Monday, 16 November 2009

AT LAST, AN ' EZEKIEL' PARTY PAMPHLET !

Bertie was wondering when the 'Ezekiel' Party candidate's leaflet would arrive. It has now done so. She calls herself, 'Your conservative' candidate but as readers might have gathered, Bertie does not consider we have a proper Conservative Party at local level in Thanet, and in reality she is Ezekiel's choice. What I love is this snippet from the glossy:
.
'Ingrid is committed to the provision of decent and affordable housing and believes in good quality homes as a basic right.'
.
Has she failed to look at her Ezekiel Party's ideas about Eurokent becoming a rather prestigious estate for aspiring people rather than employment land? How many good , honest hard-working young families in Thanet can afford what the 'Ezekiel' Party have in mind there? £250,000 to £300,000 houses?
.
What I found strange about this leaflet though, was the poor chap delivering it. In the dark of the night a lonely true Conservative Cllr who has incurred the wrath and ire of the 'Ezekiel' Party was delivering Ingrid's posters by himself; I of course refer to Cllr Mike Jarvis who will certainly have my vote in 2011 because he is a man of principle and integrity.
.
Where have been the rest of the motley 'Ezekiel Party' crew and even Ingrid herself? Do they really believe that they have the divine right to be elected and therefore do not need to make an effort? I am surprised that Roger Gale MP tries to make Ingrid's support a national matter; he says on her glossy:
.
"you can send a clear message to Gordon Brown to tell him his time is up. ....PLEASE cast your vote for Ingrid Spencer".
.
He clearly fails to grasp that the stuff she claims some credit for in her 'glossy' are actually Labour Govt initiatives funded by a Labour Government!
.
I leave readers with the latest from Bill Furness to arrive through the letter-box. He makes the point admirably that our local 'Ezekiel' Party Cllrs and Ex- Cllrs in Dane Valley ( with the exception of Cllr Mike Jarvis) have let down the electorate they are meant to represent.(Please click on the pic to read it!)

15 comments:

Anonymous said...

Interesting that Ingrid Spencer seems to support the idea of Sure Start centres that have proved so successful in engaging with some of the least affluent members of our society, when her own party plans to get rid of them.

These centres have encouraged parents who lack confidence in their abilities to bring up their children to engage with others, attend classes, learn what parenting means, gain skills to enable them to get back into work.

Before any of your Tory readers accuse me of being too Labour, the benefits of these centres were shown in academic studies by independent academics.

Dr. Moores talks about 'tribalism' and accuses Labour of trying to keep its care supporters in poverty; these centres are a way of helping people out of poverty and, as such, should be encouraged.

The Tories at TDC/KCC fail to tell the electorate how much funding for these and other schemes comes from central government. Will Cameron and his party keep these initiatives alive? I doubt it. Then who's keeping the poor in their place at the bottom?

Anonymous said...

Perhaps Cllr. Wells should have waited for the Tory leaflet to be delivered before engaging in a cheap jibe about a glossy Labour leaflet. How does he know how many candidates were considered before a new not a retread candidate was selected?

A fresh face with local connections might be what the voters seek, not an Ezekiel candidate who was convincingly outed by an Independent in Westgate two years ago.

The Labour leaflet highlights what a supportive group Sandra will, hopefully, be joining and how having an office accessible to most in the area is a benefit.

Anonymous said...

to parachute Ingrid Spencer into Dane Valley as the Con candidate is simply a case of "job for the boys" or in her case a job for the old girl.
they need a candidate who lives and breaths the hardships and troubles of the area not someone who resides in the pleasant suburbia of Westgate.

Tony Beachcomber said...

Bertie,

A typical Lib Dem leaflet attacking the opponent and no policy.
Reminds me of that "Focus" they once put through the doors.Always attacking their opponents and no policy. They did that to me once got it totally wrong and came last, I hope history repeats itself.

DrM. said...

I vaguely recall that the cost per successful job generated as a consequence of Sure Start, was a remarkably high number. So correct me if I'm wrong here/

However, I think you may find that the Conservative view involves finding more cost effective methods of creating much needed employment which doesn't add to the £80 billion public sector debt.

In the present economic climate with the highest number of young people out of work ever, I suspect that 'Sure Start' is itself an unfortunate oxymoron!

Anonymous said...

Does Dr M understand what Sure Start is all about? "Cost per successful job generated....." Sure Start is mainly about early years education and developing good parenting skills. It is about ensuring children get the best start in life. So Dr M thinks this is an oxymoron? If this is the Tory attitude to children then I will be changing my vote at the next election.

Anonymous said...

It's a pity you didn't scan the reverse of the Tories' leaflet then we could have seen what a busy person Mrs. Spencer has been in the ward - getting roads repaired, putting up fencing around allotments etc. Wow, she has been very busy since getting aopted as a candidate in Septemeber. Hang about a bit, these things she's claiming were done before that date so how can she, living in Westgste and not being a councillor, have achieved all she claims. This ward had three Tory councillors albeit with one absent so did they get these things done and aren't they a bit annoyed that someone else is now claiming responsibility?

Also, it's a pity no-one proof-read the Lib. Dem. leaflet -one spelling mistake and moving the Mayor's court case to Maidstone, not the Medway Court.

Anonymous said...

Dr. Moores 'vaguely recalls' something about the cost of Sure Start job creation. Couldn't be bothered to check up but had to have a go.

His own party would have left the economy to find its own level and that would have had even greater impact on the unemployed of Dane Valley.

How much would the levels of unemployment his party would have created cost us as a nation?

He forgets to tell us the level of debt when the Labour Government came in in 1997 was 42% of GDP and is currently 37%. The Japanese level of debt is currently 120% of GDP. Our debt can be repaid when the economy picks up which it will. His party's policies (or lack of them) would have left us with a greater debt than we currently have.

Anonymous said...

Shock...horror - Dreamland has been re-named, its now being called Ezekielland.

DrM. said...

My apologies and clearly a wiring problem on my side as I mentally transposed 'Sure Start' for 'New Deal' and it is to the latter that my comments refer.

I rather think what may or may not have happened prior to Tony Blair or John Major is now irrelevant in the present economic circumstances.

Up the creek without the proverbial paddle is the expression that springs to mind and this Government has had ten years to deliver on its promises and left us with a catastrophe, several wars and a police state besides.

Let the people decide what happens nationally and on a local basis they should consider where there vte will give them the nost representative impact. I'm not sure a lonely LibDem would achieve that!

Bertie Biggles said...

I have to agree, Simon, that a lonely Lib Dem is not the present requirement in Dane Valley. However, with the exception of Mike Jarvis (Con), the electorate here have been badly let down by its other two Con Cllrs; hence you will have to agree, political affiliations aside, that Sandra Hart(Lab) is locally and for local matters, the best candidate.

Anonymous said...

Dr. Moores might be interested to know that on the doorstep at the moment, many of the comments from voters are 'Anyone exceptwhoever runs the council'. That could give the vote to either of the non-Tory candaidates but the one who is getting most recognition on the doorstep in Sandra Hart, local girl, local businesswoman.

Anonymous said...

Not our experience 08:10. Huge support for the conservative. You make the assumption that Dane Valley voters are thick and don't recognise that labour at very level are incompetent and not to be trusted. As much as you try to spin it (the only thing they are good at).

Anonymous said...

Interesting that Dr. Moores attacks Bill Furness for claiming to have done lots in Dane Valley but seems to forget his own Tory candidate seems to have been equally busy. With all these non-elected individuals sorting out the ward's problems I have to wonder why they need to be elected if they're so successful unelected.

Anonymous said...

Anon. 12.43
Dear Councillor,

Leaving aside your insult to Labour and its campaigners for a minute, perhaps we can look at the national picture and note that, according to the latest polls, Labour is closing the gap on the Tories with the effect that, were the election tomorrow, we'd have the unwelcome result of a hung parliament.

Don't know how the figures there would be reflected in Dane Valley but let's accept,'it ain't over yet' and I will leave the rest of the quote out.

Yours sincerely,

Labour supporter.