A couple of letters from Lib Dems in the letters page this week - is there an election coming?

One, from someone I've never heard of, was essentially just slagging off Garvie for being at home rather then being out canvassing for the election.

Is this the most pressing local issue for the Lib Dems, the one burning injustice above all others that they have to expose in the letters page? I'm guessing their intention was to rubbish RG and improve their own prospects in the forthcoming election, but is this the kind of thing that actually influences people? I'm pretty disillusioned with local politics so it might just be me that finds this inane, but I'd so much sooner see the issues discussed rather than the personalities.

I don't think there is any WBC election. The only one I'm sure about is the NTC By-election......

I would think there would be more excitement if there was going to be a vote to abolish it?

The Town Council is crippled with failure. If they could be honest about their failures there would be some hope of rehabilitating the institution, but that's not going to happen. A small and efficient parish council which was engaged with ordinary townspeople would be a great thing for Newbury, managing the parks, cemeteries, market, and allotments with a part-time clerk and a bunch of enthusiastic volunteers, and empowering the community to organise its own social and cultural celebrations like Big Lunch and Carnival, with a Carnival King and Queen in place of the mayor. A parish council that served us, and not one that served party-political and personal agendas. I would like to see the town given the opportunity to vote for that.

I think the evidence speaks for itself. The Lib Dems are spineless, gutless and hopeless, with no other option but to attack me and Labour in one last desperate attempt to cling to power at the glorified residents association we refer to as NTC.

In 2015, there will be a choice of two genuine candidates to pick from in Newbury. Tory if you want Cameron, Labour if you want Miliband. The Lib Dems, Clegg and the likes of Captain Hook are finished in these parts once and for all.

Haven't seen this weeks paper yet so can't comment on the letters. But is seemed to me that it was you indulging in a pretty desperate personal attack on a leading Lib Dem on this forum a few days ago (in the mistaken belief that I was he).

And Labour also seem pretty keen to grab a little of the power at the glorified resident's association.


Dream on. Astoundingly the Lib Dems actually have a chance of winning Newbury at the next election - thanks to UKIP's erosion of the traditional Tory vote. Labour will come in fourth, just like at Eastleigh. However, I suspect that Benyon will still be our MP in 2016.

On a positive note for Labour though - I see Labour led Reading Borough Council have decided to return to the committee system of governance.

Richard, so this would be ALL Liberal Democrats then? This appears awfully like negative campaigning to me.

What is the current 'Party' balance in NTC?

Trouble is though labour dont stand a chance of winning the Newbury seat and also until Miliband actually comes up with some concrete policies on how he and balls will reduce the defecit, reduce unemployment, curb Britains benefit culture, reduce immigration and plus how he will (not really too hard) make a better effort of it than Brown then labour dont stand a chance

10 Lib Dem, 11 Tory, 2 Vacant

So "one last desperate attempt to cling to power at the glorified residents association we refer to as NTC" is not the precision we might hope for from our future leaders?

Ruwan, you know what I meant. Plus I'm not campaigning.

As for "desperate attempt to cling to power", look at the Lib Dem campaign against me personally, lying in letters and in the paper!! That is a negative campaign, and I'm not even standing!!

I agree with you Richard that the Lib Dems are all those things and more - but what is Labour going to do?

If your candidates are elected will they demand that I'm given my allotment back and protected from future victimisation? Will they discuss allotment self-management?

Will they vote to drop the mayor, or will they be seduced by the dressing up clothes and cowed into conformity by the council establishment?

Will they vote to move the office to New Greenham Park and save us the expense of the Gothic Mansion, or will their vanity get the better of them and they'll choose to keep the trappings of baronial authority?

Will they vote to thin out the army of administrator down to a part-time clerk and get the council back in touch with the townspeople, or will they revert to socialist type and to hull with efficiency?

Will they demand the council come clean on the cracks debacle, or will they lose their bottle and be absorbed by the council establishment.

Will they be honest about the miserable state of the charter market, and what will they do about it? Will they get it moved into Northbrook Street where it will get the passing trade? Will they demand an investigation into the £60k "cleansing contract", how it got to be awarded, and what exactly it was paying for?

Will they commit to putting a fence around the kiddies play area in Victoria Park - it's what the park-users want, so why not just do it? If the council can't find the money, you only need to ask, I'll free-up £50k no problem.

I've never heard a peep from either of your candidates on local issues. I'd like to think they were different to the sell-out lib dems and tories, but I haven't seen the evidence of that yet.

The town council has some major problems, but rather than admit their mistakes and seek to resolve the situation the council just lies, hides, and bullies. You've criticised two tory councillors and the town clerk for their anti-gypsy policy for which the tories apologised (I never saw an apology from the clerk).

Fine. But will you criticise the town council for anything else, even if it embarrasses your party or harms your standing?

The lib-dem-lead town council evicted me from my allotment because I wouldn't sign the secret no-criticism agreement - will you criticise that? I would gladly have resolved that dispute through negotiation and mediation - as you very well know - but I could not sign away my right to the free expression of my political views, and it was tyrannical of the lib-dem-lead council to ransom my allotment for my silence. The council needs to right this injustice.

Why don't you just stand for election yourself?

Simon, It is a matter of record that I have challenged Councillors in the past and I am aware of your situation as well, as we have spoken at length, but I have no intention of discussing your specific grievance with the Council, or the matter of my concerns with Councillors in the past, as this is not an appropriate forum, but you know yourself that I have and do speak against what some may see as the "Party Line" when necessary.

Anyone holding an elected position has a duty to represent their electorate before anything else, unless it is one of breaching a principle that cannot be broken. As the Liberal Democrat Party has terribly democrat internal processes for the development of policies, there is always an element of friction between the membership who decide the policies, and some Parliamentarians.

As a result of this Liberal Democrats are generally not bound by the 'Party Whip' as much as some other political groups either at a national or local level, and I for one do not recognise any 'Whip', but can be won over at times with evidence and a well constructed argument.

It is a shame that the closing date has passed for putting yourself forward for election, but I also feel that you should consider standing for election in the future.

Would you vote for me?

I might stand in Falkland at the next opportunity, but I don't particularly want to be a parish councillor. I have opinions on parish matters, but I don't need to be a councillor to air them. My particular interest is the allotment movement and above all I want my allotment back, and I want to be free to cultivate it without fear of harassment and victimisation for holding and expressing my political beliefs. I'd also very much like to see the Newbury allotment service self-managed and I'd like to be fully involved in that. I'm also less than convinced that many Wash Commoners would vote for me and what I stand for.

no - but then I have never voted.

But I do think that folk should be prepared to stand by their convictions. Be critical by all means, but also be prepared to do something about it.

I've done as much as I could to stand up for my convictions. I'm sorry what I've done wouldn't persuade you to vote for me (in principle), but I don't think many Wash Commoners share my convictions either so you're in company.

It's one for another thread I suspect, but I have to ask about the apparent inconsistency in your views: you've previously derided my ambition to see the allotment service self-managed and for me to be actively involved in that, but now you appear to sneer at me for not wanting to be a town councillor.

As an allotmenteer on a self-managed site I'd get involved in the site management and maintenance with other volunteers. Management decisions would be made democratically by the allotmenteers themselves and we'd run the site for our own benefit without any financial support from the precept.

As a town councillor I'd sit with other councillors who know feck-all about allotmenteering on a committee that had zero input from the allotmenteers themselves, and the site management and maintenance would be done at the public expense by council officers and contractors because the allotmenteers are prohibited from doing the maintenance themselves.

So how is it that being a councillor is a worthy thing, but self-managing is so wrong?

That is fair enough, however Simon has tried to do something about it, but perhaps his cynicism for our local council is the result of such action. I also don't think it would be fair on the candidate, nor the electorate, for a single issue person to stand.

It would be a bad idea for me to stand to right my own injustice.

I also have quite a radical agenda for reform and until we can elected non-party independent free-thinkers onto the council that agenda will never get a look in, and if we get a council of free-thinkers then there won't be a need for me to stand anyways. I feel I can do most good by trying to influence the debate from outside the council, there are plenty of open-minded people out there who would make better councillors than I would if they can just be persuaded to stand without a party ticket.

He IS doing something about it and has done a great deal already. The 'why don't you stand' is generally the answer from those with nothing to contribute themselves. Seem to recall a certain local ex MP was over fond of that one when (as usual) stuck for a sensible answer.

I think you mean

10 Lib Dem, 11 Tory, all 13 look Vacant!

Such a defeatist attitude.


I derided your wish for self management as you had no support for the idea from the other allotmenters.

He just sees a different method than you to get to where he wants to be.


Apparently he did, it is just support faded as allegedly the council got heavy on them, but you should know all this already, so I have to ask why you are posting, especially as someone who appears to have such a laissez-faire attitude to everything.

Oh. Wasn't that rather mean spirited? The idea had no support, that doesn't mean it had no merit, and either way I don't see how it deserved your derision. It works very well in places other than Newbury and there's no reason to suppose it wouldn't work well in Newbury also. I put a lot of time and effort into researching and promoting the idea, certainly more time and effort than your average town councillor puts in.

It's all so easy, just roll up the trouser leg and adopt a funny handshake!

I don't immediately understand why someone would promote a method of change (standing as a councillor), yet takes no part in democracy themselves (doesn't vote).

Quite so!

Not really.

You had certain ideas which you thought of merit. Those who would be directly affected by your ideas did not support them.

Why post -

well, all talk & no action does get a bit monotonous.

At least RG can't be accused of inaction....

For the second time, I understand that the support faltered when the council got heavy. That isn't fact, only what Simon says, but I will for the time being take his comments in good faith.


Simon staged public protests, lobbied the council and got labelled vexatious, and went to court. That is hardly the sign of inaction.

There is more than one way to skin a cat.

And perhaps that is what Simon also thinks.

It's extraordinary the hard time that Simon gets on this forum. I don't understand it. Far from being a single issue bore, I can't think of many people who do more to initiate debate on matters that touch us all, with well researched and sensible posts. It's a bit rich to be accused of not standing up to be counted!

not really.

SK posts anything that he thinks will enable him to score a few points against either of the local councils.

to further the debate I take a contrary position. It would be dull if we all just agreed with him.

It wouldn't only be dull, it would be wrong if people just agreed with him without thinking through the issues he raises. But it would be equally wrong to take a contrary position solely for the purpose of knocking someone down when they have a valid point. Wouldn't it?

It would.

Good! Let's revel in Kirby-raised debate!

I'm sure that Mr Kirby is quite able to argue his corner, however , I'm a great believer in the old adage "you can tell a lot about a man by his enemies" so, in which case, it seems to me judging by the council lackeys, apologists, and lick-spittle's ranged against him he's gotta be doing something right.

Certainly Mr Kirby can stand his ground with the best. And I'm sure he doesn't need me. But I think he has much to say.

I'm not afraid of being wrong, but I have been intimidated by the council's vindictiveness, so it's good to have friends. Thanks Charlie, and thanks DSB.