Churchill v SVDK

St Neots News and Crier - 23/09/2010

I thought the "March" against the imposition of car parking charges was a part of a "political pantomime". With the Tsunami of cuts coming I didn't feel putting car parking charges at the top of the list of services not to cut or charge- 20 pence and hour and free evenings/Sundays - was the not the best option. I also thought that all this was over the top and silly. That is my opinion.

In a free country, it is our right to protest against decisions. Whether Steve van de Kerkhove is a District Councillor (Liberal Democrat) or not he should be able to use publicly owned facilities such as Riverside Park.

The problem SVDK had was this was his first go at organising this type of event. People make mistakes and so long as they learn for those mistakes then move on.

Cllr Churchill (Conservative) alleged that SVDK brought "his office and HDC into disrepute" by not undertaking a risk assessment and not completing an events application form.

This is just a rush, by Cllr Churchill, to the Standards Board over a complaint that, in my opinion, just doesn't warrant this sort of action.

If there were problems then talk to his leader or to the Councillor concerned.

Protest without music?

St Neots News and Crier - 29/07/2010

I read that Steve van de Kerkhove, District Councillor and Town Councillor has called off the music part of protest this coming Sunday. Member of the Licensing Committee, Steve says: "We are not going to have an amplifier or music because there's a licensing issue". DOH!

To find out what licensing issue was I looked up on the HDC website to see if any licences had been applied for. The Town Council does have a licence for the playing of music on Sundays. If the Town Council supports this protest why isn't the Town Council allowing this licence to be used?

There is something called a Temporary Event Notice which organisers have to put in for regulated entertainment. On the licensing website there is no Temporary Event Notice.

So the "licensing issue" is they didn't send in a Temporary Events Notice. Not really a licensing issue! Just an issue of bad organisation! I just hope they have informed the Police of this demonstration?

Car Park Protest Facebook site built on lies and untruths.

The Facebook site is run with a few of our Councillors on the admin team. Cllr Steve van de Kerkhove (District Councillor and Town Councillor) and Julia Hayward (Town Councillor and leader of the majority Liberal Democrats on SNTC).

Whilst I don't mind a good argument, this shouldn't be based on lie and untruths. Yet many of the lies and untruths go unchallenged by the administrators. Lies and untruths such as these:

The highest charge is £1.50 for 4 to 23 hours. Where the £5 comes from I have no idea.

By removing all our facilities - but HDC hasn't. Another lie!

The are a number of calls to send this e-mail from the savestneots.org.uk. Below is the e-mail that you are asked to send.

This e-mail is littered with inaccuracies, untruths and lies. By sending this e-mail it shows you agree with the lies. The same e-mail is sent from the scraphdc.org.uk website - another dubious website.

Our Councillors should know what is going on here. Yet they allow these lies, untruths and inaccuracies to go unchallenged on their Facebook site. They also allow links to these two site of doubtful repute, whilst saying they are NOT responsible for the content. In the end, they still allow links to these sites.

Mary Lee's comments must have been embarrassing to the admin councillors as the bus stop was not provided HDC. At least they informed her that she was wrong.

There are the rants. Here is one:

As ever the rant has less to with fact than just letting out anger. As the estimates say, the installation costs should be recovered within a year. No figures given by Nev Bear. Now calling the people in Pathfinder House tyrants is wrong. They are not tyrants. The real reason for these charges is the £4.7 million budget deficit as  HDC has not been charging the full amount of Council Tax it should do.

All in all this Facebook page is littered with lies, inaccuracies and untruths all seen as true by many of the contributors. What I find bad is Cllrs van de Kerkhove and Hayward, as administrators, aren't countering many of these falsehoods and allow linking to dubious websites. 


All this is a political pantomime. Deep cuts are coming and rather than talk about what should be cut, the Liberal Democrat opposition whines on about the imposition of a 20 pence rise. It seems it is easier to allow lies and untruths to be spread than it is to tell the truth.

As it says on the front of the book "Effective Opposition" - be wicked; - act shamelessly; - stir endlessly and EXAGGERATE.

How I voted at the local elections

Having received my ballots by post, although I wanted to cancel them, I thought I would let everyone know how I voted. I have done a mock up of a ballot paper to show you.

I will point out the only local campaign leaflets I have received were from Steve van de Kerkhove. As normal none form the Conservatives and none from Labour or UKIP. Rather pathetic really.

First Local Election Leaflet is from: The Liberal Democrats

The first local election leaflet to land on my doormat is from the Liberal Democrats. Steve van de Kerkhove is standing for the Liberal Democrats in Eynesbury. If you haven't had one yet there is a link to a copy here. 

What is Steve promising? Not much and nor can he. The main problem with these local elections is the same problem with the General Election. Both the Conservative run HDC and Labour run HM Government are running deficits. Both are NOT informing the public where the inevitable cuts are going to fall. 

At the General Election, I don't expect the Conservatives or Liberal Democrats to detail cuts whilst Gordon Brown and Labour, who have the figures, stay secret and silent over their massive cuts. Nor can I expect the Liberal Democrats to be able to tell me where they would cut when the local Conservatives are doing exactly the same as the Labour Government.

I will be voting for Steve as I feel he will stand up for Eynesbury. As equally important is sending a message to the current Conservative administration that they have messed up and should pay by being voted out of office. The Conservative slogan is "Vote for change". I shall certainly be voting to get rid of this Conservative administration.

The First Election Poster seen!

And the race has been won by Steve van de Kerkhove! As seen in my street today.

Letter in the News and Crier 25/2/10

My comments on Letters to the Editor pages in the ever excellent News and Crier.

Your views on St Neots Riverside Car Park - is a series of 6 letters on this issue. I'll comment on 4 of them here. 


Any charges are unacceptable - Steve van de Kerkhove has to start thinking ahead for when he gets into power.  This decision would be his. The problem is a car park cost money to run. 


Concession does not go far enough - Is Cllr Barry Chapman the leader of the St Neots Conservative Councillors? He is certainly writing as though he is. As the St Neots Conservatives are "leading" the campaign against their Conservative colleagues at HDC. As for his St Ivo comparison this falls down as they are not comparable. St Ivo is about 600 metres from the edge of St Ives Town Centre. The better comparison is either the Riverside CP and the Godmanchester CP both which charge at 20 pence per hour.
The trouble with Cllr Chapman's letter is he misses the point. Car Park charges are revenue. If he doesn't want these charges he either needs to find replacement revenue or make cuts.


Budget mess needs a proper strategy - David Gadenne writes a very good letter about the need for HDC to have a strategy.


HDC doesn't car about local business - Jon Mountfort gets towards the point but misses it. The old HDC building had to go because it was falling down. As for free parking in Fenland District Council this is true. But as with all free provision someone has to pay. In this case free car parks cost the Fenland Council Taxpayer £410,560 or £13.34 each. In Huntingdonshire car park charges contribute to the budget £526,000 or £8.98 per Council Taxpayer. 


As for his idea of making all the car parks free we will end up in the position of Fenland were their Car parks cost. Effectively this would mean a loss in income of £526k + additional costs of £410k makes a total of £936k. This would mean an extra £15.98 per council taxpayer.
--------
On a different note:


Where are all the politically correct jobs - Ric Euteneuer of Huntingdonshire Unison makes a good point about what are backroom jobs and frontline jobs. When talking about this our local politicians need to define what are frontline jobs.

The Election Season has started with the first delivery of a political leaflet since June 2009. Normally I would be finding ways to rip into a political leaflet. On this occasion I find this leaflet is well presented and reads very easily.
With Steve van de Kerkhove named 6 times on this leaflet it is almost certain that he will be standing at the local elections on 6th May 2010. The other recipient of this publicity is Martin Land. He is pictured 3 times and named 3 times.

As an aside, Martin Land named Julia Hayward as his Agent for the General Election. This hasn't stopped Martin running local campaigns in this constituency and in the surrounding constituencies. This is why I believe that Martin is a part-time candidate as the Liberal Democrats must be looking to fight in Cambridge and other constituencies where they have a better chance. The Fenstanton By-election will add some perspective on who is doing well in the constituency.

As I pointed out near the beginning of this blog I will be voting Liberal Democrat at the local elections on 6th May 2010 and for other parties at other forthcoming elections.

Getting a raw deal?

The by-election which James Clark refers to in his letter in the Hunts Post was the non-election which got me onto the St Neots Community Forum. The reason I started was this was a by-election and I wanted to know about the issues before voting.
I received a leaflet from Stevie-v but nothing from the Conservative candidate James Clark. I even e-mailed the Conservative Office as I had received a letter regarding my postal vote. I wrote:
"I have just received your letter regarding my postal ballot at the forthcoming by election. In your letter you state that "You should now have received my first election leaflet.....". Well, I haven't and I'm not voting for you until I actually get a leaflet."


I did receive a reply and this said:
"I am forwarding your email on to James Clark who is standing for the Conservatives at the By-election of 18 December.  Please accept out apologies for our error in not sending you the leaflet. Kind regards. Ann Wilson HCCA."


To this date I have yet to receive anything from James Clark. In the end I didn't vote for him. If this was an example of how James Clark's campaign treated his potential voters then no wonder he lost!

The letter to the paper also makes a claim about Stevie-v using being elected to the Town Council as being a stepping to the District Council. So what? It is not as though some Conservative Councillors haven't got two or even three Councillor jobs. These are:

Cllr Ursell: St Neots Town Council, Eynesbury Hardwicke Parish Council and Hunts DC. Also stood for CCC in 2005.
Cllr Harty: St Neots Town Council, Hunts DC and Cambs CC.
Cllr Farrer: Hunts DC and Cambs CC.
Cllr Catherine Hutton: Eynesbury Hardwicke Parish Council, Cambs CC

County Councillor Catherine Hutton was co-opted onto Eynesbury Hardwicke Parish Council and then stood for Cambridgeshire County Council. Isn't that what James Clark is accusing Stevie-v of doing. Seems to me James Clark has one rule for his Conservative mates and another rule for the Liberal Democrats.