been put in motion....

Libdem conference Votes NO to Boris Island

Peter Welch of Southend West

Whilst some political groups and commentators will still warn you off the almost inevitability of Boris Island as the "least negative option" but last Sunday a big step was taken at the Liberal Democrat Party conference.
t
Medway's very own Cllr Geoff Juby, leader of our Council group was due to speak and a good contingent of our exec committee were there too including our Chairman Tony Jeacock.

In the end Geoff was not called to speak but Peter Welch of Southend West spoke passionately and eloquently against the proposals.

Conference voted AGAINST any estuary airport.

Let's just be clear so there can be no calls of inconsistency or claims to the contrary;

The Liberal Democrats are in support of creating a new HUB airport. They are AGAINST any Heathrow expansion or development in the Thames estuary.

Hope everyone has got that.

Any way, I've attached the party email from Mr Welch and included the link to the petition.


I spoke against Boris Johnson’s idea of a Thames Estuary Airport at Liberal Democrat conference last Sunday – and won a big vote. I told conference delegates that the ideas being pushed by London’s Conservative mayor were wrong on environmental, economic and aviation grounds.

I reminded delegates of the beauty of the Estuary, inviting them to come and see for themselves:
Come and visit the estuary sometime. Come to Leigh on Sea and to Old Leigh. Gaze out across the Estuary. You will probably be surprised at how beautiful it is. Locals are always tweeting pictures of the estuary, while they wait for a train in the morning. Every day it is different. You’ll be surprised at all the wildlife, so close to London, even while the centre of the estuary is a busy shipping route. There are 300 000 sea birds in the estuary, harbour seals, even seahorses. You’ll probably say to yourself: this should be protected.
And guess what? It is!  If you destroy the unique wetlands of the estuary, you breach the Ramsar convention, you breach the Habitats Directive, and you destroy sites of Special Scientific Interest. You’d be breaking international agreements.

I told them that the Isle of Grain proposals were estimated to cost at least £50 billion, would involve building far out into the Estuary, and would that there would be no return on this investment for years and years.
Lastly I told the conference that the Chief Executive of NATS had described the Estuary as “the worst possible place to put an airport”. It would interfere with the flight paths at least four of our present airports – and the risk of bird strike would be unacceptably high.

Conference voted for my amendment - ruling out the Estuary option  - by a massive majority.

Peter Welch 
2010 Liberal Democrat candidate
Southend West

PS: We need to continue campaigning. It helps if you can forward this email to people you know who are or may be opposed. They can then sign the petition at http://campaigns.libdems.org.uk/Estuary%20Airport%20Petition
A special thanks to all the people who have printed out petition sheets and collected signatures from friends, neighbours and colleagues. We have had a great response.



It will be interesting to see if Labour's members back the move in today's motion. Even more so, the reception it will receive at the Conservative party conference next week. The Liberal Democrats have stood up for common sense on this matter - lets hope the others do to.

If there is a general consensus of all three parties Nationally, as there is locally in Medway, in Southend and in North Kent then we can block this proposal and sink Boris Island once and for all.

Time to call it quits?

So my reduced services pledge and sabbatical is going well!!!!

Before I went on leave I wrote a blog  post about my writing, this blog and what I'm thinking for the future (here) and well... I've been thinking.

Tonight, following a massive mix up on the part of a Local Labour member and myself, which has all been cleared up having him genuinely not seeing the disclaimer in the corner of this blog, I started to analyse the blog, my role in the local party and politics as a whole.

Its like a whirling aerial dogfight. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy dogfighting but it should remain in the air where it belongs.

I've spoken about this before and about how I spent my teenage years preparing for a battle that had happened some fifty years before by cleaving my way through enemy airforces (usually in a BF 110 taking the RAF apart) but I didn't expect to still be doing it in another form.

I got into politics quite by accident. It started as a dare to stand up for my chosen party, then I went to a few meetings, wrote a few things about Southeastern ticket rises etc... Next thing I know I'm on the Total Politics blog top 100, Group Secretary, a prospective candidate for election... What the heck happened?

Partly its a selfish act.

I want what is best for my family and for families like mine across the Medway towns. I am motivated as a tax payer and resident by the issues that tick me off or make me happy and I want a better life for us.

If I'm involved I'm part of a solution rather than sitting at home bitching about the Council or the Government.

I truly believe that Politics should be open and honest and conducted by grown ups.

I'm sorely disappointed.

There are those like Vince Maple, Geoff Juby, Tracey Crouch et al. who aren't into the game playing, who believe in the same as I.

There are however many more who are into playing the game. Its all about the twisting words, semantics, the accusations, the mud flinging, the down right dirty play and even straight up fibs. For them party victory is THE most important thing. They're not isolated to just the Labour party, there are those in the Conservatives and I am ashamed to say it, yes even the Libdems.

All I can say is; I tire of it.

There came a point that even Molders and Hartmann grew tired of dogfighting and left it to younger pilots. Is this now my turn to bring her about and head back to the airfield and take a desk job?

Maybe it is. After all my life's ambition is to obtain true peace and quiet mixed with a good book and comfy arm chair.

My family is the most important thing to me and with the birth of my son Oliver three weeks ago, I've been finding my time has been severely dented. So much so that I am seriously considering not running for secretary again this year as I can't guarantee I'll get to every meeting. I'm almost tempted to just fade back into the ether of the Medway Political scene and become a small l Liberal.

Then I think of what my Great Grandfather Walter used to say;

When you're right - fight.

I want to fight for a better Politics, the New Politics.
I want to fight for a fairer deal for my family and millions like us.
I want to fight through the lies and continue to tell truths.
I want to fight for and win for the Libdems because I believe we are a good party and one that represents the people accurately - or at least in the Medway Towns.

I also think of how it hurts to give up the Secretary position and although I may have to accept that bitter blow I can get a less important role in the Exec and still be heavily involved but still have the option of missing the occasional meeting.

I'll be honest I am torn... Further thought and discussions with our Group Chair are needed.

I've not written this to be dramatic or as an attention seeking exercise - I'm just saying it how it is.

Play area neglected by Council's cleaners?

Today, as the sun had finally come out, I took my daughter Sophie to the park after nursery. As she ran around and I took photos of her gleefully putting "dogdog" into the seesaw or swings when to my horror and concern she came back clutching a WKD blue glass bottle.

I hurriedly removed it from her and put it in the bin. Then I took a serious look around the play area at Rookery fields Gillingham.

I know that play areas tend to attract a crowd of disaffected teens with "Nothing to do" and with this crowd comes a trail of devastation and litter. As I looked around I saw two crushed Coke cans, an empty can of Fosters, general litter and fag ends (despite the sign asking people to refrain from smoking). This was further compounded by the two teens sat on the larger swings trying to twist the chains up to the top and the other two hogging the seesaw. I know that this wave of litter can be unpredictable too so I'm not too concerned about that. Any large litter can be picked up and binned as I did with the WKD bottle.

What did get my attention was the broken glass beneath the Waste bin in the centre of the park.

Underneath it are shards of Green glass from a broken bottle - and they've been there for months. I first spotted them whilst putting something in the bin back on 6th May. I thought nothing of it and presumed that someone would sweep them up when the park was next cleaned.

I was wrong.

Two weeks ago I sent a fresh picture of the shards to the Medway Council Twitter feed as I didn't know quite what else to do about it as my out of date phone does not allow me to download the "LveMedway" app. (when I get my new Iphone however!!!) I also tweeted a picture of the melted bin in Livingston road at the same time. The bin was replaced in a week the glass still remains.

I am loathed to ask if anyone does actually clean the park? I've seen the street cleaners in there and I know large waste is picked up as I notice the day to day changes on my way to drop Sophie at Nursery but the play area is often missed. I must admit I saw the WKD bottle on the floor in there this morning as I walked past and in retrospect should have done something about it.

I don't want anyone to lose their job over this, nor do I want to go hunting for blame. What I'm asking is that our children's play areas are swept and have rubbish removed once a day. As you can see from the picture some of these shards are pretty nasty and it only takes a toddler to fall on them and be scarred for life.

The other option is to get all "Big Society" on their backsides and go around and do it myself and it came close but I find myself lacking time. I'm also loathed to say anything to teenagers loitering and littering as they usually outnumber me and since bad experiences at school I've been wary of large groups of teens.

Local Libdem Councillors Geoff Juby, Shelia Kearney (and Stephen Kearney before 2011) have worked hard to improve the playground facilities and park so we have a nice area to play and sit in the sun. I implore local residents to please pick up your litter afterwards and also to the Council to please get someone to regularly go in and sweep.

Thanks

The "New Politics" is dead.

One of the things that drew me to the Liberal Democrats, apart from polices, was a certain honesty that wasn't questionable unlike New Labour and their spin machine and the fading memories of Conservative sleaze that rocked the Major Administration.

I became inspired by Nick. As the expenses scandal hit the news and the "truth" that the public had held about MPs being corrupt was proven, only one person seemed to be listening to the public out cry as Nick called for Parliament to extend its session to get to the bottom of this.

Leadership debates followed and Clegg stepped up over the bickering of Blue vs. Red and spoke to the people, spoke to me.
"The New Politics" it was dubbed. Moving away from party over people or bitter blood feuds against the old enemy. Its something I believe in, something I think is worth fighting for.

But New Politics is now the same as the Old.

70% of people failed to vote last week in local elections, Politics is failing the people.

Parliament is like the battle of Waterloo - A furious battle between two opposing armies hell bent on the other's destruction. In fact blog posts and Political pundits of all sides talk in terms that sound like Napoleonic battle reports.
(I'm not singling out Cllr Osborne as an attack, only for illustrative purposes as writers from all parties are guilty of this - So if you're reading this Tris I'm sorry.)

Both sides are now hell bent on taking the middle ground, a metaphorical La Haye Saint, and losing strength on their left and right flanks respectively.

I know (well hope), that at heart politicos believe their candidate would be the best at representing the people than the others but outwardly it seems that its all about the winning.

When slogans like Labour cannot win here (Winchester Conservative Group) or Only Labour can oppose the Tory Council (Medway Labour) and the Libdems have done as bad. It sounds pathetic and I want to bang peoples heads together and knock some sense into them.

Take a look around you.

The Public have been screwed over by Labour, they've faced Conservative austerity and now they've been failed by the Libdems too and the paragon of virtue that was Nick Clegg has "Sold Out" for a whiff of power.

No one perceivable politician or party stands up for the common man.

My Sister said to me a few weeks ago;
Why should I vote? What's the point they're all the same - A year ago I'd had an answer but now there is only silence.

Cllr Juby raised similar comments in "Party People" a few weeks ago about a lack of representation and too much Party before people and I echo those sentiments. Maybe its because we're such a small group in Medway with a small clutch of Councillors - I'm not trying to be Holier than thou- but we spend a lot of time talking about the people of Medway rather than a resurgent Gold tide that will sweep the Tories and Labour away. Although I'm sure my observations could be true for Libdem groups and politicos around the country too.

Another thing is the misleading comments. Last week before the local and Mayoral elections rising Labour star Chuka Umunna tweeted this:

Needless to say there was no response.

Voting Labour in a local election today will not oust Cameron tomorrow. Last year local Libdem Councillors were berated on the doorstep for their failure to stop tuition fees! This isn't down to voter ignorance but to years and years of political leaflets blurring the party lines between local and national issues.

Yet, hope remains were company stays true... Some MPs including Libdems Greg Mulholland, Dr Julian Huppert and local Conservative MP Tracey Crouch (to name but a few) restore a certain amount of faith in that they are willing to put down Party loyalty and vote for their constituencies. Mulholland and Huppert voted against tuition fee rises and the NHS bills! Tracey recently stood up for constituents against the Government line on Mesothelioma and Asbestosis sufferers.

Party's are about linking like minded people with in parliament not about forming two separate power blocs who are hell bent on the destruction of the other. Politicians, politicos and pundits are losing sight of what its all about and I urge everyone to please take a look around you and remember why we are doing what we're doing and try to recapture that idea of "New Politics" it is what is needed for the benefit of all.

Council has failed those in need at Nelson Court

 A great dis-service has been done to those in need by the ruling Conservative group in Medway council.

Nelson Court

The on going saga of Medway's elderly care homes is drawing to a close but not in the way campaigners, including myself, had hoped.

Now I know that in politics as in warfare, you cannot win every battle and as much as you believe you are correct and your opponents are wrong there are occasions when it works out the other way.
Sometimes the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few - other times the state or majority are shown to be oppressing the few and the decision is reversed.
All you can hope for is that the process and consultation is just and fair, all get to speak and that the deliberations are carried out in a balanced manner.

This has not been the case for the care homes.

It is true, that in these times of austerity tough decisions will have to be made, services are going to suffer one way or the other - for good or bad we're in this together and unfortunately the innocent will suffer with the guilty - well apparently.

For the moment the Balfour centre has a temporary reprieve - the two general care homes (Robert Bean Lodge in Rochester and Platters farm Lodge) are to be outsourced but ultimately they will remain under the control of the Council and available to the public and as the staff should have their contracts taken over by the new owner. Touch wood they will remain the same and continue under the same high standards at no extra cost.

Nelson's lodge, the specialist dementia care home, is to be sold of to a Private provider. I must admit that I have been unable to get to the scrutiny meetings or indeed the council meetings due to life and work getting in the way but, Maureen Ruparel, the organiser of the Save Nelson Court group has kept up updates on the Facebook group and, as a Liberal Democrat has sent regular reports to the Executive Committee meetings so I will use those from henceforth.

According to Maureen's posts the consultation has been a "Charade" and to quote her directly (from the 15th February - sited on the Facebook group)

As we suspected, the Conservatives haven't listened to the people. the cabinet has decided to go ahead with the sell off in spite of all the feeling against it. What a farce this consultation business is - the money would be better spent on services instead of all the paper, postage and officer time needed for a bit of theatre that is absolutely meaningless.

Indeed, Cllr Osborne (lab) had suggested that the Consultation was a forgone conclusion with the Cllr Jarrett having already pre-budgeted for the sale before the Consultation had even started. If this claim is true it would mean that however the Consultation went it didn't matter. It was always going to be their aim. There were also suggestions that the meetings were not taken seriously by those on the committee.

Cllr Juby

Another meeting was called by the Labour group on Thursday evening to discuss Co-oping them. The problem with this meeting is that our councillors (Dianna Smith, Shelia Kearney and Geoff Juby) were told that they were not allowed to speak, nor were the public. Maureen had this to say on Facebook;

I have just walked out of the scrutiny meeting held this evening as my blood pressure couldn't take any more of the crass attitude of the Tories. In spite of a request put by the Labour Party they still refused to allow any members of the public to speak, and on top of this they even refused to allow other elected councillors to address the committee!!! This is not democracy, it is total dictatorship and after completely ignoring the results of the so called public consultation they are determined to press ahead with the sell off of one of the council's prize assets. Labour and Liberal Democrats have only asked that the council look at other ways of saving the money, and at least let the management and staff put forward ideas for making savings, but the Conservatives are hell bent on getting rid of Nelson Court, and the other two facilities, at the earliest opportunity with no concept of how this will affect staff, residents and relatives. In the beginning of this campaign we tried to keep politics out of it, and hoped that the voices of those most concerned with the well being of our many frail elderly with special care needs would be heard. Unfortunately the intransigence of the ruling group and their refusal to listen to the public forced political action.

Geoff Juby, leader of the Libdem Council group had this to say as well;

To not only refuse to allow members of the public to speak or ask questions, but to also refuse to allow another democratically elected councillor to address the committee, is dictatorship of the worst kind.  We are quick to criticise other regimes elsewhere for refusing to listen to the public, but the ruling Tory group have totally ignored the overwhelming public consultation on the matter of our care homes, have gagged their staff and are now gagging other councillors and those members of the public who have come to the meeting.

This is a desperate situation and a lot of people are really concerned, in fact there may be current patients who are unable to use the services under private care providers. Maureen's husband, who uses Nelson court was unable to find a Private provider to take him as he needs are so specific as are his cultural needs. This is akin to shutting them for good to those users.

As the Council's bandwagon rattles on and wastes money, like the money thrown away on the bus station or on Jubilee mugs, or on lapsed photocopier contracts... the list of waste and mismanagement has been fairly lengthy but who is being forced to suffer? What could Nelson Court have done with the money that has been wasted and will be wasted on other vanity projects, including City status?

I don't normally wave the banner and shout but this, in my opinion has been a miscarriage of justice and procedure and those in serious need are being cast aside to get by as best they can. Personally I feel it is wrong.