Saturday, 31 March 2012

the crassness of Reading Labour

who stood up in the council chamber and cheered a Tory councillor who was making his last speech before leaving the council, having been deselected last autumn.  Local dead-tree reporting of this immediately brought out the following: Labour cannot comment on this after the shameful way they treated Jane Griffiths and why this lot - and Labour, and the Lib Dems and the Greens cannot just GET ON WITH THE WORK FOR WHICH THEY WERE VOTED IN FOR. START BE HAVING LIKE ADULTS. Oh, Silly me, they are politicians, aren’t they?
 and that was over seven years ago!  Reading Labour should have learned from that experience, but it seems they have not.  If a retiring councillor wants to have a public score-settling - and it would not be the first time this has happened - then surely this comes under the heading of private grief for that councillor's party.  And as such should be listened to in silence.  And then everyone should move on.  Undoubtedly Reading Labour had the text of the councillor's retiring speech beforehand, and had decided what they would do.  I can just imagine the cackling at the group meeting beforehand. So when Josephine Lovelock was heaving her vast wine-fed bulk off the chair she might have done well to reflect on the wisdom or otherwise of her group's actions.  People have long memories.  I don't know the councillor concerned and have no idea whether the reported accusations against him are true.  That's not the point here.  The point is that members of the public, as the comments showed, know a crass hypocritical gesture when they see it, and they don't like it.  And there is an election coming up.  Reading Labour are confident of cementing their control of the council in May.  Maybe that is just what they will do.  But shouldn't they think of what they actually want to DO with that control?  As historic Reading buildings like the Kings Meadow Baths crumble away with the connivance of the council, and as Reading Labour continue to fail to provide decent schools for Reading children, and as parts of south Reading look increasingly like the crappier suburbs of Belgrade, where is the vision?  Think about that.

In semi-related  news, this week the loathsome Ed Balls was in Reading.  Local reporting does not say why he was there, other than that he visited Alfred Sutton School in east Reading.  Yesterday on the Chronicle website he was pictured with a youngish person of drippy appearance with a Labour rosette on, who was not named.  Today her name has been added to the picture, perhaps after representations from Reading Labour.  Too late.  She is the candidate for Park ward, which Reading Labour are not fighting this year.  Their best offer previously was Basher McKenzie, and when the voters showed their disgust with the likes of him they couldn't think of anything else, so they put in a GIRL and then kept her safely out of the way.  They put a picture on their Facebook page later in the day, which has Gumdrops Gavin in the foreground (who should stay out of direct sunlight, or get a skin peel), the loathsome Balls next to her, and shadowed, so you can't see her face, some GIRL  or other with a rosette on.  Also, getting your picture taken does not constitute "campaigning", chaps.  Issues you're tackling in Park ward, anyone?  Anyone? (sound of tumbleweed)

After Bradford West, is this really all there is?  Still, Reading Labour "strongly supported" Ed Miliband for leader, we were told.  So that's all right then.

Doomed.

13 comments:

Anonymous said...

Yeah - LOATHSOME. Obviously, they are puffing this girl or whatever it was for the Parliamentary selection.As they will try to impose and puff elsewhere, I suspect. In this case, they should think about the electorate. Balls is the kiss of death - or as Churchill once said - Madam, there are two and they bounce, or something to that effect. The other disaster being Ms Cooper Balls. The problem for Labour is that although they both bounce, they fall in unfortunate places - normally in the form of crosses at the ballot box for the Tories.

Encouraged to see a paper reacting as it did. 'Shameful treatment of JG?' Must have been The Chronicle, surely not the Salter -polluted Post?

Jane Griffiths said...

In fact it was the Post but a comment from a member of the public rather than the paper itself. As you may know, the Post's local nickname is His Master's Voice.

Anonymous said...

Don't be so unkind about JL.
She tarted herself up nicely to appear on TV when Reading failed to become a city!
L9

Anonymous said...

I'm afraid they don't look doomed at the ballot box this year. Even if they balls up Park (excuse the pun), they are most likely going to win Katesgrove, Redlands and Church which should give them overall control. Its also possible given the dire Tory poll ratings that they might lose Kentwood.

Anonymous said...

Piss poor nickname. They should call it The Dog's Bollocks.

Jane Griffiths said...

Ballot box - no, not doomed. Redlands likely to be won back, Katesgrove and Church also possible, Tories will take Tilehurst and hold Kentwood, Park most likely Green gain. Labour Party currently, doomed, unless it turns itself round. But to do that - well, we had Tony Blair, and he was pushed out, I don;t see anyone of his calibre around now, do you?

Anonymous said...

To be honest, I don't even see anyone of Gordon Brown's calibre and as a Party Leader, that is saying something. Meanwhile I woudl like to bet a shedload that eth next WOMAN who becomes a Prime Minister for any political party here is Anna Soubry, Tory MP for Broxtowe.

Authoritative and bright and yet also quite human - unlike Cooper B who is an authoriatrain martinet who looks and speaks 'odd'. And snob.

GIDEON MACK said...

Whilst Labour are a bag of old pants with an idiot leader; they have no fears from a Tory opposition that seem stuck in 1945.

Anonymous said...

Sorry Jane but Kentwood will revert back to Labour. The tories have a very lazy Councilllor in that Ward who talks the talk but hasn't worked out the walk! And as for Church, don't start me off on that one, if the Councillor had done any work there at all he could have squeezed in by a tiny majority but he too is only ever heard about when it's election time. Expect a surprise in Caversham also.
Try not to delete this comment, you'll need to refer to it on 4th May!!

Jane Griffiths said...

as you see, I have published your comment anon 1728, despite the abominable use of English "revert back" - were you educated in Reading? and despite today's date. Whatever happens, do tell, what is Labour's plan and vision for Reading?

Anonymous said...

Anna Soubry is not stuck in 1945 at all.

Mr London Street said...

Anna Soubry was on Question Time recently. Let's hope to God she isn't the future leader of the Tories.

Anonymous said...

Yes, QUITE SO! Because she would be far too credible; tick far too many boxes and be more hard to dislodge than Margaret Hilda - that took 3 elections - and she was ousted by her own lot - just like Tony.

Sadly, Labour can't see the nose on its face, or anybody elses and it keeps on trying to foist weird geeks who can't connect with a loo brush on the electorate like Cooper B and Ed M.

And it can't spot a winner a mile off - which is why the eventual election of Ms Soubry will catch it unawares and chop its legs off. Don't say I never warned, now will you?