From Joseph S

Tuesday, 17 April 2012

I disagree with this view of Janet Battye, who I find to be decent, honest and hardworking. I think in a local election you vote for a person not a party.

I did not vote for Labour for years after they lied about Iraq. I'll not vote Lib Dem again for a while for their failure to stand up to the Tories nationally.

But locally, I want to be represented by honest decent people, who'll work hard for the benefit of the community, doing their best despite the shoddy hand that they've been given. That's what Janet has been doing- a difficult job in rubbish circumstances. I think she'll find it hard to win, but if people look at the person not the politics she might stand a chance.

From Jade P

Wednesday, 18 April 2012

I'm not surprised to hear that Cllr Press and kate sweeney have responded to the request to discuss political issues- that's the difference between being in power and lounging in opposition. Discussing politics and actually practising it are two entirely different things.

Cllr Battye is hardworking and honest and if she has failed to respond it is because, as Cllr Press claimed about her failure to send apologies to the Calder Holmes park meetings, it is because she is over stretched. Cllr Press, having dropped one of her commitments now has the time to do the debating . . . she is yet to understand what it really means to run an authority.

From Stephen Curry

Wednesday, 18 April 2012

Being the Independent Candidate last year, but unable to stand for various reasons this year, I of course would agree with Joseph S. That you should vote for the Person and not the Party at local level. In fact I believe that the Parties with only 1.5% of the population collectively as members are even less representative at local level than Independents would be, because they allow their party philosophies to get in the way of what may be best for the whole community/constituency.

That said there is no choice this time but to select a candidate from the Party Political candidate's list. Unless you join the majority of people who have been so bored with yah boo party politics, that you don't bother to vote.

Personally I have chosen to vote for the person most likely to do a good constituency job. I may disagree fundamentally with her on national issues and even on local issues like the handling of the Library and Northgate House development proposals. But as constituency councillors go I believe Janet Battye is as busy and as involved in individual peoples problems as any councillor I have known over many years. Kate Sweeney would be a clear second choice for me but I would wish to see some continuity of experience and ward knowledge retained this time around.

So the sign for Janet will go up today . . . with the rider Voting for the person and not the party.

From Richard Scorer

Wednesday, 18 April 2012

Whilst being a Labour councillor I can recognise good qualities in political opponents, and acknowledge that no party has a monopoly of wisdom. But as Joseph says, the Lib Dems have alot of answering to do about their behaviour nationally and it is not impressive at all to see Janet Battye ducking out of a debate on the massive impact of cuts whilst putting out poisonous leaflets accusing one of her opponents of being an IRA supporter. Not exactly grown up politics. Susan Press is a very hardworking town councillor in my experience.

Leaving aside the fact that austerity clearly isn't working - the economy is already tanking and four fifths of the cuts are yet to come-the Lib Dems have been pretty hypocritical about public spending. I stood as a Labour candidate in a Lib Dem held seat in the last general election and the local Lib Dem MP was constantly complaining that Labour weren't spending enough on NHS, schools etc - every local interest group who wanted more spending would get a photo opportunity with him and a supportive message on his website. He's now a junior minister in a government implementing savage cuts. I don't recall Hilary Myers advocating savage cuts when she was standing for the Lib Dems in Calder Valley in 2010, either.

From Graham Barker

Wednesday, 18 April 2012

Can we have chapter and verse please on 'poisonous leaflets accusing one of her opponents of being an IRA supporter'? I do actually read every leaflet on its way to my recycling bin - a short journey - and don't recall anything fitting that description.

And I too am a supporter of Janet Battye. At a time when it's hard to find a reason to vote for any political party, I agree with others here that you look locally at the person and her or his qualities. Whatever you think about the LibDems, Janet is an excellent councillor and would be a hard act to follow.

From Dave M

Wednesday, 18 April 2012

Janet Battye's party have signed up to the programme of austerity and cuts so I'm not a bit surprised that she won't attend a public meeting organised by a group committed to defending local services.

I'm very suspicious of any claims that she can't make it because she's too busy. It's an election campaigning opportunity. It's a bit difficult to imagine that a politician is too busy for that.

What's more, a decent local councillor wouldn't have to resort to negative campaigning – their record would speak for itself.

I dread to think what will happen to local services in the hands of Lib Dems or Tories. There are only two choices – Green or Labour.

From Paul Clarke

Thursday, 19 April 2012

I wonder if anyone can confirm if Jade P is also Jade Smith former Lib Dem town councillor?

For what it's worth I've found Cllr Battye (Calder, only 27 people need to switch their vote) very poor under direct questioning and not fully across her brief. Just my experience.

It seems the Lib Dem narrative is she is hardworking. Maybe, but remember she can claim more than 30K in allowances as leader and councillor so it is surely not too much for voters to expect a bit of effort.

They are also saying national politics shouldn't matter and this from a party that went on and on and on and on and on and on and on about Iraq.

The difference in this election is that national cuts imposed by a ConDem coalition Cllr Battye supports have a direct impact on local services for the poor, vulnerable, those worried about crime. people wanting to borrow a library book and anyone who has the misfortune to be sick.

I'm not going to bore you with who I'm voting as it is same party I've supported for the last 30 years who have a very good candidate.

From Jade P

Thursday, 19 April 2012

If I had an issue I wanted sorting I would choose a person who would listen and not bluster, who has an established track record at local authority level, not town council only and a person with many years experience of working for her community and not her party. There is only one candidate who meets those criteria - Cllr Battye.

From Jim W

Thursday, 19 April 2012

Following Graham's comment I have in front of me the last 2 leaflets that were posted through my door by the Janet Battye election 'campaign' in both under the heading "controversial choice for Labour" comes the statement "known for her hardline political views, she has accepted campaign donations from the Labour representation committee (LRC) - an extremest group in the Labour party who advocate special rights for IRA terrorist prisoners". So not directly an IRA activist herself but Susan is claimed to be financed by them.

Janet may be seen to be a terrifically hard working councillor, and may consider herself over stretched but is accountability, by means of debate and other methods, not a role of a councillor? Is Janet claiming that she is too busy to fulfil her role?

In reply to Jade's comment yes Susan is, at this present time, "lounging in opposition" as a the chair of several town council committees and sitting on more. She did have to withdraw from the friends of Calder Holmes park allowing for a more than adequate replacement in Richard Scorer to take her place. This was all to allow her to fulfil her council obligations by actually attending the committees that she's signed up for unlike a number of other councillors, namely LibDems.

I dislike to bring into this party politics but as Stephen mentioned we should be voting for the person, but if that person is part of a group, surely we'd be reckless to consider that when electing them to positions?

From David Telford

Thursday, 19 April 2012

It's an interesting conclusion from Alan and perhaps a little too simple.
The issue is that no matter who you vote for in the local election, there is not going to be more money available to spend on local services.

Personally, I think very few of us can afford an increase in council tax and I'm thankful that it has not gone up although it could be reduced.
The key in this election is to check what the parties' / independent candidates consider priority.

Take a look at nearby councils suggests that the colour of the rosette does have an implication of the decision making process. Take Manchester, OK it's a large metropolitan council but with the cut in it's budget, The Labour dominated council announced (press released into MEN newspapers) that libraries, swimming pools, street cleaning, parks, elderly care and pre-school support would face drastic cuts - these are not the priorities I'd chose to cut when I consider that whilst the council could not afford a librarian at £12k a year, it has advertised for the following posts: Nuclear Free Local Secretariat & Policy and Research Officer @ £37k, New Media Manager @ £38k, Link Worker - Indian and East African Asian on £25,940; a Cultural Regeneration Officer (1) @ a cool £30k; another Cultural Regeneration Officer on a mere £28,919, Assistant Specialist Market Manager on £ 27,016...well it is only an assistant post, Corporate Lead Officer - Lesbians' issues on £38k, Corporate Lead Officer - Gay Men's Issues, another £38k, a 'Zest' Hub Co-Ordinator on £30k, Climate Change Officer £37,206, Team Strategic Development on salary of £41,616, a Creative Director on a juicy £120,000, An Expressive and Performing Arts Technician @ £21,519, a Travel Change Team Policy Officer on £34,549.....

When you look at the Lib Dem councils, right next to Manchester in Stockport, they managed their budget with no redundancies in frontline roles. They did make redundancies but the one that hit the headlines wasn't a librarian but a Promote Cycling officer which for me is a role that isn't really going to hurt the hardest hit. The conservative councils also avoided hurting the frontline when you look around Yorkshire & North West.

It's about priorities. Nice as it is, I don't see that the local council should be risking front line services in favour of say the cinema, especially as the Cinema could easily be ran by a private individual at no cost to the tax-payer at all. That to me is crazy.

I'll be voting Lib Dem, their priorities appear sensible, on a perhaps less important pont but nevertheless telling, I note some Labour Councillors use rather inappropriate references to anyone who votes for another party, they seem to lack the grace, balance and priorities I expect from my local representative.

Alan, if you need someone to balance your debate for your little group, I'm more than willing to attend. When is it happening?

From Dave M

Thursday, 19 April 2012

David Telford, part of your comment is interestingly similar to a couple I have noticed on the net here (under Tony) and here

Strange that the jobs were listed in the same order and the wording is almost identical.

Did you cut and paste and did you take the trouble to check the accuracy of your message before posting? If so, can you say when each was advertised and whether the roles still exist?

Not really on topic but I'm curious.

From David Telford

Thursday, 19 April 2012

Yes Dave M, I took the list from the MEN as I racalled it was listed at the time of reading about how different councils prioritised their budget.

Sadly, I too wondered if these roles were still in existance so checked. Yes, they are all still there, even the Nuclear Free Local Secretariat! So for Mancs, they may not be able to take any excercise, get a library book, grow old etc etc but their money is being spent on these roles.

Now, I'm not saying that Labour are profligate in every town & city but there does seem to be a pattern where certain parties seem to prioritise in a more logical fashion than others. For me, this is the most important question for any would be councillor, where would they spend the budget and how can they improve the value for money that tax payers get?

Jim W -Thanks for clarifying the leaflet, it's clear that Janet's claim about Susan Press was fair and balanced. On your point about accountability are you suggesting that councillors should attend every political debate that goes on? Alan Keep may have invited her to join his mates for a debate which is fine but why should a councillor be compelled to attend just becasuse Alan says so? He's got no more legitimate right to demand attendance than anyone wlse. Frankly, attending every political conversation isn't going to get bins emptied, streets cleaned and it's certainly not going to reduce council taxes.

From Dave M

Thursday, 19 April 2012

David Telford, so you copied and pasted your contribution from the comments section of the MEN (not from the news, but the comment of another reader). That's great. Well done! I wonder exactly how you verified that the information was correct and that the jobs still exist.

David, can you point to the specific examples, providing links or the means to find them where "Labour Councillors use rather inappropriate references to anyone who votes for another party".

As far as I can see it Janet Battye is conducting a highly unprofessional and desperate campaign and if their is any justice she will get trounced at the ballot box for it.

Jonathan Timbers

Thursday, 19 April 2012

I object to political smears, in posts and in political leaflets. In particular, I don't like the 'guilt-through-association'IRA accusation against Sue and what Paul Clarke says about Janet. It saddens me though that Janet is trying to win the election through denying her connections with the Liberal Democrats (e.g. her posters only mention her party in tiny writing underneath her name, as required by law, in effect making her national allegiances invisible to voters).

So she seems to be tacitly supporting her national party, but not trying not to tell anybody.

What is her position on coalition policies? Does anybody know? After all, she is leader of Calderdale Council, which means her role is more than just local, it has a national political dimension too. Even as a local councillor, she has a duty to try to influence the decisions of government and indeed we know that she is active at this level (e.g. she has tried to influence the Department of Transport's grading of our railway station, which affects the likelihood of it becoming accessible for disabled people).

It would be good if politics were conducted in a grown up way through full and reasoned debate, informed by evidence, with a focus on outcomes rather than dishing the dirt on one's opponents. And whilst we might not end up agreeing with one another, at least we might all benefit from the challenges thrown up in a good discussion to rethink and develop our views.

But please don't invite David Telford to speak at the meeting, his views are as predictable as the SWP's or the Economist's. In fact, they appear to be cut and pasted from the Daily Mail.

From Joseph S

Thursday, 19 April 2012

Good grief. What a great example of why people are turning away from politics. She said this- he said this. Its just boring to most of us.

You might find it exciting, and interesting and fun, but its failing to engage me as a normal voter. I want to be inspired and engaged. I want to look up to decent, competent people like Janet Battye or Barry Collins. I'd rather not vote Lib Dem or Labour, but for a person that I respect and trust to make intelligent decisions based on the evidence that they have in front of them.

And if they get it wrong that's fine. I don't care, as long as they've done it honestly and openly. Janet is a decent, honest, fair and hardworking councillor. I'd rather she was not a Lib Dem, but frankly don't care that she is. Its the person I'm going to vote for for the party.

From Paul D

Thursday, 19 April 2012

Local Lib Dems are just campaigning hard because even they must know that Janet's track record won't save her this time out. It should be about local issues but the decisions taken by the Coalition are starting to hit home. People are losing their jobs, or fearful of losing their jobs. Families are seeing their income cut just as living costs soar; largely due to inflation brought on by the suicidal decisions to keep interest rates artificially low, devalue sterling and pump hundreds of billions of taxpayers' money into failed banks. The weakest are hit hardest, as real incomes fall by 3-4% a year those only just in work see their tax credits cut, others see their benefits frozen and pensions undermined. As bankers' trouser multi-million pound bonuses and shareholders cash in, those facing another pay freeze are told to keep clam and carry on by smug, incompetent twits driving around London in armoured executive cars.

Cameron and Clegg are the uninvited guest at the local election and when senior Conservatives are reported as being rattled by Cameron's incompetence you can only hope he fits in a trip to the Valley between now and May. The Lib Dems need to wake up; I don't walk past our reduced hours local library and immediately think Gordon Brown shouldn't have refurbished so many schools or introduced tax credits, I immediately see it against a backdrop of austerity imposed by those just a little too close to power and a little too far from people. I don't see care assistants having their hours cut and immediately trawl the press for a job supporting gay or lesbian to compare with that fact. I wonder why those who remain in low paid work are expected to do the same work, for less pay and keep quiet, whilst their employers (who profit from state income) often whinge about the waste in the public sector.

But Janet won't be alone in being sacrificed as collateral damage to the mistakes Clegg made and his party will possibly never recover. The Tory press will simply hasten the calls for an early election and one with Cameron free of dead weight Clegg and his decimated party. There is no economic nirvana two years hence. Things are going to get worse, in fact are being made worse by the Coalition. All the Tories can hope to do is wipe out the Lib Dems and rely on its anti-gay, anti-lesbian, anti-everything activists to mobilise enough resentment to prevent a barely credible Labour making anything like a majority. That's what this election is about. It's about the recasting of the Coalition. As one party builds a scaffold the Lib Dens are being lined up for the drop. Anyone else notice what an incredibly quiet campaign the Tories are running this time?

From Jade P

Thursday, 19 April 2012

First, I note Allen Keep has made no mention of inviting the conservative candidate for Calder Ward to the 'Save our Services' meeting. If not, why not? Is not a democracy about gaining all points of view? I am wondering whether this meeting has been set up purely as a campaigning platform for Cllr Press? If so someone should come clean about it.

Second, could anyone clarify for me whether Paul Clarke is really Alistair Campbell? Why is it Cllr Press cannot respond on her own behalf? Why is it that whenever there is a posting about Cllr Press it is Paul Clarke/ Alistair Campbell who responds. If Paul Clarke is the voice of the local Labour Party, that might be a good reason note to vote for them?

Thirdly, Jim W notes that Cllr Press gave up the Calder Holmes Park committee in order to better fulfill her other roles on the Town Council. Cllr Press is only doing what she is elected to do, which is sit on committees. If, Labour did not hog the chairs of committees she would not be so over stretched. If she is struggling with her role on the town council then how is she going to cope with the extra work she will inevitably take on if, and it is a big if, she is elected to Calderdale?

From Allen Keep

Thursday, 19 April 2012

Jade argues, presumably because she has access to the candidate's diaries, that Janet cannot attend a debate because she is overstretched while Susan accepted because she has lots of time. Well, everyone can daw their own conclusions about Janet's failure to debate her and her party's position on austerity, cuts and privatisation and their impact on the people of Calder. Indeed, they'll have to because Janet failed to offer me the courtesy of a reply to my invitation - perhaps she hasn't the time to say "no thanks"?

Susan, for the record, made it very clear to me that she would not attend a debate if it clashed with her existing council commitments.

Next, we are encouraged to vote for Janet regardless of her politics. How bizarre. I thought this was a local political election where the candidates - all of them, I assume, being hardworking decent and honest (why would anyone assume otherwise?) – distinguish themselves from one another by their policies shaped by their affiliation to one political party or another. We aren't, after all, electing a form captain.

Unfortunately, Janet brought some rather unusual politics the table - perhaps for the first time in a Calderdale local election and which appear to have little political resonance or particular relevance in the constituency - the question of the IRA.

Now normally, I'm well up for a discussion about Irish politics and the IRA but why on earth did Janet raise it? The answer is crushingly simple – she is attempting to discredit and smear her opponent by crude association.
She doesn't actually say, of course, that Susan is an IRA sympathiser, but would just like to infer it. Whether that says something about Janet the politician or Janet the person will be up to voters to decide.
Janet points to the shocking revelation that the LRC otherwise blood curdlingly known as The Labour Representation Committee and laughingly referred to as "extremist" supports "special (she means political I think) status" for IRA terrorists.

Last summer, the Queen (someone who does have "special status") laid a wreath in Dublin to those who fell in their opposition to British rule in Ireland including, of course, IRA volunteers (or murdering terrorists if you prefer). Perhaps she is an IRA sympathiser too – and yet Janet Battye supports the Queen I believe.

That other extremist, Tony Blair, brokered the Belfast (Good Friday) agreement 13 years ago. The agreement effectively gave IRA prisoners (psychopathic killers) political status – the bombers and gunmen were set free early because of the political nature of their offences. I don't recall any Liberal opposition. Perhaps the LRC are not so far from the mainstream after all?

As for David Telford? Don't worry Jonathan - I won't be inviting him to anything -nor engaging with his views which are as offensive as they are (designed to be) provocative and disruptive. I imagine Janet is thrilled with his endorsement of the LibDems and her smear tactics. She's welcome to his vote.

From Jade P

Friday, 20 April 2012

Has Mr Keep invited the conservative candidate to his debate about saving services? If not this is not a democratic debate. Is this debate being stage purely as an election platform for Cllr Press?

The fact that Cllr Press is prepared to abandon all other commitments says it all!

From Rod H

Friday, 20 April 2012

I am really shocked that the elected Leader of Calderdale MBC has chose to use such nasty tactics in her election leaflets. Is the election really a 2 horse race between a hard worker and an ira sympathiser? Unfortunately, the Lib Dems have form for such shamefull gutter tactics at a local level, and it devalues the whole process.

From Allen Keep

Friday, 20 April 2012

Why did we not invite the Tories to a debate? Simple. Calderdale SOS is committed to oppose cuts/privatisation/austerity -the Tories are committed to impose them. What is there to debate with them? We wanted to open up a discussion in the context of the local election amongst those who oppose the Tories and how the cuts can be pushed back, services saved etc -what would a Tory have to contribute?
In the election those opposing the Tories are Labour, Green and LibDem ( who are in coalition with Labour in calderdale).

We thought it would be good to give those parties and their representatives the opportunity to spell out their policies that could defend Calder people from the attacks of the government - and through debate and discussion to attempt to win an audience around to the prospect of joining a real fight against this extremist government - and not just electorally. We had/have no intention of providing an electoral platform for any party.

It was always, of course, going to be a bit of an ask for a candidate whose party nationally is part of a government imposing the cuts - but you make your bed...and, as Jonathan says about Janet Battye..
"What is her position on coalition policies? Does anybody know? After all, she is leader of Calderdale Council, which means her role is more than just local, it has a national political dimension too. Even as a local councillor, she has a duty to try to influence the decisions of government.." That's a very legitimate point and one that Janet had the opportunity given to her to answer.

From David Telford

Friday, 20 April 2012

In response to Dave M's questions: Of course I just pasted the list, what's the point of re-typing it, it saves time. The guy actually made the list elsewhere with links to the actual ads for the vacancies - yes they are real roles paid for by the council tax payer under the Labour dominated council.

In fact I met Terry, one of the two Corporate Lead Officers - Gay mens issues chaps last summer. Links to the office are here

You'll see from the link that the Lesbian issues lady is still there, the Nuke free guy still has his role, there are a number of Link Workers for Indian and East African Asians, 4 Cultural Regeneration Officers, a number of new media officers, the Creative Director is still trousering his £120k. I've not really got time to search for them all but the only role so far that I couldn't confirm was a Expressive and Performing Arts Technician.

Also Dave M, I'll not name names but some Labour councillors are on Twitter you can take a search there for rather inappropriate references to anyone who votes for another party. Perhaps the language may be used when a little drunk but nevertheless, we know that is not an excuse.

Allen, Are you really surprised Janet didn't want to attend. You don't sound like you'd go into the debate with an open mind, it's clear that you have an agenda which does not include lisstening to Janet's point of view.

It's clearly not a fair debate as you've not invited any other parties and furthermore, you seem unwilling to allow anyone of a different midset to attend. So really, what's in it for Janet to attend a meeting with what seems like a closed shop rent-a-mob? She's better off attending a meeting of people who genuinely want to listen and understand to what she has to say.

Alan, my views differ from yours, surely you can accept that without suggesting I am somehow offensive. If you are genuinely offended, say why and it can be debated.

You make it absolutely clear that you are a closed mind on the issues so if you are only interested in have yay sayers at your meeting, I can't understand why you expect Janet to turn up so you can abuse her.

From Jade P

Friday, 20 April 2012

Mr Keep; just because 'you' think 'you' know what Tory policy might be, you fail to invite a local candidate. That is appalling.

I reiterate, this meeting is clearly a platform for Cllr Press.

May I respectfully suggest you convene a meeting entitled 'save democracy in Hebden Bridge'!

From Joe Ridley

Friday, 20 April 2012

I don't know Janet Battye and have never met her. It seems that lots of people think that she's a hardworking person with her heart in the right place. The decisions made in London are not hers and frankly I would prefer that she concentrates on local issues and leave the national politics to the national politicians. The fact that she wishes not to engage with a bunch of ideologically driven loudmouths about issues that she has no control over doesn't surprise me.

I, like many people in this country, dream of the day when party politics withers and we can then get a real chance of democracy. One where the MP's actually represent the people of their constituency rather than the unions or their party.

From Allen Keep

Friday, 20 April 2012

Just as a P.S. as mine and Jade's latest posts have crossed.
Jade repeats her questions - which I think I have answered.

She then adds this: "The fact that Cllr Press is prepared to abandon all other commitments says it all!"

Perhaps Jade is reading what she wants to read rather than what I said - Susan P made it clear to me that she would not attend a debate if it clashed with her council commitments.

Does that say anything?

From Dave M

Friday, 20 April 2012

If there were to be a meeting called 'Save Democracy in Hebden Bridge' I would hope that an invitation would not be sent to any politician who thinks it is ok to make dangerous claims about their rival in order to cling on to power.

As David 'copy & paste' Telford doesn't seem willing or brave enough to back his statements up I think it may be unwise to continue dignifying him.

From Jim W

Friday, 20 April 2012

David Telford, of course I expect my local ward councillor to enter into frank open discussions on what SHE is implementing in our MBC, how is that not a relevant request? how is it not within our power to ask for reasoning?

Jade, I would liken you to a successful press secretary for Mr Clegg, in your work for Janet but from a brief investigation there doesn't seem to be one... in the same vain could Janet not reply to the questions asked of her? Could she not find time to reply to Allen?

How exactly is a debate in favour of Susan? Surely it's a chance for Janet to engage with the people she serves and explain and rationalize the loss of services?

Your comment on Labour "hogging" the chairs is totally unfounded, to hog would imply that there is an alternative, the alternative if you look at the dreadful attendance records of Liberal councillors is no chair at all! Not I think you could agree is a real option.

Joseph S, with vague statements like "Janet is a decent, honest, fair and hardworking councillor" and declaring your support for her how can you consider yourself a normal voter? Surely a normal voter would come to the election with an open mind, realize that the successes Janet likes to harp on about as leader of the council are due to the hard working officers, and a coalition with the Labour party... The 'fantastic' work that local liberals are doing in the locality is not wholly accountable to one person and in an election where it is what we are going to do to look at past 'successes' is an academic point, we need open debates to see what our choices are for the future!

From Graham Barker

Friday, 20 April 2012

It's becoming clear to me at least that with friends like some of the posters on this thread, the Labour Party doesn't need enemies. The closed, condescending minds are just about tolerable but what is disturbing is the tendency to subject those with opposing views to what in other contexts would be considered bullying or harassment.

Like David Telford. I've put the boot into him in the past myself and now feel guilty about it when all he's really doing is expressing views felt by many people - perhaps a majority, even in Hebden Bridge. He speaks his mind and is repaid with contempt. Is that how people genuinely interested in debate behave?

As for all the indignation about Janet and her leaflets, consider this extract (ropey grammar and all) from a post to yesterday's HEC. It's from Andrew Tagg, Tory candidate for Illingworth & Mixenden. I haven't yet had my private detectives shake it down for accuracy, but it strikes me as relevant to this thread for two reasons. I'll let others make up their minds what those reasons might be.

"I was recently personally attacked by the Labour party for having to go to Turkey where I am now on business. Yes I have a real job with commitments. What I found amazing they tried to smear me for working abroad which for a major part of my commitments I travel to the USA Mexico and South Africa developing business for a Halifax based manufacturer. So I am actually helping to secure jobs in Halifax. What I find amazing is it was Cllr Collins who approved the smear yes the portfolio holder for Economy and environment., approves the criticism of my travelling to secure employment. Finally, as all my income is earned through export and as such I am a net contributor to Calderdale, unlike some of the labour councillors that find the thought of real employment alien to them as they live of their council allowances."

From Dave M

Friday, 20 April 2012

Graham Barker, it's no surprise to hear that a Conservative candidate claims he was attacked by Labour. Do you know what the nature of the 'attack' was? Or whether there might have been any just cause for it? It's a bit difficult to make up your mind if you only hear one side, no?

What is striking about Janet Battye's election leaflets is they deliberately (in my view) try to establish a link in the electors' mind between one of her opponents and terrorists. A link that is completely unfair to make. I think this is a disgusting, desperate and reckless tactic and I would say the same no matter who was employing it. I wouldn't trust any politician willing to use it and it's not the sort of behaviour I would expect of a 'decent person'.

I wonder if anyone who is intending to support Janet Battye will have the courage to condemn the election literature in question.

What have we found out about Janet Battye from this thread? She is said to be a hard worker. We are not to think of her as a Lib Dem. She is said to be too busy to debate issues relating to local services with her Labour and Green opponents.

I for one am very suspicious of the fact that she won't attend the meeting and wonder what will happen to local services in the hands of Janet Battye and her Lib Dem colleagues. Unfortunately, we won't have a clue... unless she wins.

From Allen Keep

Friday, 20 April 2012

Jade, yes I do know about Tory policies – who doesn't? - they are rammed down our throats every day. I and millions of others are suffering from them.

What would be the logic of inviting the Tories to a meeting to discuss opposing the Tories? Tell me, would you invite a burglar to a neighbourhood watch meeting to discuss ways to stop theft and vandalism?

Well the Tories are the thieves and vandals - aren't they? Case proven as far as I am concerned. So yes, I have got a closed mind in relation to this disgusting, immoral and extremist government - they've stolen the NHS, pinched our pensions and are sharing the proceeds amongst their partners in crime who they gave tax cuts to. They are busy vandalising our services, the life chances of our youth and the dignity of our old.
And how? – they are supported by the LibDems – that's how. In my view the LibDems, nationally and locally need to be held accountable for that -it's called democracy.

Speaking of democracy – who voted for a coalition government? Where is the mandate for increased tuition fees, for privatising the NHS, for giving tax breaks to the super rich, for chucking young people on to the dole queue and then forcing them to work for nothing, for forcing local authorities to make savage cuts and close down local services for the vulnerable?

You either oppose this or accept it. Which is it?

If, as I do, you oppose this government and the carnage its policies are causing nationally and locally then the question seems to be whether we can effectively join together in Calderdale to do whatever we can in the here and now to defend our jobs and services and oppose cuts and privatisation. Everyone is able to choose whether to be a part of that or not – that too is democracy.

"How" is a more challenging question, especially for some Lib Dem supporters, - but also for those who support Labour or the Greens are trade unionists or are angry but unaligned. That's why Calderdale Save Our Services offered the opportunity for a debate and discussion - not to win an election, but to find a way to join forces against the polices of this wretched coalition and their impact here in Calderdale.

Anyone who wants to help us do so is welcome to our events and meetings – and the next is on Tuesday 24th at the Trades. Details on the "what's on" page.

From Paul Clarke

Saturday, 21 April 2012

Jade. I think we can establish that I am not Alistair Campbell (I don't play the bagpipes for one) but we haven't actually established who you are have we?

So for the second time I will ask you a direct and simple question: are you in fact Jade Smith, a former Lib Dem Town councillor? It's a simple yes or no.

The reason this is important is it is about the integrity of what you are saying. If you are a Lib Dem supporter then it completely changes of the context of your slavish devotion to Cllr Battye (Calder, only 27 voters need to switch their vote). It would be like me coming here as Paul P and backing Labour but it would be totally dishonest.

I also think it helpful if you read my posts as I wasn't defending Cllr Press but merely pointing out that Cllr Battye can claim generous allowances for the duties she carries out. One difference between the two councillors is about 30K.

I always smile at Graham Barker's unique combination of wild assertions and blind rage. Here he is again slagging off people who disagree with him - despite debate being the essence of democracy - as having 'closed, condescending minds' yet he is guilty of exactly that. Every time he comes on it is with a rant against Labour who have clearly wounded him deeply and once again proving his mind is even more closed that those he despises. He seems to mistake bullying for robust debate between adults.

But Graham is also guilty of making sweeping statements with no evidence whatsoever, This time he claims his political soulmate David Trelford speaks for the mythical silent majority.

Now, I disagree with David on virtually everything but he has at least the wit to bring some research supporting his thinking to the table unlike Graham, I don't think even David would say he was speaking for a majority of people in Hebden.

I realise the Lib Dems locally have hit the panic button after their drubbing last year and being overtaken by UKIP in the polls but their supporters need to be more open and considered when they post. I suppose the only consultation for the Focus team is that UKIP aren't standing in Calder leaving them chasing the Tory vote who will prefer to vote for the real thing.

From James Baker

Saturday, 21 April 2012

I've organised a few hustings events before in my time for single issue campaigns. It can be a right pain to do. Mainly because you have to pay attention to are the Electoral Commissions guidelines and rules on such meetings.

These rules are set up to ensure that debates are fair, open and democratic. From what Allen says it appears the Conservative candidate was excluded on the basis of their parties ideology. Simply put they have not been allowed a chance to defend the actions they are accused of. This is profoundly undemocratic.

As a result this meeting breaches the Electoral Commissions rules on holding a fair hustings debate. The result of this is that candidates in attendance will have to declare the cost of the meeting on their election expenses. It appears the organisers and at least one candidate involved is completely unaware of this legality.

Given that fact I'm not surprised Janet appears not to have replied. Personally I wouldn't ever attend a debate during an election campaign where a candidate was excluded.

From Allen Keep

Saturday, 21 April 2012

James - I dare say you are much more versed than I in election law - I freely admit I haven't a clue. Never been my thing.

It wasn't an election "husting". Why would we try to organise one of those? It was intended as a debate between those who oppose the Tories - which, again is why they were not invited - in the context of how we can defend jobs and services in Calderdale and oppose austerity and privatisation.

That is how I put the invitation to Janet, Susan and Helen.

I assume that as a campaigning group we are at liberty to invite who we want to join in a debate/discussion we are organising?! - just as those invited are at liberty to decline.

All I have pointed out is that Janet did not respond while both Helen and Susan indicated they would be happy to be part of a debate on those terms (notwithstanding, in both cases, their exisiting commitments). I just can't put it any plainer.

If there was an issue in Janet's mind re electoral restricitions etc I presume she could have let me know?

I think the LibDems are running scared of debating their policies with anyone - and I'm not surprised. That's my personal view - others can draw similar or different conclusions.

And can we now just get something clear? As a result of Janet's failure to respond (and unless she changes her mind) there will be no debate involving election candidates held by Calderdale Save Our Services.

From James Baker

Saturday, 21 April 2012

I had the misfortunate of having to learn about election law when putting on a debate against ID cards during the last general election, although I did have the foresight to research rules and regulations that apply during an election period.

You are of course quite free of course to organise any type of meeting. Thankfully we live in a democratic society. I'm glad there are people engaged who want to promote their cause and view.

However during an election if you organise and promote events that have candidates speaking at them then it has to go down on their expenses. The exception to this is if you hold a husting in a fair and unbiased manner. I really suggest you read up on the rules and regulations that you can find on the Election Commission's website.

It appears that Calderdale SOS are hosting and promoting an event that promotes a particular political point of view. As you say on this thread to oppose cuts and build opposition to the "extremist government". The flyers have candidate's names on it, and the event will draw a crowd and give them a platform to electioneer. You are essentially promoting those candidates and certain views they hold by advertising them as guest speakers.

Because you haven't organised a free of fair democratic debate here, I can only conclude that is why Janet hasn't replied. Why would she want to attend a meeting organised by someone who thinks the government is 'extremist'. I wouldn't waste my time at such an event either.

PS Locally Labour (including Cllr Dave Young) voted to support the budget drawn up by Calderdale under Janet Battye's leadership. In this regard perhaps only the Greens can really honestly say they are anti all cuts.

From Charles Gate

Saturday, 21 April 2012

I'm replacing Kate Sweeny as the Green speaker. Kate has to attend a conference and cannot make it. We (the Greens) are attending the meeting on the basis that it is not a hustings but part of Calderdale SOS continuing campaign against cuts and austerity. Indeed on CSOS web page it is described as a Public Meeting 'with a focus on our continuing campaign against cuts and privatisation of public services'. Being a public meeting anyone can attend so I look forward to contributions from the floor from Lib Dems or others. In fact speeches from the platform, I understand, are to be short in order to let all the meeting discuss the issues in an open and frank way.

Charlie Gate, Green Party.

From James Baker

Saturday, 21 April 2012

This is all very confusing. Allen said at the start of this thread it was a debate:

"On behalf of local campaining group Calderdale Save Our services I invited Janet some time ago to publically debate some other national issues which directly affect Calder constiuents - austerity, cuts and privatisation under this Government - with the Green and Labour candidates."

Now it appears both Allen and Charles are saying this isn't actually a debate but rather part of an ongoing political campaign. Both Heb Web and the Hebden Bridge Times are reporting it as an election debate, so where did they get this information from?

Anyone can of course attend a public meeting, but if candidates are speaking and given a platform they will have to declare a share of the cost of the event on their expenses. I recall the flyer circulated does actualy list two CMBC candidates as public speakers.

From Dave M

Saturday, 21 April 2012

A shame that the Conservative candidate wasn't invited. In the circumstances (the guidance that James Baker refers to appears here I believe). I am sure that Janet Battye is justified in not attending.

It's unfortunate that we will not have an opportunity to hear to what extent she is committed to preserving local services before casting our votes.

From Allen Keep

Sunday, 22 April 2012

James. Listen carefully. Calderdale SOS proposed a debate between the candidates in the forthcoming election who are opposed to the Tories (therefore not the tories themselves).

It was not a "hustings" to which all candidates would be invited to put forward their election manifesto but a debate about the coalition governement's austerity policies - how to respond to them from their particular position as representatives of opposition parties - and to offer a way forward for Calder constiuents from their perspective.
There was never any intention of asking the proposed participants to "electioneer" i.e to put forward a case as to why anyone should vote for them - and that is not what they were asked to do in my invitation to them.

We had no intention, as I have explained before, in offering an election specific platform to anyone in general or any candidate in particular.

As we know, Susan and Helen expressed an interest in taking part - no more than that - and with provisos re: their exisitng commitments.

As Janet did not reply (for whatever reason) there could be no debate between all those opposed to the Tories and therefore, as I said, in capitals, there will be no debate organised by Calderdale SOS involving election candidates.

CSOS then decided to have a public meeting(on 24th April at the Trades Club), which is not the same thing as a debate, to discuss with those who are opposed to austerity, privatisation and cuts - and anyone else who wishes to turn up (as it is a public meeting) - as to how we can develop and build a campaign against this governement's policies and their impact on the people of Calderdale.

As I myself pointed out, this is advertised on the Hebweb What's On page - as a public meeting, not a debate, and with no reference whatsoever to the election ( I'm afraid I can't vouch for what was printed in the Hebden Bridge Times).

Calderdale SOS therefore invited some speakers to make a contribution to the meeting and lead off a discussion - people who, as we do, oppose the Coalition's policies.

We invited Susan Press - because she, and her local party, clearly and correctly does so and it would be good to hear what she has to say about fighting coalition policies.

We also invited Charlie Gate (member of the Green party) for exactly the same reason (and given that Helen was not available). We have also invited an activist from the PCS union, who will address the meeting, as they are taking strike action in the near future to defend their pensions.
Frankly, I can't see a problem.

What I can see is a level of political paralysis so acute that no supporter of the Lib Dems on this forum has been able to make a single contribution in this discussion that desrcribes or defends any specific policy that the LibDems have whatsoever.

So James, you can bleat all you like about abstract notions of democracy and witter on about legal processes and so forth - and maybe it will distract others from the questions you seem unable to answer but here is a really, really simple question to you and all those who support the Lib Dems and Janet.

What do you have to say to the people of Calder constituency about the Coalition's policy of austerity, privatisation and the imposition of savage cuts on local authorities everywhere and Calderdale in particular? If that is too much to deal with I'll make it even simpler - a one word answer from any of you will suffice.

Are you for or against this government's policy of austerity, cuts and privatisation? Quiet please.

From James Baker

Sunday, 22 April 2012

Allen the question of inviting all candidates to a debate is not an abstract legalistic point. It is something most people would agree is a fair and democratic thing to do.

The Electoral Commission guidelines help ensure that meetings that give certain candidates an election platform are properly recorded in their expenses. You have invited two election candidates as guest speakers, so they will have to declare some of the meeting costs on their campaign expenses. That is fine; there is nothing wrong with doing that so long as it is legally recorded as a part of their election campaign.

Over the past two years Calderdale Liberal Democrats have put out countless leaflets explaining our position. We have made every effort to ensure the cuts required to reduce our national deficit did not impact on front line services here in Calderdale.

Labour acknowledge this in their leaflet that claims they 'have made sure that no children's centres and no libraries will be closing". This has been done by working constructively in coalition with Liberal Democrats here in Calderdale.

That is why Labour Councillors such as Dave Young voted for the budget put forward by Calderdale under Janet Battye's leadership. That budget was the result of a lot of hard work from both parties.

For the record I am in favour of cutting our national deficit and bringing the sprawling sovereign debt that Labour left us with under control. I believe there is a lot of wasteful state spending that could be reduced. In the long run I think the coalition's policy of deficit reduction will put our economy in a much stronger situation.

From Dave M

Sunday, 22 April 2012

The guidance of the Electoral Commission gives a very clear and simple definition of what is meant by a hustings event. "A hustings event is a meeting where election candidates or parties debate policies and answer questions from the audience."

Alan Keep, can I ask, is this a meeting where election candidates will debate policies and answer questions from the audience? Was anthing said in the invitation to Cllr Battye to suggest that this would be such a meeting?

If the answer is no then it seems clear that the Lib Dems are hiding behind this hustings issue in order to avoid taking part.

If, however, it is to be such a meeting then it seems that the candidates in attendance will have to comply with the rules.

If you are in any doubt, Alan, then why not check with the Electoral Commission whose phone number is in the guidance. I am sure they will give a better opinion than that expressed by Cllr Baker.

From Anne H

Sunday, 22 April 2012

Two points to Allen Keep.

Firstly, if you want to invite people opposed to the Tories' cuts to a meeting - without inviting the Tories that's fine, but why tell people about it in a forum thread entitled 'Calderdale Ward local election'.

And secondly, the Green candidate's name is Kate Sweeny - not Helen Sweeny

From Roger N

Sunday, 22 April 2012

Can I just add my support to those people who maintain that local politics should be non-partisan? Whether a candidate is Labour, Liberal, Conservative or Monster Raving Loony is (or should be) a matter of supreme irrelevance at a local level.

We don't need people who are going to campaing for the withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan, who are going to address the problems of immigration, the NHS, G8 summits or the banking industry. There are far more appropriate platforms for that sort of stuff.

I've always though that local politics should be concerned with local issues, and not a forum for would-be party politicians to inflict their dull and predictable ideology on, what they consider to be, a gullible and unthinking public. To such people I'd simply say - get real! The public is more savvy than you give it credit for. Your kind of politics is not appropriate at local level.

What I, and most people I talk to, want is someone who will address local issues. You only need to look at Hebweb to see what matters to people - local public transport, local planning issues, dog fouling, litter, community facilities, local schools, parking and traffic issues. None of the above are honestly any better off in the hands of any particular party. How would being a Labour councillor make you more capable of addressing the issue of dog poo on the canal towpath than it would if you were a Liberal Democrat? Sadly party politicians almost invariably have delusions of grandeur - there's far more street cred in demonstrating in London agains government cuts than there is in talking to Calderdale Council Officers about removing litter in Calder Holmes Park!

If only we had more independent candidates with no political axe to grind. If that were the case, local issues might actually be addressed.

From Allen Keep

Sunday, 22 April 2012

Just a quick message.
I can't keep on giving explanations about the debate we proposed and the public meeting we now have - it's doing my head in.

Anne. I revealed that Janet had not responded to our invitation as part of a post sent after receiving another of her election leaflets through the door which I was appalled by. I felt it was time we had a discussion about the upcoming election on Hebweb (hence the title).

Many apologies, especially to Kate herself, for repeatedly confusing her first name with someone else I know with the same surname. Thanks for pointing it out. It's my age.

Good also to see that James makes it as clear as I suspect he is going to that he supports austerity, privatisation and cuts. It wasn't a shock.

From James Baker

Monday, 23 April 2012

Maybe Allen could post up the text of the invite he sent to Janet and we could all see if it was billed as a debate or a meeting?

From Stephen Curry

Monday, 23 April 2012

It is pleasing to read amongst dogma and counter dogma that two contributors, Joseph S and Roger N, have taken the view that local politics should be about the person and not the party. I have explained my own position in this regard in voting for the candidate at this particular election, who I consider to be the best alternative to an independent candidate. That being the most likely candidate to work hardest for individual constituents. It's not based on any party literature or candidate's promises, purely on experience of calling on that candidate on numerous occasions to raise issues on my or neighbours behalf.

For me these two contributors are breath of fresh air, and give me hope that one day in the not to distant future more people from varied background will put themselves forward for civic duty, free of the binding and constricting party machines, people with the integrity to make decisions for the whole community without reference to what a local, none elected external party committee may dictate. Just as one Labour supporter constantly reminds us of Janet Battye's small majority, I too will keep reminding you and the majority of the community that, Party Political members are in a very small minority of 1.5% and we should not let them continue to dictate our local issues based on gaining sympathy for one national campaign or the other.

This tribalism, shown at its worst on this thread will, I believe, have had its day after this election. In some ways they are already losing power in our community as some leading community groups like the Hebden Bridge Community Association, the Town Partnership and the Business Association are far more engaged with the community and moving improvements forward in partnership, without the need or for Party Political input.

So I welcome the ray of hope Joseph S and Roger N have brought to this predictable Election thread. Please get in touch as the future isn't Orange! It isn't Red, Blue or Green either. It's people like you

From Allen Keep

Monday, 23 April 2012

James. I've said I won't be answering any further questions on this issue as I think I've made myself very clear. But I think our posts have crossed - so, one last time.

Firstly, I'd refer you to my previous posts -especially the one which began "James-listen carefully" - which explains precisiely what I invited Janet, Kate and Susan to.

Here's a summary. I invited all three to a debate.

Two responded favourably. One candidate did not respond at all. There is therefore no debate taking place between the candidates invited.
There is to be a public meeting and the details are posted on the whats on page.

Sometimes, when I ask my children to do something reasonable and explain it carefully I wonder if they then deliberatley misunderstand in order to get out of it/wind me up. I'm getting a similar feeling.

I won't be posting the text of my invitation to JB -there is no need. I've explained what it said.

As it was in an email I guess your government may have a copy of it quite soon - you could ask them. Or maybe Janet herself?

Out of courtesy and respect I wouldn't normally publically post a copy of correspondance to other people without speaking to them first.

From James Baker

Monday, 23 April 2012

Regarding the local savings being made here in Calderdale: yes I support Janet's budget as did the local Labour party. It was a budget that protected front line services whilst cutting waste.

I've taken time out of a very busy schedule to answer and refute some of your accusations. If you will excuse me there are some local issues that my time is better spent on.

John Mooney

Monday, 23 April 2012

James Barker asks Allen Keep to post the email sent to Janet Battye.
This comes a bit late in the day. Janet Battye or one of her supporters could have responded to Allen's email in the first place saying one of a number of things. They could have asked for clarification. They could have said that election law made the meeting difficult and outlined the conditions, which would have made attendance possible. They could have said that under no circumstance would Janet be attending a meeting organised by SOS.

They didn't do any of these things then and haven't since Allen made his first comment.

Presumably readers of this thread will draw their own and differing conclusions.

From Dave M

Monday, 23 April 2012

As far as my understanding of the guidance goes, there could still be a debate amongst the candidates present as long as they don't answer questions from the audience. Then it seems that the meeting wouldn't be caught by the Electoral Commission rules. The guidance says that a hustings event is a meeting where candidates or parties 1) debate policies and 2) answer questions from the audience.

For example, couldn't the candidates speak or debate policies between themselves and then a chaired discussion, not including questions to candidates or parties, follow?

Or alternatively, the chair (not the audience) could ask the candidates pre-prepared questions.

It would be a shame if people attending couldn't have a chance to hear what the Labour candidate and the Green party representative have to say.

I've never organised such a meeting myself but perhaps it could work?

Stephen Curry, how much more difficult it would be for a council full of independents to formulate and implement coherent policy. I've nothing against independent candidates per se but don't see how they can replace the party system, even locally. Personally, I am undecided between Green and Labour but would certainly have voted for the right independent candidate had they stood.

I realise that there are those who think that Janet Battye has done a good job but she is a Liberal Democrat and therefore is not as non-partisan as many of her supporters appear to be. We are being asked to vote for a member of a party who have allowed a massive attack on our health service, huge cuts to our public services and welfare reforms that harm the vulnerable and take tax credits and housing benefits away from families in need. Councillor Battye might have responded favourably to your enquiries and requests but what might she and her party allow to happen to our local services if we let her?

From Rod H

Monday, 23 April 2012

I find it really worrying when the best reason a person can offer when they say why they could and should do a job is that they 'work hard'. Surely it should be an unstated given (unless you are 16-18 and have nothing on your CV) that you will work hard. And the point about party polictics not being important at a local level is plain naive. It does make a difference if we have more, or less Lib Dems or Conservative councilors elected as it could change the whole balance of power in Calderdale.

Those who say no party speaks for them should get together with like minded individuals and perswade the rest of us of their wisdom, perhaps by forming a party or movement themselves!

From Allen Keep

Monday, 23 April 2012

James, sorry you had to go.

Speaking of accusations though...

When you next get a break from your schedule I wonder whether your knowledge of election regulations (I have none) can shed some light in relation to what can be said in campaign literature about one's opponents? I assume there must be some rules/code of conduct? I imagine Janet's attempt to associate her opponent with the IRA must have sailed a little close to the wind. No?

Don't worry if you don't have time to find out - you can let us all know whether you (or any other LibDem supporters) were comfortable with
it? I think this was a question asked by another poster earlier - can't recall an answer?
Slainte.

From Joseph S

Monday, 23 April 2012

A council full of independents would be stupid. But so is getting rid of a good councillor just because of her affiliation.

A council full of competent people would be nice. Many I suspect are scared off the process by threads like this.

You vote tactically in different ways in different elections. In a general election in Calder Valley you might go Labour because the alternative is to elect a Tory. When Blair invades Iraq illegally you go Lib Dem to show your fury. In the Euro's you might try to push the Green agenda because it's not first past the post. And in a local election, you weigh up candidates and what you know of them.

So is it more naive to troop up at the ballot and just tag the same party regardless of what they do- or to think about each election as a separate and discrete democratic process?

And if that is the case, does that mean that if you are a Tory, you might end up voting for a Lib Dem in a local election you know Tories can't win? Good grief- the mind boggles!

From Dave M

Tuesday, 24 April 2012

Joseph S, you have described Janet Battye as "decent, honest and hardworking" "decent, competent" and "decent, honest, fair and hardworking."

That's quite a testimonial. I'm curious as to what specifically Cllr Battye might have done to earn this glowing reference from you. I am particularly intrigued by your repeated description of the councillor as 'decent' (a description I would usually reserve for someone who is known personally to me - a friend or colleague perhaps). Perhaps if you can give some further information it might help us to make up our minds.

From Rod H

Wednesday, 25 April 2012

I'm sorry Joseph but how can she be 'a good councillor' with good judgement whilst at the same time employing such sleazy tactics (IRA leaflet etc)? The ends don't justify the means. And it's absurd to think folk would be put off going into civic duty by reading this thread. They might actually be encouraged! Some vote tactically, some do not . . . and however poorly a candidate polls, there is no such thing as a wasted vote. A party that comes third or forth this time, may well come first or second next time.

From David Telford

Wednesday, 25 April 2012

Rod H, what was claimed in the leaflet is absolutely true. It doesn't claim Susan is a supporter of terrorists, simply that those behind her have been sympathetic to people found guilty of terrorism.

As it happens, neither this or the accusationhas anything to do with ability to get basic services working, well without an increase of the previously out of control council taxes.

From Stephen Curry

Wednesday, 25 April 2012

Sorry Joseph S for misunderstanding you. I thought you were looking for 'decent, honest, hard-working' people who were community orientated rather than Party politically orientated. As for a council of Independents being "Stupid" I guess you include many of our Parish councils in that then?

What do you think happened before the large political machines reached their tentacles down and infiltrated our local democracy with national issues? We had in the main independent minded people sitting around council chambers making decisions, like any other organisation, based on needs of the community rather than external party policies. It's not that long ago either, but we've been sold the idea now over time that only Party Politicians are capable of running our towns and independents are seen as unusual. Many capable individuals don't put up for Councillor because the parties dominate the elections and have the funds to do so.

All the parties are struggling to find willing and able candidates to stand in local elections. Because as I said before only a small minority of the population (1.5%) belong to parties now. So the pool of candidates is stretched to include anyone able to stand! That's the real reason so many of our councillors are both Town/Parish and Calderdale Councillors!

It looks like down the road in Todmorden they are struggling to get quorums for council meetings. I understand just 4 turned up to set the Budget. Its easy to put your name on a ballot paper not so easy when your party does better than you expected and you find yourself elected.

Its not democracy that has turned people off going to the polls it is Party Politics!

Dave M you say

"how much more difficult it would be for a council full of independents to formulate and implement coherent policy. I've nothing against independent candidates per se but don't see how they can replace the party system, even locally."

Dave, the Independent Forum replaced the long term Labour controlled council in Mansfield within two elections. The Independent Mayor is in his third term. I hope you are not suggesting we are getting coherent policies from the local political parties in coalition in Calderdale? The Tories say they want to keep the Central Library where it is, the Liberal Democrats want to move it and Labour is sitting on the fence afraid to lose votes by declaring a preference. I suspect that there will be some in either party that would like to vote opposite to their party. Better they were all independently minded.

From Joseph S

Wednesday, 25 April 2012

@ Dave M. I'm not a friend of Janet Battye. I'm not a Lib Dem supporter, councillor or party member. Neither does she owe me money. Nor am I related to her. I'm not her lover, her landlord, her gardener or her houseboy. I've just seen her working and think that she's a decent person. This view seems to be shared by most people I've spoken to, including the Labour lot, and it seems to me a pity to bin her just because Nick Clegg got it wrong.

I also think that (as previously stated) locally Barry Collins (Labour) is a decent person. I'd add Stephen Fry, Eddie Izzard, Jane Garvey, Tony Benn, John Peel and Simon Mayo to a list of people whom I've never met but have formed the impression that they are fundamentally decent people. Do you need to personally know someone in order to believe that they are "decent?" I don't think you do.

I've come into contact with Susan Press 4 times too. I'm happy to share that impression as well, though its a bit more limited. It amounts to seeing her on a train. Hearing her on a train. Seeing her in a pub. And the comments of a local Labour Party member.

From Paul Clarke

Wednesday, 25 April 2012

I've had quite enough of Stephen Curry on how Independent councillors will save us all from disaster if only we could just see it, and that they are only a few months away from a breakthrough here in Calderdale, so it's time for a history lesson. Let's cast our minds back to the 2011 Calder election where Mr Curry was the Independent candidate and here is the final result:

Labour 1660

LD 1042

Con 915

Green 754

Curry Independent 262

I was hoping to spare Mr Curry the embarrassment of reminding him of this drubbing but there it is in black and white as he came a very, very, very, very distant fifth and last. Now you might expect HB might be the sort of independently minded place that would elect an independent but not only did they reject him but the voters placed him last.

I'm not surprised as I actually bothered to read his leaflet when it popped though the door and it made no sense except saying vote for me because I'm not in a party and I got up this morning and thought I'd be a councillor.... and, er, that's it. Hardly a platform for radical change

In fact in order to come even fourth Mr Curry would have to perform spectacularly well and triple his vote which would be a remarkable achievement for a candidate with no organisation or policies.

But unlike Mr Curry I like to do a bit of research so I went back to the 2011 election and looked at how the other independents did. Only one independent did worse than Mr Curry and most came 3rd, 4th or last. In fairness one did come second but it is hardly the sort of tidal wave of independents we are seeing in Mansfield. Mr Curry doesn't want you to know all that as it blows a gaping hole in his argument but it's all on the Calderdale website.

The picture this year is even worse as there are only two independents standing in this year's election across the whole authority so I would say it will take more than two years for the Independents to sweep to power in Calderdale.

Before the creation of political parties we had rotten boroughs where white men who could vote because they owned property made decisions on where to put the workhouse and how young children had to be before they went down t'pit or to the mill. All of the gains made in our country have been made by political parties.

I agree with Dave M that a council full of 51 independents would resemble the chaotic Galactic parliament in the Star Wars prequels as Halifax councillors battle it out with Calder councillors and so on. But what would actually happen is that like minded independents would begin to form groups based on common interests or in Mr Curry's case a publicly stated support for Lib Dem candidates. Does that sound familiar? It should because that's what happens now but at least councillors from political parties are accountable to their own organisations unlike self appointed independents.

I actually have a huge respect for local councillors - even the ones I disagree with - because they on the whole do a good job in difficult circumstances. To smear then as mindless, second rate drones blindly following the party line is insulting to them all. Yet another reason not to vote for Mr Curry.

From Dave M

Thursday, 26 April 2012

Joseph S, thanks for clarifying though I'm still not sure what Janet Battye did to earn such a glowing testimonial. When I contacted her I didn't form the same opinion.

Stephen Curry, I agree that there are problems with coalitions and I'm sorry to say that I don't really know a lot about the Mansfield Independent Forum. I do think that what we really need more than anything are councillors who we can trust to resist (as far as possible) the assault on our local services. The comments of James Baker (supporter of Janet Battye) and the actions of the government he approves of suggest that is would be unwise to put faith in any Lib Dem candidate. Of all the candidates on offer in the Calder Ward the one most likely to defend services for vulnerable people is Susan Press. I've not been a great supporter of Labour Party candidates over the last decade or so but this time I'm going to vote for the person not the party.

From David Telford

Thursday, 26 April 2012

Paul C, you are completely missing the point that Stephen Curry is making. I don't know but I suspect the electorate didn't really look into what Stephen Curry could do for them, they just followed the rosettes. Why didn't you vote for him last time? What was it your favoured candidate had in his/her policy or personality that meant you didn't vote for Stephen? I'm pretty sure Stephen would have preferred to have 'failed' because of his personality & policy rather than simply because he doesn't have the right rosette.

@Dave M, Rod H, Paul C, Allen K you keep questioning Janet's work as a councilor. Can you be specific about why you don't think she's doing a good job for the area? All you seem to worry about is a little dig in her pamphlet which is made at a prominent backer of Susan Press and the fact she didn't want to appear at a 'sting' arranged by Allen.

I'd ask why the Labour supporters feel they must have their candidate over and above an Indy or for that matter a Conservative of Lib dem. There is no Labour policy which is replicated in every town they have control of, neither is there one for the Torys. Labour may be ideological and wasteful in one town but even I'll acknowledge that in others they aren't that bad. I don't see why you guys are so myopic about this and support a party so unconditionally as if it were a football team.

I take things how I see them Janet seems to do what I expect of a councilor, I've come across Sue Press a few times, once by email she was very pleasant, another request I had for her which could have saved the taxpayer £80k a year was ignored, another was a bit rude and I've not come across the Conservative at all.

From Rod H

Thursday, 26 April 2012

I find it very interesting David Telford that you seem to be the only one that is prepared to directly defend and suport the Lib Dem election leaflet tactics. I refer you to earlier posts in this thread that explain with crysal clarity that all those who supported the 'Good Friday Agreement' (did that include you as well as the Queen?) in essence agreed that the peace process involved and involves a recognition that both loyalist and republican prisoners be given 'special status'. To try and use the destructive politics of Northern Irelands past to smear her main rival is most certainly below the belt and indeed smacks of desperation and poor political judgement. When people make such comments about others, it invariably says far more about them than it does about those they attack!

From Dave M

Thursday, 26 April 2012

Joseph S, thanks for clarifying though I'm still not sure what Janet Battye did to earn such a glowing testimonial. When I contacted her I didn't form the same opinion.

Stephen Curry, I agree that there are problems with coalitions and I'm sorry to say that I don't really know a lot about the Mansfield Independent Forum. I do think that what we really need more than anything are councillors who we can trust to resist (as far as possible) the assault on our local services. The comments of James Baker (supporter of Janet Battye) and the actions of the government he approves of suggest that is would be unwise to put faith in any Lib Dem candidate. Of all the candidates on offer in the Calder Ward the one most likely to defend services for vulnerable people is Susan Press. I've not been a great supporter of Labour Party candidates over the last decade or so but this time I'm going to vote for the person not the party.

From Joe Ridley

Thursday, 26 April 2012

Paul Clarke states; "Before the creation of political parties we had rotten boroughs where white men who could vote because they owned property".

To portray the modern party system as ideal and not leading to rotten boroughs is disingenuous and you need only to read the Private Eye page that he filched the term from to understand that.

The "white men" bit is a perplexing comment and I don't know what his point is. There's a fine example of the modern socialist in the form of Ayesha Chowdhury, a Labour member for the London Borough of Newham. This is the council that is trying to farm out families to the poorer parts of the country because the rental market in their area is overheating - she co-owns 18 houses in the borough!!

Perhaps he prefers the face of the modern Labour party in the form of a local ex Labour MP. His recent stay in prison for expenses fraud rather precluded his ability to enjoy a number of properties that he owns both here and abroad. Or Michael Meacher, another multiple property owning dyed in the wool 'socialist'. Dare I mention Tony Blair? I could go on.

With reference to the alleged smears that Janet Battye has allegedly published. If untruths about another person have been published, surely they are libellous and the courts should be used to address the issue. To aid their case, Paul Clarke, Allen Keep, et al could call their comrade Phil Woolas, the ex Labour MP for Oldham East and Saddleworth. I believe he has some experience of smear campaigns.

My point is; please stop attacking normal everyday people for wanting an alternative to the corrupt and redundant political system that we currently have to endure. Modern communication systems and related technologies surely offer the hope for a democracy that properly serves hard working, honest people of this country. I don't see why Independent candidates can't play a part in that bright future.

From Jonathan Timbers

Thursday, 26 April 2012

Stephen, I'd be interested to know what you mean when you refer to a period when the council was run by independents. I understand that Calderdale councillors have always belonged predominately to political parties. You'll find the results here.

It might have been different on Hebden Royd prior to 1974, but even then there must have been substantial numbers of councillors from political parties. You may recall that, following in his father's footsteps, Bernard Ingham started off as a Labour councillor on Hebden Royd.

In any event, many of the best things to emerge from councils in the West Riding came from Independent Labour Party (ILP) councillors like Fred Jowett and Margaret MacMillan. But that's going back before the first world war!

From Brian Merry

Wednesday, 2 May 2012

I would love to vote but as i am from Mytholmroyd and it seems I can not. Only the main three parties to vote for and all of them a waist of time to me. Would be nice to have a choice of where my tax is spent.