the Reading ones that is. Yes folks, step forward the Reading Chronicle, which has this on Reading Labour's racist dog-whistle, fairly factual on the whole, unlike His Master's Voice, which so far, on its website at least , has been silent on the issue. Well, there's only been what looks like a criminal offence committed by a candidate a matter of days before a local election, and only a racist dog-whistle publication which has become a national disgrace, so nothing to get in the way of Whitley Dad Pissed Off With Council and Tragic Teen In Plea For Money, hein? So big up the Chronicle, considering how poisonous the political climate is in Reading.
Word reaches me too of a late surge in the LibDem vote in Church ward. Unlikely, you might say. I thought so too. And how much it will amount to on May 3rd I don't know. But some people are saying they will not vote for a party (Labour) which has called them racist, and they have never been Tory voters, and at least the LibDems don't insult them. Hmmm.
I've known for a long time what the Reading Labour boys think of the people of south Reading, because I've heard them say it. Racist, they say. That's why the local party members are not usually allowed to choose a candidate, unlike other wards, because they cannot be trusted to choose the one the boys want. I know that the people of Church ward are not racist, and the local party members I know are not either.
There's still time to withdraw the leaflet, apologise and move on. You will (probably) be forgiven electorally. You weren't when at least one of your candidates was responsible for electoral fraud in Redlands - you lost every councillor there.