Changes at HCCA

I haven't looked the HCCA website for a while and I was surprised at some of the changes.

Firstly, Simon Burton is no longer The Agent. This has passed to a new person on the block - Sarah Carrick.

Secondly, Cllr Churchill is no longer Deputy Chairman Political. So the Conservative Association didn't stand behind him. No one really has.

Thirdly, Cllr Churchill was suspended by the Conservative County group. Yet Ken is still down as a County Councillor on the HCCA website.

Huntingdon Conservatives new website

I see the Huntingdon Conservatives have put up a new website. Pity not much thought has gone into this site. The name of the website - Huntingdon Conservatives - really reinforces the world view of the local Conservatives that Huntingdon is at the centre of their world. St Neots doesn't get a mention.

Whilst looking good on the outside the slap dash and rushed nature of this new site comes up on every page. On the about page the reader is informed:

"In addition the Constituency Association organises, through a number of clubs such as Huntingdon Industrial Advisory Council,....."

Back in a Parliamentary report in 2007 on the use of dining facilities Djanogly said:

HIAC had been founded over 25 years ago for business people living in or connected with Huntingdonshire. Members of HIAC did not need to be members of the Conservative Party and HIAC itself was not part of the Party.

Now it is!

The County Councillor page is an utter mess. It even claims the following:

Keith Walters hasn't been a County Councillor since 2009.

The District Councillors page is not so much of a mess.

Under People it turns out Sir John Major is District Chairman West.

Further, to contact MEP Vicky Ford you have to go through Robert Sturdy:

For a new website this is littered with mistakes. Not a very good start, but is probably a sign of the state HCCA finds itself in.

Djanogly still not good for the Conservatives

Looking at the Electoral Commission website for the 2010 General election expenses I find further evidence that Djanogly hasn't been good for Huntingdon Conservatives. Comparing with the Rt Hon Grant Shapps MP (a Twitter follower), who took his seat of Welwyn Hatfield from being a Labour stronghold to a Conservative safe seat, I find that Djanogly isn't bringing home the money.

Total donations to the Shapps campaign was £54,252.72. Over the same period Djanogly only obtained £10,011.51. So Shapps was bring in £5.42 to every £1 that Djanogly brought into his campaign.

On the otherhand Shapps did out spend Djanogly. Shapps spent £22,859.22 to Djanogly's £10,187.91. A spend rate of £2.24 to Djanogly's £1.

So whilst Djanogly cost HCCA £76.40, Shapps brought a whopping total of £31,393.50 into his Association.

This is another reason why Djanogly isn't good for the Huntingdon Constituency Conservative Association. I don't find it hard to believe as Djanogly fell into this seat. But what has been good for Djanogly has been to the detriment of HCCA.

One good reason why having an MP is good for the local party, whatever the political colour, is it bring in money to the local party. Djanogly is failing to do this. The Conservatives had the chance to get rid of Djanogly over his expenses. They flunked it. Now they are paying for it. Djanogly hasn't been good for HCCA. The longer he stays the worse it seems to get.

Trouble at HCCA?

I see HCCA has a new design for its own website.

The new design looks like a holding page for something better. Apart from Djanogly there is not much about the rest of the association. Strange, the Association would take such a backward step.

But could it be something deeper than a loss of a website. HCCA is an asset rich, income poor association. It hasn't been doing too well under Djanogly and the MP's Expenses Scandal didn't do the Association any favours as they kept Djanogly on. This hit HCCA finances hard.

HCCA wasn't financially ready to fight the General Election. A properly run campaign can spend at least £20,000 over an extended election period. If the Conservatives fought a proper campaign, which they tried too, they would have made a bad situation worse as the expected campaign contributions didn't come in.

The Conservatives need money. Lola Car gave £3000 to the Fighting Fund. I wonder how much came from anyone else in the constituency. We'll have to wait until June 2011 to find out how Djanogly and HCCA did.

The main problem with HCCA is the MP does need to be local. Just coming here on the odd days and the weekend, when his main home is in London doesn't look good. HCCA should have rid itself of Djanogly back in 2009 when it had the chance to do so. HCCA flunked this putsch and is paying the price for this loss.

As I've said before. Djanogly isn't good for HCCA. When will HCCA realise this?

Something wrong at HCCA

The news that Huntingdon Constituency Conservative Association is not going to hold a special meeting over the revelations that Djanogly was employing private investigators to snoop on party members is wrong. There is obviously a schism between Djanogly and the rest of HCCA. This needs to be addressed. Burying this story isn't the answer. Djanogly needs a vibrant association and the association needs a vibrant MP. At the moment there seems to be neither.

The thing about political associations is many times non-political people get the power structure wrong. Back in the olden days each Conservative Association was very autonomous and in a General Meeting of the Association was supreme. They could select and de-select candidates and MPs at will. This was a frustration to John Major who wanted to get rid of Neil Hamilton. William Hague started the change of balance giving the party leader the ability to effectively sack MPs and candidates.

For all the constitutional changes the basic political structure of the Conservatives remains the same. The General Meeting of The Association is still the font of power. It elects the President, Chairman, Deputy Chairmen, Treasurer and other positions. It delegates authority to the Chairman, Management Committee and Executive Council. It appoints Patrons and, importantly, its parliamentary candidate and can appoint a Political Agent.

The point of all this is the political agent works for the association not the MP or Parliamentary candidate. The Association works to ensure the constituency returns a Conservative MP. To this end the MP is a product of the Association. The Agent is an employee/contractor of the Association not the MP. The MP doesn't run or own the association nor the Agent. The current Agent, Simon Burton, was an employee of Jonathan Djanogly. So does Simon put the Association first or Djanogly?

As reported in The Daily Telegraph, Djanogly served notice on the former Agent, Sir Peter Brown, not to tell anyone about his expenses claims. Resorting to the law and threats doesn't help in getting a working relationship between members.

By ruling out an Extraordinary General Meeting, the HCCA leadership is not allowing the local Conservative members a chance to have their say on this matter. Better to keep their heads down and hope the Boundary Commission for England effectively does their job for them.

Should Djanogly resign?

The use of private detectives by Djanogly to snoop on fellow Conservatives members is extraordinary. Essentially this is an internal matter for the Huntingdon Constituency Conservative Association for whom Djanogly is their parliamentary candidate.

Don't expect any serious move to deselect Djanogly. With a former Djanogly employee (Simon Burton) in as Association Agent unless the Chairman (Martin Stephenson)/Management Committee/Executive Council does something this will all be brushed under the carpet with all the other problems.

What has emerged is the distrust between Conservative members and their MP. I pointed out a while back that Djanogly was effectively out of the loop on local issues. To get back into the loop he had to hire private investigators to find out information about what Conservative supporters are thinking and saying.

Either HCCA takes control of the situation or the association should be renamed "The Jonathan Djanogly Conservative Association".

Should Djanogly resign? I don't see this on its own as a resigning issue whether at Government or Parliamentary level. This is effectively an internal matter between Conservatives. The local Conservative Association should take charge of the situation. There isn't that much a Conservative Association can do. They could hold an Extraordinary General Meeting and vote on a motion of no confidence.

With the Boundary Commission for England saying all seats will be up for change it could be likely Djanogly could be a casualty of the cut in the number of MPs. For HCCA to rely on this would be a mistake. HCCA needs to take a stand rather than let Djanogly rule the association.

Djanogly snoops on own supporters!

I was going to leave Djanogly and his expenses troubles to one side as he was re-elected by the people of the Huntingdon constituency. In my view much of the information about his expenses and conduct were in the public domain and still Djanogly was re-elected. So what had gone on before, that we all knew about, was behind us and really couldn't be used as the people have spoken.


The new evidence, in The Daily Telegraph, that Djanogly hired private detectives raises new questions on Djanogly's way of doing things and his suitability as our MP. This rakes up much of the past and re-opens what was closed. It also shows how the Liberal Democrats flunked it with with Martin Land.

I have to wonder whether the Conservative Association knew he had hired private detectives to investigate members of the constituency association they would have kept him as candidate!

On the BBC website Djanogly says: "I instructed a firm of private investigators to try to find out the source of these stories because I was extremely upset that my private family life had been invaded.". Your private life was invaded because you claimed £13,962 in public money for a cleaner who worked Friday, Saturday and Sunday at  your secondary home in Alconbury. Your Alconbury home must have got very dirty at the weekends!

What I also found interesting in The Daily Telegraph article is the following:

 ". . . please be on notice that I will defend my reputation through the courts if necessary."

Djanogly also said roughly the same about the animal rights election leaflet. Nothing heard since!

"Mr Djanogly was, perhaps, aware of rumblings of discontent in his constituency, where some Tories were unhappy with the job he was doing and with the fact that he had carried on working as a lawyer."

"The other problem is his [Djanogly’s] wife who is quite rude and openly expresses her lack of interest in the Conservative Association and has been known to go to bed in the middle of dinner parties. This does not go down well in a traditional Tory constituency like Huntingdon."

"Sir Peter “confirmed he had resigned over the expenses scandal” rather than for health reasons, as Mr Djanogly had claimed at the time, while Mr Holley refused to say anything."

"They (the conspirators) claim that if Peter Down(e)s, the respected leader of the Liberal Democrats on the council, stood against you in the general election, it would be a close call."
The Liberal Democrats put up multiple Political Agent Martin Land instead.


Lets get this into perspective. Djanogly is the candidate of the Association. The Conservative Association is paramount. It looks to me that Djanogly thinks he is the Association and he is paramount. This is wrong! Has Djanogly been good for the Huntingdon Conservative Association? I think not!


The problem with all this is there anyone else who Djanogly sent Private Detectives to investigate? Can we believe his answer?

HCCA Membership

Since Conservatives keep giving different figure for their membership it can be hard to come to a real conclusion on how badly the Conservative under Djanogly are doing. Below are some examples:

Highest was 1436 (2003) to the lowest 686 (2009) is a loss of 750.
2001 figures was 888 to the 2009 figures was 686. So a loss of 202.
Including unpaid members 1,544 (2008) to 778 (2009). This is a loss of 766 members in just one year!

snrednek says: The Conservatives have been caught out with not being consistent with their membership figures. What is obvious is the fall in the Conservative membership at HCCA is large and not being addressed. The Conservatives need to arrest this downward spiral in membership and finances. HCCA has an MP and controls most councils. There must be something turning people becoming members? I feel the answer is Djanogly. Get rid of him and get a proper MP willing to make this constituency his home will change the HCCA.

In the 2009 accounts there is a statement on membership which just doesn't tally with previous figures.

The 2008 figures are:

2008 to 2009.
Full Members -58
Out of Constituency +15
Club -193 (though the figures have changed)
Total -236
Actual Membership -766

The 2007 figures are:

The 2006 figures are:

2006 to 2007. The membership numbers for paid up members is 1021 in 2006 and fell 200 to 821 in 2007.

The 2005 figures are:

2005 to 2006. The overall paid membership rose by 36.

The 2004 figure are: 

2004 to 2005. The figures don't match. The 2004 figures say 933 Full members. In the 2005 figures the 2004 numbers are changed from 933 to 860. The other memberships don't match either!

The 2003 figures are:

The 2003 to 2004 figures don't match.

The 2002 figures are:

The 2002 to 2003 figures don't match.

Djanogly is still bad for HCCA!

With the recent publication of the local accounting units of the Conservative Party, I thought I would look to see how badly HCCA was damaged by Djanogly.

Starting with Membership. This was down by 58 full members. There was an increase of Out of Constituency members. This rose by 15 and for all we may know this could have been previous members or friends of Djanogly. 

The is a large discrepancy over Club members. In the 2008 accounts this was shown as 195 up from 52. In the 2009 accounts this number has changed from 195 to just 4 and this has fallen to just 2. Something wrong here! I'll blog on this later.

Income and Expenditure.
The net loss was £8,086. In the previous year there was a £2,085 surplus. The is a downward movement of £10,171. The main reason for this fall was a dramatic loss of income of £19,825.

Subscriptions were down by just £1,238. As most of these are taken at the beginning of the year this is expected. 2010 accounts will be more reflective of what happened. Fundraising is a massive £13,911 down. Branches were down by £1,894. Donations were down by £2,752.

What helped is a cut back on expenditure. With a drop of fundraising, this led to less cost of £9,311. Less political activity meant a cut of £2,789. Staff expenditure increased by £1,178. Photocopying increased by £3,552. Other cuts in expenditure saved £3,500.

Comparing with other Conservative Associations I find:

North East Cambridgeshire: No real loss year on year. -12 members.
North West Cambridgeshire: Down by £2,000 year on year. -82 members.
South Cambridgeshire: Upped their Subs and donations by £13,000. -2 members.
Peterborough: Donations slightly up. -98 members.

I conclude the Conservative Association is doing badly with Djanogly as MP. A Conservative MP does need a strong Conservative Association behind him. HCCA is year on year is getting weaker and weaker.

-----------

I will point out these are the only accounts published by any local party. I would like to see Labour, Liberal Democrats and other local party accounts publish their account. These are kept secret. 

Huntingdon Conservatives Website Update

I see the Huntingdon Conservative Association has finally got around to changing their website. A few problems with these changes!

With Parliament being dissolved, Jonathan Djanogly is no longer an MP. According to this website he still is:

"This includes providing a local office for our Member of Parliament and Shadow Minister for Corporate Governance and Solicitor General, Jonathan Djanogly MP...."

Jonathan Djanogly MP
House of Commons,
London,
SW1A 1AA
Constituency Office Telephone (01480) 437840
E-mail djanoglyj@parliament.uk

Neither of these contacts will work as Djanogly is no longer an MP.

Another point is how seriously are the Huntingdon Conservatives at wanting Djanogly and local council candidates to be elected as they are off on a boat trip.

I'll point out the following election offence:

"Treating - candidates or their supporters cannot directly or indirectly give or provide food, drink or entertainment in order to influence a voter."

HCCA finally catches up with their website.

I see the HCCA has finally gotten around to make some changes to their website that needed to happen as I set out here. The main change has to be the imprint which has finally been changed from Peter Brown to Simon Burton.

I do have to wonder whether I'm doing the Conservatives job for them! Well if I am, there is another problem the St Neots Conservative website has a whole host of problems.

Firstly, there is the imprint. As with the the HCCA the imprint still says Peter Brown.

The other is why is Catherine Hutton missing from the County Councillors website?

If the St Neots Conservatives aren't going to continue updating this website what is the point of it?

Hunts Conservatives finally change their website.

I see the Conservatives have finally knocked Paul Dakers off their website months after he resigned as a District Councillor. But that isn't all that is wrong with the website. A couple of more problems are:

1. The Events section is now a history of 2009 rather than what is to come in 2010.

2. The imprint at the bottom of each page is a legal requirement. Peter Brown was the Agent. He is no longer having resigned last year. So why does the imprint continue to use his name?

Djanogly hasn't been good for the local Conservatives. Having put a former member of his own staff into the position of Agent things are still going down hill.

New(ish) website for Djanogly

Wow, the election is nearing and Jonathan Djanogly has gone into election mode. There is even a section for vote for change by registering your e-mail address, name and postcode.

But hold on there!

Much of the content is from Jonathan Djanogly's old website which was paid for by the taxpayer via the Parliamentary Communications Allowance. The total annual cost is estimated to be £3,450.00.

But that isn't the end of it. There is a section for donating to this multi-millionaire's campaign. There is nothing wrong with that as we don't really want Djanogly to pay for his own election. Do we?

Of the course changing the website loses a few embarrassing problems for Djanogly. The deletion of the Winter Edition that I never received covers this problem up. 

All Djanogly has done is turned his Parliamentary website, paid by the taxpayer, into a campaign website by adding a few bells and whistles to it. Knowing Djanogly this is very legal. To me it doesn't seem right!

Paul Dakers is still a Conservative Councillor says HCCA

According to the Huntingdon Constituency Conservative Association website the Paul Dakers is still listed as the Conservative member for Fenstanton. Not only did Dakers resign his seat in early December 2009, but a by-election has been fought with the Liberal Democrats winning a week ago.

If the Conservatives can't even get their act together over this I expect a pretty bad campaign for them in the run up to 6th May 2010.

Djanogly off to see Lola

I took a look at Djanogly's website to find a bit of a change. Jonathan has been visiting his mates at Lola Cars. I say mates because Lola Cars made a reportable donation back in 2002 of £1,500.00 to Huntingdon Constituency Conservative Association. 

Djanogly Press release. 

Lola Car Press release.

More on Djanogly and HCCA

Sometimes I have to recognise that certain expenses are inevitable. Most MPs, but by no means all, have a constituency office. Indeed Djanogly has a constituency office in Huntingdon (see picture right). He also orders supplies for the constituency office and even pays a telephone bill there.

So Djanogly is using the property of the HCCA as a Constituency Office. So what is he paying towards this cost of this? From the accounts of HCCA I can see "contributions to office expenses". But nothing about rent. Now this isn't something special. This is an on going cost and Parliament should pay for property MPs use. MPs for other parties do this so it is common.

From my investigations I feel Djanogly is not getting HCCA the best deal he can. Djanogly is bad for HCCA. Why the Conservatives carry on supporting him is beyond me.

An example:
Stewart Jackson MP of Peterborough
Expenses
PCA 2008 Accounts.

Letters in the News and Crier 11/2/10

My comments on some of the letters in this weeks News and Crier.

Anger over rural buses - Michael Sneath has written on behalf of the Labour candidate Angela Richards at the Fenstanton HDC by-election. The letter is about buses and how the village of Fenstanton has been left without a bus service. That is an election issue. But is this how the Labour Party is going to campaign with letters in the papers? And why is the Agent writing on behalf of the candidate? Can't she write for herself! There have been doubts about letters apparently written by Anthea Cox. Is this a case of Labour putting up "paper candidates". The result may give us a clue!

Countryside Campaign - Is a letter from Alan Fitzgerald who is writing to get people to support the CPRE. The General Election is coming. Pressure Groups will be using the media to press their case by using the public to lobby on their behalf. The CPRE is using the method of getting the public to e-mail candidates in support of their manifesto. Of course the CPRE is in competition with other Pressure Groups using the public to lobby candidates on their behalf.

This isn't democracy - Bob Mullineaux is right in what is wrong. But is wrong in his prescription of how to correct this. The problem with his prescription of an Open Primary for the selection of a candidate costs money. As pointed out in this blog, the Conservatives simply don't have the money to have a postal ballot as held in Totnes. Opening up the selection with an open public meeting, as for the Bedford mayoral candidate will not involve the whole electorate, just some. My answer is for the public to join their local political party or have a properly conducted, publicly funded open primary election.

Djanogly is OUT OF THE LOOP.

In a News and Crier article on the new page 3 Djanogly is asked to comment on the proposed car parking charges being imposed by HDC. The comments on this just shows how 'Out of the Loop' Djanogly is on local issues.


HUNTlNGDON MP Jonathan Dianogly
and Conservative said "I have not had any constituents or local politicians contact me on this issue which is of course a council matter and should properly be dealt with by the local council."

Very true. But this means your local Conservative Councillors haven't briefed you on this local issue. So Djanogly is 'Out of the Loop'.

“Having said that, I do hope that the town and district councils will co-ordinate and work together to find a suitable solution here. My view is that the relevant councils should sit round a table and sort the matter out based on the protected impact ot parking charges on revenue versus the possibility of lower footfall."

Not true. The Town Council has NOTHING to do with this decision. This is solely down to the Conservative run HDC. Again Djanogly hasn't been briefed on this local issue by local Conservative Councillors. So Djanogly is 'Out of the Loop'.

"Presumably this involves not only the decision to charge, but also the level of charge."


Well, if the local Conservatives Councillors had actually briefed Djanogly on this issue he wouldn't need to presume. Again Djanogly is 'Out of the Loop'.

"I have received none of the information to make that decision or take a view, although I am always open to listening to anyone who wishes to discuss the matter with me."

If Djanogly was in the loop he would be regularly briefed on what is going on locally and the issues which will cause problems. As Djanogly is 'Out of the Loop' he isn't being briefed by the local Conservatives. HCCA is on a downwards spiral. There seems to be no relationship between Djanogly and local Conservative Councillors.

I have to wonder why the local Conservatives stand up for Djanogly. Its not for the money. It is not for the influence. Really, is he the best candidate for the Huntingdon Conservatives? I don't think so!

Letters in the News and Crier 27/01/10

Rather than doing a separate piece on each letter so I thought I would lump all I want to comment on into one article. Link to the ever excellent News and Crier.

Outrage at candidate's 'offensive remarks' - This blog started this story and the News and Crier picked this up. Bill Sinclair is right. Though whether this is slanderous is a moot point. James Clark should read the original article before firing off a letter.

Community should pay - Malcolm McColl is right to say Tesco should be asked for a contribution. The church pays the rest. As for Helen Cochrane's letter, I will repeat that it if the church wants this car park then the Church should pay. Has it got to be that everytime something is used by "the community" the taxpayer must then pick up the bill? I don't think so. Will Helen support all churches which have or want a car park get these paid for and maintained by the taxpayer? It is very easy to call for taxpayers to pick up the bill because there is no direct relationship. But one of the consequences doing something for the 'community' is in next letter.

Anger at £270k hole - St Ives Town Council is run by Independent Councillors. I think that is worth saying. The trouble is the Corn Exchange. These Independent Councillors were elected to stop the building being sold and set about refurbishing it for the 'community'. When Councils do things for the 'community' it cost money and Council tax goes up.
In answer to the letter, Parish and Town Councils are NOT included in the capping arrangements. In theory they could tax us more and more. My worry is that HDC, with all its financial problems, will look at what a Town/Parish can do and try to shift services and costs to the Towns and Parishes. This is what HDC did with the Public Conveniences.

Did they want a lap dog - A much better letter from Paul Dakers than the one printed in the Hunts Post. I can understand the frustration with the political process when you are at the bottom. The political parties/councillors/councils build up their respective roles. The reality is what Councils can do is restricted by law and many major decisions are taken by Government.
 The trouble with Cllr Monk is he is a political tramp. Started with the Conservatives, went Independent and has ended up in UKIP.  Probably not the end of his journey.

Fewer jobless than in 1992 - Labour Parliamentary candidate is again in the papers. This time with an outright political letter. What Anthea doesn't mention is the Government is likely to borrow in this current financial year at total of £180,000,000,000. That is scary! 

Huntingdon Conservatives finances down in 2008.

The local Conservative finances are still on a downwards trend. What will be interesting will be the accounts for 2009 and then 2010. What I always have a look at is the register of donations. Just put Huntingdon in the second line of the search box.

What the accounts throw up is whilst the Conservatives have a good balance sheet but most of the value of the association is in property. So when there are calls for an open postal primary the local Conservative Association simply couldn't afford this without selling its property.

There are a couple of questions over the relationship between Djanogly constituency office and the Conservative Office which are at the same address. Like Djanoglys' expenses I'm sure everything is above board.

I would further point out that whilst we can find out what the local Conservative Association raises, spends and owns this doesn't apply to the other local parties. Because of this the Conservatives are far more transparent than their opponents.

What will be interesting will be the 2009 Accounts.