IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

6 Pages V   1 2 3 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Liberal Democrats retain control of Newbury Town Council
Criddleback
post May 6 2011, 09:10 PM
Post #1


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 58
Joined: 6-March 11
Member No.: 3,387



Final result: LibDems 12 seats, Conservatives 11 seats.

LibDems won a seat in St Johns and lost one in Brummel Grove.

Tories won a seat in Brummel and lost one in St Johns.

So LibDems hold:
Victoria - 4 seats
Northcroft - 4
Pyle Hill - 2
Clay Hill - 1
St Johns - 1

Conservatives hold:
Falkland - 4
Clay Hill - 3
St Johns - 3
Brummel Grove - 1
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
blackdog
post May 7 2011, 12:29 AM
Post #2


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,945
Joined: 5-June 09
Member No.: 130



QUOTE (Criddleback @ May 6 2011, 10:10 PM) *
Final result: LibDems 12 seats, Conservatives 11 seats.

LibDems won a seat in St Johns and lost one in Brummel Grove.

Tories won a seat in Brummel and lost one in St Johns.


If the Tories could have found a 4th candidate for St John's they would be in control - why on earth did they put up candidates in wards where they would probably lose and go in one short in a ward where they could expect to win all 4 seats?


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Criddleback
post May 7 2011, 06:56 AM
Post #3


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 58
Joined: 6-March 11
Member No.: 3,387



QUOTE (blackdog @ May 7 2011, 01:29 AM) *
If the Tories could have found a 4th candidate for St John's they would be in control - why on earth did they put up candidates in wards where they would probably lose and go in one short in a ward where they could expect to win all 4 seats?


It's utterably unfathomable. I understand that there was a fair amount of joy in the LibDem camp when they saw the nominations and saw that they had won a seat without doing a thing except nominate a candidate.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Richard Garvie
post May 7 2011, 08:31 AM
Post #4


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,974
Joined: 8-September 10
Member No.: 1,076



Oh well, congratulations to the Lib Dems for retaining control of one council. I understand that Thatcham has gone blue from what people were saying just before I left the Racecourse?

Anyone got a list of town councillors in Thatcham?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Criddleback
post May 7 2011, 10:33 AM
Post #5


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 58
Joined: 6-March 11
Member No.: 3,387



QUOTE (Richard Garvie @ May 7 2011, 09:31 AM) *
Oh well, congratulations to the Lib Dems for retaining control of one council. I understand that Thatcham has gone blue from what people were saying just before I left the Racecourse?

Anyone got a list of town councillors in Thatcham?


Thatcham Town Council has not gone blue. The Liberal Democrats have retained control.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Bofem
post May 7 2011, 12:58 PM
Post #6


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 485
Joined: 28-May 10
From: Newbury
Member No.: 924



Big shame that NTC isn't under new management. It's equally unfathomable to many why the Lib Dems are not against the pavilion that no one asked for.

Now's the chance for NTC's Libs to support the emerging action group.


--------------------
Newbury's #1 ill-informed internet poster
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cognosco
post May 7 2011, 01:15 PM
Post #7


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,452
Joined: 31-October 10
Member No.: 1,212



QUOTE (Bofem @ May 7 2011, 01:58 PM) *
Big shame that NTC isn't under new management. It's equally unfathomable to many why the Lib Dems are not against the pavilion that no one asked for.

Now's the chance for NTC's Libs to support the emerging action group.


Are you still under the illusion that councillors have any say in the matter over what a developer wants? wink.gif
Next you will come up with the outrageous suggestion that the coucillors listen to what the taxpayers want? wink.gif


--------------------
Vexatious Candidate?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Richard Garvie
post May 7 2011, 01:15 PM
Post #8


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,974
Joined: 8-September 10
Member No.: 1,076



QUOTE (Bofem @ May 7 2011, 12:58 PM) *
Big shame that NTC isn't under new management. It's equally unfathomable to many why the Lib Dems are not against the pavilion that no one asked for.

Now's the chance for NTC's Libs to support the emerging action group.


Correct. We need a cross party campaign against it, in addition to a non political campaign my members of the public and friends of the park.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cognosco
post May 7 2011, 01:18 PM
Post #9


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,452
Joined: 31-October 10
Member No.: 1,212



QUOTE (Richard Garvie @ May 7 2011, 02:15 PM) *
Correct. We need a cross party campaign against it, in addition to a non political campaign my members of the public and friends of the park.


Elections over and done with now so they will press on and get it built as soon as possible. What developers want.... developers get... wink.gif


--------------------
Vexatious Candidate?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Andy Capp
post May 7 2011, 01:19 PM
Post #10


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 11,895
Joined: 3-September 09
Member No.: 317



QUOTE (Richard Garvie @ May 7 2011, 02:15 PM) *
Correct. We need a cross party campaign against it, in addition to a non political campaign my members of the public and friends of the park.

'We need'? Perhaps we should just not bother. Few are.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Richard Garvie
post May 7 2011, 02:51 PM
Post #11


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,974
Joined: 8-September 10
Member No.: 1,076



QUOTE (Andy Capp @ May 7 2011, 01:19 PM) *
'We need'? Perhaps we should just not bother. Few are.


I think the public are generally against it, from what they have told us.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Simon Kirby
post May 7 2011, 03:07 PM
Post #12


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,326
Joined: 20-July 10
From: Wash Common
Member No.: 1,011



Does the pavilion have anything to do with NTC? The story as I understand it is that the bit of land that WBC want to build on was not leased to NTC. I suggest that NTC have enough to keep themselves busy finding a commercial operator for the charter market, handing the Christmas lights over to the TCP, scaling back the opulance of a £100k mayor, finding out what all that petrol gets used for at the cemetary, cutting out the profit from the councillors' milage allowance, putting a floral display together that justifies the new budget, spinning the bad news about the crack snafu, plus other challenges too I expect. It took them a year to buy some grit bins; any one of these things could occupy them for the whole of the next term.


--------------------
Right an injustice - give Simon Kirby his allotment back!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cognosco
post May 7 2011, 03:22 PM
Post #13


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,452
Joined: 31-October 10
Member No.: 1,212



QUOTE (Simon Kirby @ May 7 2011, 04:07 PM) *
Does the pavilion have anything to do with NTC? The story as I understand it is that the bit of land that WBC want to build on was not leased to NTC. I suggest that NTC have enough to keep themselves busy finding a commercial operator for the charter market, handing the Christmas lights over to the TCP, scaling back the opulance of a £100k mayor, finding out what all that petrol gets used for at the cemetary, cutting out the profit from the councillors' milage allowance, putting a floral display together that justifies the new budget, spinning the bad news about the crack snafu, plus other challenges too I expect. It took them a year to buy some grit bins; any one of these things could occupy them for the whole of the next term.


Not to mention trying to get back in favour with the voters? Going to be hard not to get wiped out after the next general election, especially if the coalition does not last much longer, we have not even started on the real cuts yet?

No one voted for massive cuts and the turmoil of the NHS reforms, the EMA, etc etc. They only got in because voters did not want the Tory right wingers in and were fed up with Labour.

I am led to believe that in a lot of wards there were only two choices Cons or Lib Liars to vote for so Hobsons choice only really. Oh for democracy in dear old West Berkshire eh? Any one any idea on the percentage of voters that turned out?


--------------------
Vexatious Candidate?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Richard Garvie
post May 7 2011, 04:59 PM
Post #14


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,974
Joined: 8-September 10
Member No.: 1,076



QUOTE (Cognosco @ May 7 2011, 03:22 PM) *
Not to mention trying to get back in favour with the voters? Going to be hard not to get wiped out after the next general election, especially if the coalition does not last much longer, we have not even started on the real cuts yet?

No one voted for massive cuts and the turmoil of the NHS reforms, the EMA, etc etc. They only got in because voters did not want the Tory right wingers in and were fed up with Labour.

I am led to believe that in a lot of wards there were only two choices Cons or Lib Liars to vote for so Hobsons choice only really. Oh for democracy in dear old West Berkshire eh? Any one any idea on the percentage of voters that turned out?


I think I saw 48% mentioned somewhere?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cognosco
post May 7 2011, 06:56 PM
Post #15


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,452
Joined: 31-October 10
Member No.: 1,212



QUOTE (Richard Garvie @ May 7 2011, 05:59 PM) *
I think I saw 48% mentioned somewhere?


So they get into power with only approx of 1/3 of the electorate voting for them then? wink.gif Fair?


--------------------
Vexatious Candidate?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Criddleback
post May 7 2011, 08:00 PM
Post #16


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 58
Joined: 6-March 11
Member No.: 3,387



QUOTE (Cognosco @ May 7 2011, 07:56 PM) *
So they get into power with only approx of 1/3 of the electorate voting for them then? wink.gif Fair?


I agree.It is unfair. We should have proportional voting systems. But I don't agree with compulsory voting which is the only way I can think that you could get the other 52% who didn't vote to vote. They all had voting cards sent to them. They had the option of having postal votes by filling out a form which takes 10 seconds to fill out. They had ample warning and were reminded many times through various media. Or are you saying that because 52% of people can't be arsed to fill out a form and post a ballot, or walk a few minutes to vote, then that invalidates the whole democratic process of this country? That's radical.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Strafin
post May 7 2011, 08:54 PM
Post #17


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 3,927
Joined: 14-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 55



Or you could say that 52% voted for all the candidates, so the rest casted the deciding votes.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Richard Garvie
post May 7 2011, 09:23 PM
Post #18


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,974
Joined: 8-September 10
Member No.: 1,076



QUOTE (Strafin @ May 7 2011, 08:54 PM) *
Or you could say that 52% voted for all the candidates, so the rest casted the deciding votes.


There is so much apathy in West Berkshire, and it is rightly justified. Politicians are truly hated at present, mainly because of what our MP's have done in the past few years with expenses etc.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
CharlieF
post May 7 2011, 10:37 PM
Post #19


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 166
Joined: 21-March 11
From: Newbury
Member No.: 3,706



QUOTE (Criddleback @ May 7 2011, 09:00 PM) *
I agree.It is unfair. We should have proportional voting systems. But I don't agree with compulsory voting which is the only way I can think that you could get the other 52% who didn't vote to vote. They all had voting cards sent to them. They had the option of having postal votes by filling out a form which takes 10 seconds to fill out. They had ample warning and were reminded many times through various media. Or are you saying that because 52% of people can't be arsed to fill out a form and post a ballot, or walk a few minutes to vote, then that invalidates the whole democratic process of this country? That's radical.

I think there is a bigger issue even than that. There is a sizable number of people who have actively disenfranchised themselves and are not registered anywhere to vote. They are not illegal immigrants but they are hiding because they are afraid of being traced - by abusive partners, stalkers, debt collectors etc.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Strafin
post May 7 2011, 10:49 PM
Post #20


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 3,927
Joined: 14-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 55



People who owe money....
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

6 Pages V   1 2 3 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 25th May 2020 - 05:52 AM