Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

I've forwarded your address to the appropriate department, you won't get one next year, which will be a blessing, as I can't stand the earache:D

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

Funny how you don't criticise Labour locally. Even on this issue where you have chance to point out that the money, given that it's been spent, could have been spent better by including all councillors. Something Labour prevented from happening. Show some of the 'independence' :rolleyes:

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

There's a Department of Calenders? Let's hope their days are numbered!
:cool:

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

I have jokingly asked for the blind Conservative party faithful to please take note, on the many, many occasions I have criticised the government on here.

Strange how I'm never accused of being anti-Labour when I've been scathing about Labour, yet am seen as anti-Tory as soon as it's your little pal Peter under attack.

Trust me, if he was doing a good job there'd be no criticism from me, and others. Like I said earlier, the Observer was full of letters from residents this time last year, complaing about their taxes being wasted on these unnecessary calendars, but yet again his utter arrogance means he chooses to ignore any criticism, and do exactly as he sees fit...waste our money, yet again.

P.S. This is a local forum, and therfore the best place to discuss local politics. Personally I tend to share my thoughts on national issues, primarily on national forums.

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

As I said, I applaud any councillor who refused to be part of this wasteful calendar, irrespective of which party they're from.

I've no idea if the independents didn't want to waste money on it, if they refused to be part of it they also get applauded.

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

How fantastic!

Oh to have friends in such low places.

Would it also be possible to request an end to any political leaflets from landing on my mat, or people in rosettes knocking on my door, disturbing my peace?

Thanks awfully.

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

I think somebody mentioned that one had been produced by the independents. Could be mistaken.

You don't seem to want to criticise Labour for making the calendars less useful though. Shame, I thought an 'independent' such as yourself would want to be criticising all those that contribute to wasting money directly or wasting money indirectly by making council produced things purposely less valuable to residents, rather than just criticising one party.

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

All calendars are useless but some are more useless than others - Orwell:D

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

Seems funny that enough people think Peters is doing a good job, as he has been a councillor or St Andrews ward now since 1983 and has never come close to losing his seat and the Tories have been in control of Hyndburn for ten years, seems the blinkers are casting a shadow Rindi:rolleyes:

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

You could cut out the Tories by placing a Labour poster in your window I'm sure your bussom buddy Graham will only be too happy to furnish you with one:D

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

You really are blinkered by your political allegiance.

I can hand on heart say if it was the other way round, a Labour run council wasting money on these calendars, and the Tories who opposed them, my criticism would be aimed at the Labour group, and I would be applauding the Tories for not wanting to be associated with this waste of money.

You seem to think these calendars would have some intrinsic worth if they had the details of all the councillors on them. I totally disagree. They are an unnecessary waste of tax payers money, full stop.

As you said yourself last year, when you'd agreed the calendars are a waste of money, there are many easier ways of finding out how to contact your councillors, regardless of the fact that from the time of the forthcoming elections, they could very well contain inaccurate information re: Hyndburn's councillors.

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

You made my point much better than I did Margaret. :)

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

They would have had some additional worth to some people if they had all the councillors details on them. Indeed it would still be a waste and unnecessary use of taxpayers money, however the calendars that did go out would at least be more of a use. It's a shame that you cannot see this.

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

No - I think you missed mine;)

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

Don't you have to have spoken to, or even to have met, to be bosom buddies with someone?

Since I've never spoken to the person you refer to, once again you seem to be clutching at straws.

Happily I've more than enough non-partisan air in my lungs to huff, and to puff, and to blow your little house down.

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

this to me is sod all to do with political alligence n to do with wasting public money, its a damn good job andrew has decided i think, Not to be a political representive, cos he would be totally incapable of doing the job well, i am however suprised even knowing jaysays political leanings, that he is trying to aid this useless being in his stance,:rolleyes:

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

If you think pointing out waste and errors of both the party they belong to and another, would make somebody incapable of doing a good job, then more fool you.

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

I totally disagree.

I don't think any tax payer's money should have been spent on these now annual calendars, irrespective of whose details are, or aren't on them, and regardless of the fact that many people, who in theory should have receieved one, and yet didn't, and that by May the details may be out of date, making their very existence even more of a costly and futile exercise.

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

Cashman, if that's directed at me, could you please refrain from being so unnecessarily insulting just because I disagree with you about politics. I say this from a personal perspective, not that of a moderator. If you're referring to Peter Britcliffe then I couldn't care less.

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

You say you totally disagree and go on to reiterate my point. Whatever next. :D

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

I have got to admire the blind loyalty of some people.

You read in fairy tales of people spinning straw into gold.

It must be really difficult to try and spin something, when all you've got to work with is a pile of stinking old dung.

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

Glad you can't possibly be referring to me, given I have criticised both parties locally and nationally. :D

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

We disagree because you seem to be under the illusion that it would somehow be less a waste of money if it contained all the details of councillors, and I don't.

I think it should never have been produced using tax payers money, irrespective of the details contained on it.

It isn't needed, full stop.

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

I mentioned generic 'people', and gave no names.

Still, if you think the little pixie hat fits, so be it...

http://www.tes.co.uk/Pictures/280xAn...lstiltskin.bmp

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

like i said this affair is/should be sod all to do wi political allegiance, it was only the other day ya asked me to speak straight, well i am, as fer whom i was refering too, theres n owd saying "If The Cap Fits":D

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

...and yet the people of Hyndburn, as a whole, twice rejected him as their M.P.

Perhaps his popularity doesn't travel much further than the St. Andrew's ward boundary.

We'll see what happens for a third time, now he's declared an interest in standing yet again....if he's selected.


:rolleyes:

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

I don't think it would be less of a monetary waste no garinda, I have expressed this opinion in a number of posts in a number of threads now!

I also think it should never have been produced using tax payers money, irrespective of the details contained on it.

I also believe it isn't needed.

Lets say you decided that you no longer liked to drink wine, but didn't inform your friends, and two of them bought you a bottle of wine. One friend, Ronald, bought you a full bottle of wine. Another friend, Peter, wasn't quite as fond of you because you posted a naughty picture of him as a cyborg on a local internet forum, so got you an empty bottle of wine.

Although it's essentially a waste that the bottles have been bought, at least you can give the full bottle to somebody else who does like wine. Therefore the full bottle is more useful, or valuable. ;)

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

Come election time I think you are going to see a few of Graham's posters in Ossy. We can always shove one through your door if you want one.

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

nah give it to me bernard i'll hand deliver personally.:D

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

Spin, spin, spin.

No, sorry, still no gold.

Still just a pile of old dung next to your spinning wheel.

I'd give up, and go and try something else.

You could go and see Hansel and Gretel's house, and see why the Daily Telegraph listed it as being in an area with the highest council tax in the country.

;)

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

I don't think you're being biased to Labour, I just think you're too stubborn to agree. ;)

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

That was actually Neil.

Don't let he facts get in the way of your rather surreal analogy though.

(Though I would check there isn't a gas leak, causing you to write such seemingly off the wall, and flowery posts.)

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

If I agreed, trust me, I'd say I agreed.

I'm lucky, to be in the politically unencumbered position, of being able to say exactly what I want.

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

This post caused me to spray tea over my laptop. :p

Forgive me, it was you that suggested Peter be the Halloween, October, picture on the 2006 calendar thread. Just a normal picture, no cyborg. :D

My analogy still stands though, and sums up why both parties have been wrong in Calendargate.

I'm happy too to say I am in the politically unencumbered position, of being able to say exactly what I want.

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

Calendargate I like that. :D Cant beat a corny title to bring it to the fore. :D

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

You're forgiven, though do try to stay with the facts, especially when it comes to what I've posted.

As for me causing you to spray everywhere, perhaps you should keep some tisssues handy next to your computer, to mop up anymore unfortunate emissions.

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

You would have to be a total optimist to think any Tory would have won Hyndburn in either 1997 or 2001. As for his popularity Maybe it should spread further than St. Andrews Ward, its evident that he has got it right over many years and the people know this, If given the choice maybe the whole Borough would benefit, but there again the Tory's have run Hyndburn for the last ten years and are doing a first class job, not my words but those of the Audit Commission, If you keep listening to Jones Dawson and that nice lady from Clayton,:D you'll be as daft as they are

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

I actualy use Andrex Bernard:p

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

But the only actual proof of his popularity outside of his Oswaldtwistle ward, comes from when he stood to represent Hyndburn in the General Election, but was twice rejected.

The people of Hyndburn didn't elect him as the leader of the council, and besides a few die hard chums, he doesn't seem to have that much borough wide support evident on this forum.

Given the unpopularity of the government he's never stood a better chance than in the forthcoming election, and the party, both locally and nationally, must be very excited at the prospect of him standing a third time.

:rolleyes:

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

Theres only one person not excited and thats Jones:cool:

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

Like I said, there's never been a better time for Cllr. Britcliffe to become Peter Britcliffe M.P.

Your party must be thrilled at the certainty of the outcome....just as the people of Hyndburn must surely be too.

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

I think the Tories send them to you on purpose just to annoy you, I know I would :rolleyes::D:D

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

Never having met him, or spoken to him, I wouldn't know, though I fear you're turning into someone as paranoid and obsessive as Corporal Jones.

Running around wildly, sticking your bayonet hither and thither, looking for a perceived enemy, and shouting 'They don't like it up 'em!'

http://www.battlefield-site.co.uk/la...oral_jones.gif

I think it's abot time you went and sat quietly in the corner with Private Godfrey, Jonesy old boy.

Whoops, meant Jaysay.

;)

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

I'm only annoyed that here's now only two photographs, as opposed to the twelve of Peter and you, we had the other year.

:eek::D

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

I have met him a couple of times. I enjoyed our conversation in the Brewers very much. In fact I was hoping he was going to turn up at the last boozy session we had.

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

Awww, perhaps you could do a calendar together?

Pushing him on the swings, running through the daffodils together, playing hide-and-seek in the bushes.

Hang on, you've already done that with Peter.

:D

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

If he did he couldnt be accused of favouritism. :cool:

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

I'm just glad they got rid of the tennis courts in Rhyddings Park, because there might have been an argument about which one of you was going to be the scratcher.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...Girl_thumb.jpg

:D

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

I do have good legs :rolleyes::D

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

I believe Peter has had a letter from HQ saying he has not been accepted on the Conservative list as suitable. Don't know if he would be willing to confirm it. I don't think it fair. I think local members should decide and not Tory HQ. I am led to beleive the only local candidate is Janet Storey?

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

Don't tell me they're having women-only shortlists? :eek:

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

Funnily enough I've heard similar tales.

It doesn't seem very democratic of Conservative central office, not to select the local party's man of choice, even if his track record is not very good.

Every dog deserves his day...or even three.

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

As long as no one imposes on Hyndburn a short arsed women-only, who look a bit like a self-satisfied squirrel, shortlist, then I won't have to go and buy a cross-bow to take out Hazel Blears.

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

Whose Janet Storey.

Retlaw.

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

She's a Clayton Councillor.

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

Don't believe everything you hear Graham:rolleyes:

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

Exactly

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

The day CCO impose a short list on us, will be the day I resign my membership, I've always said I have principles, and when people who know sod all about the workings of constituencies like Hyndburn stick their noses in its time to say bye bye and let them get on with it

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

They might think the quality of a candidate, rather than the quantity, has a better chance of securing the seat.

http://www.masonicinfo.com/images/BeatDeadHorse.gif

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

Love the "Flogging a Dead Horse" very apt.:D:D:D

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

I heard it 2nd hand, reliable source. Don't know if it involved to much christmas port, fine wine or sherry?

Lets be honest he threw his hat in the ring, when? July? Still nothing. Doing better than the website tho which we have heard nothing from since July 2008 Councillor Peter Britcliffe - Latest News Reports

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

David Cameron said he was imposing lists from January 1st. Is that a cast-iron guarantee you will resign?


Cameron faces revolt over female shortlists - UK Politics, UK - The Independent
FT.com / UK - Cameron to impose all-women shortlists
Cameron Goes for Women-Only Short Lists, Travels Back in Time to 1995 - Iain Martin - WSJ

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

Exactly,I second that.

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

Especially if cameron says it.:rofl38::rofl38::rofl38:

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

Unless it's calling Twitters twa...twits.


:rofl38:

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

I have one up on you Rindi and there ain't any quality























YET:rolleyes:

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

And there's plenty of them on here:rolleyes:

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

If we are forced to accept a short list from CCO yes, although there is another twist in this sorry still to come, don't know whether we've given your pet mole the story yet Graham:rolleyes:

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

Since the Nu-Tories seem now to be as politically 'right on' as the loony-left councils of the eighties, they might impose a short-list of disabled, black lesbians, who wear hoodies and like hugging.

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

Does that mean the story was correct at one point but things have moved on?

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

I'll let you find out from your mole:rolleyes:

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

After all, you selected Peter, Peter, pumpkin eater, twice...and he was defeated.

Then there was posh boy James Mawdsley you chose. He who seemed more obsessed with the people of Burma, rather than the people of the borough, and who lied on his election pamphlets about compulsory abortions...and he was defeated.

http://www.accringtonweb.com/forum/f...ate-10446.html

You never know, if Conservative central office impose a selection list on the local party, you might have more success at the next General Election, if you can only select a one legged, dusky dyke, who likes hugging.

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

I'm not that interested in your predilections Rindi :rolleyes:

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

I'm not predicting anything.

It's just exciting who I'll be able to vote for.

The election could be called earlier than May, seeing as the gap between the two major parties is apparently narrowing. So you might have to make public your selected candidate sooner, rather than later.

The tension's making us all giddy with excitment.

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

I thought that would be obvious to anybody on here, as they certainly won't be wearing a Blue Rosette:rolleyes:

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

Why will the person your Party chooses not be wearing a blue rosette?

:confused:

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

I imagine Jaysay meant the person Garinda would be voting for would not be wearing a blue rosette.

I think the person Garinda votes for could very well be the Conservative candidate. Garinda likes to criticise the Tories here, but it's normally for being too soft, not hard right enough on various issues. It's therefore not likely he will vote Gordon Brown back in. Instead he will vote for the party he most associates with this time around, exactly the same as I'll be doing! I imagine he will never tell us though so we could all be right. :D

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

I've no idea who I'll be voting for.

A week, never mind a maximum of five months, is a long time in politics.

I do think it's rather arrogant, presuming who a person will vote for. That's the kind of narrow-mindedness that means some of the electorate are ignored, which could result in an election loss for some parties...yet again.

My vote will be a balanced choice, between party and person.

Since the only two people who are definitely standing so far are Graham Jones and Kevin Logan, I can say with all certainty, I won't be voting for the latter.

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

...when they are doing something idiotic. Just as I've praised them, on the rare occasion when they've done something good locally.

I've also criticised the government, who happen to be Labour. Calling them as morally corrupt as John Major's last hurrah, is a fairly scathing attack in my opinion.

Strangely though, even though I've made numerous attacks against the government, I'm yet to be accused of being anti-Labour.

Odd that.

I suppose it's not really that odd.

Little people have a preference for putting people in little boxes...sometimes at much cost to themselves.

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

I like that - well said :D

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

That's interesting - I never knew he had his own website. Not very impressive, is it? But the worst bit is the video in the Stanley section. The captions appear to have been written by a semi-literate 5-year-old and, what's more, they're riddled with factual inaccuracies. And just listen to that heavy rock song in the middle. Are they singing the word I think they are around 2.00 minutes in?

Oh dear, oh dear, Peter, after all the excellent teachers you had at St Peter's and AGS, I thought you could have done better than that! :D

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

Perhaps the same person wrote the similarly bad c.v. for the B.B.C, with the appallingly spelling mistakes?


BBC NEWS | VOTE 2001 | CANDIDATES

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

Yep, there is a certain consistency there. Not a very good reflection on Councillor Britcliffe, is it?

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

...or on the educational establishments in Accriwoton (sic).

:rolleyes::D

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

it was the t**t who entered the CV on the BBC web site that was illiterate there was sod all wrong with the original, believe me as I sent it to them

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

Don't care how far the election is off, you still won't be putting a cross in the Tory box:rolleyes:

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

Then the question must be asked, why didn't someone notice and contact the BBC to get it corrected?

Also, the same excuse can't be used for the pitifully inept captions that are used on the Stanley video on PB's own site. I really, really hope you aren't going to tell me you wrote those, mate! :eek:

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

Sorry duplicate post. :o

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

Was this before your eyesight improved or since? I presume you can now read to see the spelling mistakes but not quite well enough to find the backspace button & correct such errors?

:lol::yelrotflm:thumbsup::iloveyou::rofl38::dry8: :tongueout:lol::yelrotflm:thumbsup::iloveyou: :rofl38::dry8::tongueout

Psst, they usually just copy & paste!

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

Well Mystic Meg, if you've arrived at that outrageous presumption based on the fact that I've occasionally been critical of some of the things done by our Tory controlled council, and bearing in mind I've also been highly scathing on here of Labour, the B.N.P., Kevin Logan, and the Liberal Democrats, it rather limits my options as to who I'll be voting for.

Please feel free to share with us where I'll be putting my cross.

As stated earlier, it's quite usual for small minded people to want to put everyone in small, easily labelled boxes, even when they put people in the wrong little box, with the wrong little label.

;)

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

...and as stated earlier, my decision will be based on the person, balanced with the party they represent, and there's only Graham Jones, and Logan, confirmed as standing so far.

;)

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

Probably a good job nobody has done such a thing as yet then!

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

Unless of course Cllr Jones or Kevin Logan have put you in their boxes. ;)

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

Except Jaysay, who rather presumptively announced I wouldn't be voting Conservative.

It's the arrogance of taking for granted what people will, or won't do, which can lead to elections being lost.

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

I can guarantee you that Jaysay isn't the Conservative candidate so you need not worry.

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

No, but when such an ardent, and hard working member of a political party, states as fact the presumption someone won't be voting for them, it makes you wonder if they are indeed worth voting for, and if they truly want people's support.

I'd have thought every single vote that could be garnered, counted.

For those without political blinkers, they might remember when I lambasted a local candidate for not canvassing at homes displaying the Cross of St. George flag, even though there was an international football tournament on at the time.

That candidate wasn't a Conservative, and they subsequently lost.

Every vote does count, and it's only the arrogant that presume, and discount people's support, without a fight.

I'm more than happy to further discuss next year's General Election, but this really isn't the place.

This is a thread about some of our councillors wasting money on an unnecessary calendar...yet again.

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

I was reading in the LT archives about Hugh McNeil back in 1995. Seems a long time ago.

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

Garinda found it on the previous page. Between you and him you could start a detective agency.

I posted off my mobile and it pasted Garinda's link and I had previously copied the correct one on Hugh McNeil LT 1995.

Re: Britcliffe monthly.
 

I gave that one to my mate he will use it,or lose it