Originally Posted by garinda (Post 403594)

Less waffle,

Originally Posted by gondola (Post 403610)

'You say in the other thread that you do not feel that the independent candidate is truly independent'

When did I say that?

Originally Posted by gondola (Post 403624)

Mancie,

I see Graham Jones in his reposne confirmed everything I stated. He certainly did'nt deny it.

Now why do you think that is. Because I was wrong? No, thought not.

Originally Posted by gondola (Post 403577)

Less remarked 'I don't trust you'

Originally Posted by Gayle (Post 403448)

I suspect Gondola is unable to reveal his/her true identity as it would probably jeopardise his/her job.

I can understand and appreciate that because there are times when using my real name has meant that I've been unable to say what I really think or spill the dirt on something. I suspect that there are many people in Scaitcliffe House who are also currently trying to find out who Gondola is.

Originally Posted by g jones (Post 403673)

Central Ward Labour Party - As I understoood it.


A Tory hinted to me about people's alliances not being upfront a month before selection. He meant Safdar but short of being pyschi or good cryptically I missed the point.

I was always aware second hand from a distance what was happening in Central Ward. Touring all 17 branches for meetings is not practical when they are functioning democratically.

Safdar (in my mind) had always been available. Tories and Labour do a lot of talking to each other but people had mentioned Safdar as one who spoke too much with the Tories. You can only do something about it if you have evidence.

Safdar told me the day before he was standing which was surprising as his name had never come up with anyone I had spoken to fromm Central Ward. In fact the main contender, someone very popular, dropped out of selection which left it a bit open upon shortlisting. I speak with the yonger members and Ayub was spoken about very highly. It was widely predicted he would be nominated on merit. Good candidate, nice lad.

Safdar told me the night before selction he was standing and 'he'd better win (or else)". I told him that wasn't the right attitude. If he lost he should be gracious and offer his support to the winner like he would expect if he was selcted.

Safdar said; "I will don't worry, I am not disloyal". I said Central has elections next year and the runner up should take advantage of that for next year. Safdar agreed totally. It was a dodgy conversation. I suspected something wasn't right with Safdar.

I rang around a couple off CW members. I got a different picture. Safdar won't win. He's been talking to the Tories too much. Kazi and Allah Dad, spending a lot of time with them.

Safdar lost, I did not know by how many. Then the phone rang. Safdar immediatly had gone to the Tories. No-one was surprised though no one knew he had ACTUALLY done a deal. I was told by a Tory the deal was nailed months previously. So that put some flesh on well founded suspicions.

Safdar could not have been barrred. There was no proof of a deal. I was told he would lose. It eneded up close as Safdar got older members to the meeting in support of him for his years of service as I understand it.

Press ring up a week or so later. I say what I said which was pretty much accurate. 2+2 had made 4. Yes I did speak with a bit of hindsight but it was true Safdars actions prior to selection where know and that was in the minds of CW LP members. They told me so when I discoverd Safdar had put his name forward. So I think I was jsutified in what I said.

There is an alternate theory. Can't say any of it is true. Kazi knows he will beat Safdar as a weak candidate and had entered into an alliance whereby Safdar as the Labour candidate would lose and Kazi would be indebted to Safdar. Kazi knows he may well lose to Ayub who is a nice lad, straight, hard working and honest.

As Gondola knows, we had LP monitors in observing the process.

Originally Posted by gondola (Post 403801)

Mr Jones,

Thank you for the valuable insight, allowing readers to gasp at the lamentable antics from representatives of the mainstream parties in the Central Ward. Surely no one in Hyndburn can prosper from such stupidity, save those seeking to elect themselves.
It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his job depends on not understanding it. The thesis that Safdar would not have been elected on the basis that he had been ‘talking to the Tories’ is as laughably foolish as the notion that he found support from ‘older members’ as a result of his robust service to the party over the years. One only has to consider the profiles of current Councillors of Asian origin to note that most have at some stage been affiliated to both Labour and the Conservatives, either as members, candidates or serving councillors. Thus the assertion that there is a strong sense of party loyalty is tenuous at best.
The alternate theory you propose sounds far more plausible. In fact I think it likely, though like yourself I have no tangible evidence to prove the same, save to point out that this is not the first time I have heard this.
Indubitably, Safdar would not have been successful in the Central Ward. The odds were clearly stacked against him, and thus there may have been other reasons for him seeking the candidacy. I decline further commentary on this issue, for fear of making an egregious remark.
Separately, I am not sure if Safdar thought through the likelihood of success in the Church Ward. In my considered view, the chances of him being elected are increasingly moribund.

All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them.
I shall return later in the week.