Ron, firstly congratulations, I did vote for you because of the effort that you and Chris put in for us BUT you must must become more forward looking, don’t keep on blaming others, be creative, embrace the “E” age. The alternative is to follow Claggy selling deckchairs, not a great prospect is it….well certainly not on Southend sea front….????
Hard to believe and understand how someone who as far as I am aware did not appear in the ward or give out any leaflet could still receive over 500 votes. So no criticism please from some areas about our parliament candidate.
Bruce, it’s nothing whatsoever to do with Mike Pitt, it’s a complete rejection of The Liberal Democrats and the policies they promote ( and the same for Labour ). We have been through tough economic times, people don’t want to hear about parties that want to give their money away to other people who don’t deserve it or decide to live beyond their means and expect others to pick up the tab. I believe Ron got in despite being a Lib Dem because of the work he does, certainly not on policies.
I have no idea if you, Ron and Chris will carry on but I don’t see how you can retain credibility given the results, sorry but it’s true. You are all good decent folk but your train has well and truly hit the buffers.
I think you’ve got things the wrong way round.
If people voted for us because of our party label, despite us being rubbish councillors, then we’d have no credibility.
And a lot of our policies are very popular – for example raising income tax thresholds, so people on low wages don’t pay so much income tax, or maybe none at all.
Anyway, we can’t give up. I’d be worried about your health if onlineFOCUS ever closed down….
Thanks Angelina, personal attacks aren’t really our style – and often rebound on you anyway. Also thanks to you for all the comments you’ve made here over the years, always appreciated…
In the interests of my health ( a major concern if ever there was one ) then we both must continue, you with politics and me with my incisive, thoughtful and ever popular posts, maybe I should have a Facebook page….Twitter…
Oz I think my point remains that over 500 people voted for a paper candidate in the fullest sense of the term. No leaflet, no publicity and people have said to me that they did not know there were 3 candidates for the District Council. Only Ron gave any idea of his stance on the new housing, transport and flooding yet a majority of those who voted put their x against the name of candidates who did not make their view on these points clear. The Conservatives locally were all safely returned. You get what you vote for.
Joking aside Oz, I don’t understand why they have been crucified, yes they are idealists ( which does’nt really fit into this harse / selfish world ) but not bad people.
Compare them fairly with the ruthless Conservatives who sacrificed their Coalition partner , employed personal attacks and above all scaremongering ( via the SNP ).
There is no Labour Party anymore (Mr Blair & Co abandoned the working classes)
they have lost their identity / credibility – as the election proved.
Jim, they were crucified in the polls because of their actions whilst in coalition. Broken promises, in particular tuition fees, Vince Cable calling the Tories the nasty party, yet still being more than happy to,hang onto a cabinet seat. I think the core supporters felt the leadership had abandoned traditional values in favour of power at any cost. Ron was reelected because he is a good and hardworking Coucillor. Fortunately at a local level people will ignore party labels and vote for those who do the job well.
Don’t really buy that ( too easy ) – how come the senior coalition partner was’nt seen to be part of the breaking promises ? , and yes I know they all make promises they don’t keep – so why did the LibDems singled out……niavity I think.
Jim@14, Christine is spot on ( as ever ) but look, it’s history now, we have the big challenge here, namely, can we get the infrastructure in place to support the new houses….my guess is..not in a million years so get ready people to start moaning….
Jim, I think naivety on the part if some supporters who truly expected to see a whole raft of Lib Dem policies implemented as part of the coalition, plus a lot of tactical,voting to keep Lab/SNP at bay. Don’t underestimate the tuition fees thing though. A lot of first time voters voted Lib Dem in 2010 because of that promise and will never forgive them, as wont their parents who are often bearing a heavy financial cost for sending their kids to Uni
Bruce @ 10 – I don’t live in Ron’s ward so didn’t see his leaflet…but perhaps the other candidates didn’t make their views clear on certain issues like housing etc. because if they were elected, they would have already publicly declared their intentions and views, and maybe prevented them from voting (there is a word for this but I cant remember what it is)….. Perhaps Ron has shot himself in the foot – by being elected based on his views, he may not actually be able to vote on such issues when the time comes? I would expect one of the conservative councillors to be paying particular attention to what he said, pledged and expressed his views on when it comes to voting on such issues.
OK Christine & Oz – I surrender , been reading the letters page of my paper (the i) for a few days and they universally agree with your reasoning , and I was of course overlooking the selfish type of society we now live in.
And yes Oz RDC will now feel they have a mandate to push on with the concreting over of somebody else’s backyard ( the West of Rayleigh ) , so given the broken promises of the LibDems it will be interesting to see if MF now sticks to his no developments without infrastructure…..????
I really don’t get this suggestion that parents are getting into massive debt to send their youngsters to UNI. The present scheme allows for forward funding from the Student Loan Company to be repaid WHEN graduates start earning enough to be able to repay the loan. If they never earn they never pay it back but if they do they are, in effect, supporting future education of our country. What is wrong with that? We are broke and this system allows us to continue to educate our young people.
My nephew who is a Honours Graduate from Nottingham says it is a non – issue with most young people once they understand the process.
James W @ 17 – Ron and I are very careful in what we say and write. Ron’s actions were about his stance on previous applications, not future ones. The phrase you were looking for is ‘fettering your discretion”, and neither of us have done that.
Jim @ 18 – I hope when you were referred to ‘broken promises’ you were talking about national politics, not local Lib Dems!
Linda @ 19 — that’s a very fair summary of the student loan system, thank you!
Yes of course Chris , I voted for Ron locally ( the only real meaningful choice ), the above was relating to the General Election / Main Party not yourselves.
Linda you are right,seems a very fair system,teaches students some sense of financial responsibility .I think the main gripe was increase in tuition fees against the original pledge but of course that was before the previous government had seen the mess left by the Left .
You are right about the student loan system Linda, but I know quite a few parents and grandparents who are making a hefty financial contribution rather than see their offspring leave Uni with a massive debt. I know others who are making the car last a couple of years longer, having fewer holidays etc. so they can tuck money away now ready for higher education fees in a few years time.
Jim@18, no, not selfish but realistic. Have just been watching BBC Look East, one feature about a group of silly mummies whining that their kids will no longer get a “free” bus service to school. Except that they would get a “free” bus to the nominated school but no, they want it “free” to the school that they want. ( and how many have a car in the drive anyway )but thank goodness we now have a Government no longer hamstrung by a load of loony lefties who can drive toward benefit reforms and hopefully end this culture of entitlement.
Oz @ 24 – sorry mate we will have to disagree , Mrs Thatcher introduced the “loadsamoney” selfish “I’m all right Jack ” culture ( ie: Essex Man ) , your own example above says it all – ‘what about me ,gimme, gimme what I want ‘ . then along came Blair and Co ( masters of spin ) who disguised it as Aspirational culture, code
for me,me,me……
I had an interesting conversation yesterday regarding benefits and welfare. While my conversationalist repeatedly said people had ‘rights’ to benefits under the present rules I maintain that the Welfare State should concentrate on the real ‘need’ for a benefit. I fail to see how a country in deep debt can justify handing out funds to those who really are not in ‘need’ in the true sense of the word. E.g. How many Rayleigh pensioners can honestly claim to ‘need’ a £10 gift from the State at Christmas? How many high end , two car families really ‘need’ child benefit? Yes the recipients use the funds but could we reduce our national debt by better targeting the money available. note. I have my ‘tin hat’ ready!!
I think Linda that one of the problems is that it would cost far more to means test certain benefits than the savings that would arise from restricting it. The winter fuel allowance being a case in point. I think a lot of people feel that targeted benefits would do far more good but how do you find the target without it costing a fortune? At least restricting child benefit to only two children will be a start. Perhaps they could also not pay child benefit to EU immigrant workers who then promptly send it abroad, I would think they are a readily identifiable group.
James 17 A doctor once stood for Parliament solely on a campaign of fighting against the closure of Kidderminster hospital. He won. Not sure what happened after but there are `1 issues candidates. When people are candidates we should know what their policy/ attitude will be to the key areas that are/will affect us. e.g housing development How can we make a choice if we don’t know? But what you say is legally correct. But an attitude can be couched in generalisations. e.g I will be looking closely at any applications to see if the needs and concerns of the local population are dealt with.
{"email":"Email address invalid","url":"Website address invalid","required":"Required field missing"}
Session expired
Please log in again.
The login page will open in a new tab. After logging in you can close it and return to this page.
onlineFOCUS uses cookies to make the site run more smoothly for you.. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish.AcceptRejectRead More
Privacy & Cookies Policy
Privacy Overview
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these cookies, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may have an effect on your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.
Ron, firstly congratulations, I did vote for you because of the effort that you and Chris put in for us BUT you must must become more forward looking, don’t keep on blaming others, be creative, embrace the “E” age. The alternative is to follow Claggy selling deckchairs, not a great prospect is it….well certainly not on Southend sea front….????
How did Toby Mountain / Richard Lambourne & Peter Scott get on please?.
All lost Jim 🙁
Will do a comprehensive report on district council elections when I’ve caught up on my sleep.
Hard to believe and understand how someone who as far as I am aware did not appear in the ward or give out any leaflet could still receive over 500 votes. So no criticism please from some areas about our parliament candidate.
Bruce, it’s nothing whatsoever to do with Mike Pitt, it’s a complete rejection of The Liberal Democrats and the policies they promote ( and the same for Labour ). We have been through tough economic times, people don’t want to hear about parties that want to give their money away to other people who don’t deserve it or decide to live beyond their means and expect others to pick up the tab. I believe Ron got in despite being a Lib Dem because of the work he does, certainly not on policies.
I have no idea if you, Ron and Chris will carry on but I don’t see how you can retain credibility given the results, sorry but it’s true. You are all good decent folk but your train has well and truly hit the buffers.
Mmmmm Oz.
I think you’ve got things the wrong way round.
If people voted for us because of our party label, despite us being rubbish councillors, then we’d have no credibility.
And a lot of our policies are very popular – for example raising income tax thresholds, so people on low wages don’t pay so much income tax, or maybe none at all.
Anyway, we can’t give up. I’d be worried about your health if onlineFOCUS ever closed down….
Also we have, nationally, recruited 3000 new members since Thursday, including someone who’s just joined in this district.
Congratulations Ron. Also the local Lib Dems have my upmost respect for keeping their campaign clean, decent and respectful to other candidates.
Thanks Angelina, personal attacks aren’t really our style – and often rebound on you anyway. Also thanks to you for all the comments you’ve made here over the years, always appreciated…
In the interests of my health ( a major concern if ever there was one ) then we both must continue, you with politics and me with my incisive, thoughtful and ever popular posts, maybe I should have a Facebook page….Twitter…
ps: 3000 new members !!! are they Lemmings…
Oz I think my point remains that over 500 people voted for a paper candidate in the fullest sense of the term. No leaflet, no publicity and people have said to me that they did not know there were 3 candidates for the District Council. Only Ron gave any idea of his stance on the new housing, transport and flooding yet a majority of those who voted put their x against the name of candidates who did not make their view on these points clear. The Conservatives locally were all safely returned. You get what you vote for.
Joking aside Oz, I don’t understand why they have been crucified, yes they are idealists ( which does’nt really fit into this harse / selfish world ) but not bad people.
Compare them fairly with the ruthless Conservatives who sacrificed their Coalition partner , employed personal attacks and above all scaremongering ( via the SNP ).
There is no Labour Party anymore (Mr Blair & Co abandoned the working classes)
they have lost their identity / credibility – as the election proved.
Rant over……????
Jim, they were crucified in the polls because of their actions whilst in coalition. Broken promises, in particular tuition fees, Vince Cable calling the Tories the nasty party, yet still being more than happy to,hang onto a cabinet seat. I think the core supporters felt the leadership had abandoned traditional values in favour of power at any cost. Ron was reelected because he is a good and hardworking Coucillor. Fortunately at a local level people will ignore party labels and vote for those who do the job well.
Don’t really buy that ( too easy ) – how come the senior coalition partner was’nt seen to be part of the breaking promises ? , and yes I know they all make promises they don’t keep – so why did the LibDems singled out……niavity I think.
Jim@14, Christine is spot on ( as ever ) but look, it’s history now, we have the big challenge here, namely, can we get the infrastructure in place to support the new houses….my guess is..not in a million years so get ready people to start moaning….
Jim, I think naivety on the part if some supporters who truly expected to see a whole raft of Lib Dem policies implemented as part of the coalition, plus a lot of tactical,voting to keep Lab/SNP at bay. Don’t underestimate the tuition fees thing though. A lot of first time voters voted Lib Dem in 2010 because of that promise and will never forgive them, as wont their parents who are often bearing a heavy financial cost for sending their kids to Uni
Bruce @ 10 – I don’t live in Ron’s ward so didn’t see his leaflet…but perhaps the other candidates didn’t make their views clear on certain issues like housing etc. because if they were elected, they would have already publicly declared their intentions and views, and maybe prevented them from voting (there is a word for this but I cant remember what it is)….. Perhaps Ron has shot himself in the foot – by being elected based on his views, he may not actually be able to vote on such issues when the time comes? I would expect one of the conservative councillors to be paying particular attention to what he said, pledged and expressed his views on when it comes to voting on such issues.
OK Christine & Oz – I surrender , been reading the letters page of my paper (the i) for a few days and they universally agree with your reasoning , and I was of course overlooking the selfish type of society we now live in.
And yes Oz RDC will now feel they have a mandate to push on with the concreting over of somebody else’s backyard ( the West of Rayleigh ) , so given the broken promises of the LibDems it will be interesting to see if MF now sticks to his no developments without infrastructure…..????
I really don’t get this suggestion that parents are getting into massive debt to send their youngsters to UNI. The present scheme allows for forward funding from the Student Loan Company to be repaid WHEN graduates start earning enough to be able to repay the loan. If they never earn they never pay it back but if they do they are, in effect, supporting future education of our country. What is wrong with that? We are broke and this system allows us to continue to educate our young people.
My nephew who is a Honours Graduate from Nottingham says it is a non – issue with most young people once they understand the process.
James W @ 17 – Ron and I are very careful in what we say and write. Ron’s actions were about his stance on previous applications, not future ones. The phrase you were looking for is ‘fettering your discretion”, and neither of us have done that.
Jim @ 18 – I hope when you were referred to ‘broken promises’ you were talking about national politics, not local Lib Dems!
Linda @ 19 — that’s a very fair summary of the student loan system, thank you!
Yes of course Chris , I voted for Ron locally ( the only real meaningful choice ), the above was relating to the General Election / Main Party not yourselves.
Linda you are right,seems a very fair system,teaches students some sense of financial responsibility .I think the main gripe was increase in tuition fees against the original pledge but of course that was before the previous government had seen the mess left by the Left .
You are right about the student loan system Linda, but I know quite a few parents and grandparents who are making a hefty financial contribution rather than see their offspring leave Uni with a massive debt. I know others who are making the car last a couple of years longer, having fewer holidays etc. so they can tuck money away now ready for higher education fees in a few years time.
Jim@18, no, not selfish but realistic. Have just been watching BBC Look East, one feature about a group of silly mummies whining that their kids will no longer get a “free” bus service to school. Except that they would get a “free” bus to the nominated school but no, they want it “free” to the school that they want. ( and how many have a car in the drive anyway )but thank goodness we now have a Government no longer hamstrung by a load of loony lefties who can drive toward benefit reforms and hopefully end this culture of entitlement.
Oz,, in your view is everyone who’s not a right-wing Tory a ‘loony leftie’???
Oz @ 24 – sorry mate we will have to disagree , Mrs Thatcher introduced the “loadsamoney” selfish “I’m all right Jack ” culture ( ie: Essex Man ) , your own example above says it all – ‘what about me ,gimme, gimme what I want ‘ . then along came Blair and Co ( masters of spin ) who disguised it as Aspirational culture, code
for me,me,me……
I had an interesting conversation yesterday regarding benefits and welfare. While my conversationalist repeatedly said people had ‘rights’ to benefits under the present rules I maintain that the Welfare State should concentrate on the real ‘need’ for a benefit. I fail to see how a country in deep debt can justify handing out funds to those who really are not in ‘need’ in the true sense of the word. E.g. How many Rayleigh pensioners can honestly claim to ‘need’ a £10 gift from the State at Christmas? How many high end , two car families really ‘need’ child benefit? Yes the recipients use the funds but could we reduce our national debt by better targeting the money available. note. I have my ‘tin hat’ ready!!
Linda @ 27, it’s called an Entitlement mentality…..but fear not, at least we now have a “proper” government who will start to fix it.
I think Linda that one of the problems is that it would cost far more to means test certain benefits than the savings that would arise from restricting it. The winter fuel allowance being a case in point. I think a lot of people feel that targeted benefits would do far more good but how do you find the target without it costing a fortune? At least restricting child benefit to only two children will be a start. Perhaps they could also not pay child benefit to EU immigrant workers who then promptly send it abroad, I would think they are a readily identifiable group.
James 17 A doctor once stood for Parliament solely on a campaign of fighting against the closure of Kidderminster hospital. He won. Not sure what happened after but there are `1 issues candidates. When people are candidates we should know what their policy/ attitude will be to the key areas that are/will affect us. e.g housing development How can we make a choice if we don’t know? But what you say is legally correct. But an attitude can be couched in generalisations. e.g I will be looking closely at any applications to see if the needs and concerns of the local population are dealt with.