Originally Posted by Ken Moss (Post 816948)

The people of Hyndburn do not want Peter Britcliffe in charge of Hyndburn Council but unfortunately they're rather stuck with the situation, at least until Wednesday.

Your precious Tory party in Hyndburn are headed by a man who has forced an awkward situation upon the whole council in an effort to save his skin as Leader.

Post what you like on this forum or any other to try and get away from the primary point of this thread, but the fact remains that Wednesday's AGM has been moved around purely to satisfy the vanity of one man who you would hold him up as a shining example of a Hyndburn councillor.

I don't know what has led you to believe that a dictator is best for the borough but as soon as you start paying full taxes and see just what goes on with your money you might want to take a step back.

Try living in Rishton, Spring Hill or Huncoat and see how revered Cllr Britcliffe is in those wards.

Originally Posted by andrewb (Post 816956)

I've said what I think of moving the AGM. Cllr Prichard has said he will support the Tories. The Tories therefore have a majority. There's a lot of crying wolf from your side, when you know you don't have the majority when all the democratically elected councillors are there. If Labour thought they had a majority when all elected councillors were there, I imagine they'd want to wait until they could all attend too.

If writing what you think I believe and what you think is my tax situation, helps you defend Graham's expenses, that's fine.

Originally Posted by andrewb (Post 816956)

If Labour thought they had a majority when all elected councillors were there, I imagine they'd want to wait until they could all attend too.

Originally Posted by Ken Moss (Post 816965)

Let me put it to you like this then: if you're paying full council tax to Hyndburn then it would be Peter Britcliffe and not Graham Jones that should be getting your vitriol over the £250 rail fare. The original slot for the AGM would not have caused this situation or the cost.

Labour on its own does not have a majority, but working with the Independents would oust the Tories. You come across as someone who likes to think he is politically aware so why am I spelling this out to you?

It does you no credit at all as a political student when basic facts escape you and you are accusing Labour councillors of 'crying wolf' on the back of it.

Originally Posted by Ken Moss (Post 816968)

Cllr Britcliffe knows that most Labour councillors work during the day

Originally Posted by Ken Moss (Post 816968)

It is quite clearly stated to all councillors that you are expected to attend ALL full council meetings, which generally isn't a problem at 7.00pm.

Cllr Britcliffe knows that most Labour councillors work during the day and has rigged the AGM twice in a row now to suit his personal needs.

It is not a good way to run a borough, there just isn't any getting around it.

Originally Posted by Ken Moss (Post 816968)

Cllr Britcliffe knows that most Labour councillors work during the day and has rigged the AGM twice in a row now to suit his personal needs.

Originally Posted by andrewb (Post 816974)

Again you don't know what I pay or what I don't. If Peter Britcliffe was wanting to claim an inflated train fair, at taxpayers expense, I would be saying the same thing. It's against the expenses rules to claim for money that is not apart of an MPs parliamentary duties.

The 'basic facts' are not escaping me. The Conservatives have 17 councillors. One independent, Cllr Prichard, is in the local paper saying he'll support Peter Britcliffe. That's 18 councillors. There are 14 Labour councillors, and 3 other independents. That's 17 if they all vote together.

Originally Posted by Less (Post 816977)

...thats what you do isn't it Cyfer?

Originally Posted by Less (Post 816977)

Can I just ask, do none of the Tory Councillors work during the day?

If they do work why isn't it also awkward for them to get time off to attend?

Somehow I think I already know the answer, but either yourself or the political sage of accyweb can reply, (it would be nice if he did he ignored what Wyonne and I had to say in our earlier posts, but then when you haven't got an answer thats what you do isn't it Cyfer? (formerly known as Ace......).

:)

Originally Posted by garinda (Post 816981)

He didn't have an 'e'.

That was something else he presumably lost, along with his former username, and everything else.

:D

Originally Posted by andrewb (Post 816982)

Don't know what councillors have what jobs sorry Less. I posted it in this thread because Graham spoke about the expenses he intended to claim in an article about the AGM movement.

Originally Posted by andrewb (Post 816976)

As it is, as far as I'm aware, he's got a majority if all elected councillors are there. Hence why I am saying there's a lot of fuss from Labour councillors for no reason.

Originally Posted by Ken Moss (Post 816980)

Then make a statement on your tax situation! I hope you never get elected because you are exactly the sort of councillor we don't want more of. All this 'smoke and mirrors' guff might come across beautifully in studies but it doesn't sit well with the electorate in real life.

I have already suggested that you have read the Observer article as a statement that Graham is claiming £250 as an MP allowance rather than a possible misconstruance on your part to suit yourself. Ask Graham.

Malcolm Pritchard is not 100% guaranteed to vote either way. It all depends on his position on the day and there is absolutely nothing that Peter Britcliffe can do to force him to vote for him as Leader. If it was such a done deal then why all this jumping through hoops to move the meeting?

Originally Posted by andrewb (Post 816986)

If Malcolm Prichard votes how he said in the local paper, it'll still only be a majority of one. If it is a done deal, they still need to be there.

Originally Posted by Ken Moss (Post 816987)

Yet again I'll suggest that you don't believe everything that is written in the papers.

Everything hinges on Cllr Malcolm Pritchard who has been extremely courteous to me (particularly on the day of the local count) but I understand that he is very much his own man when it comes to making decisions. If there was no worry about Cllr Britcliffe's majority then the AGM would be held at 7.00pm next Wednesday, or would have already been held last Tuesday.

I wouldn't count any chickens before next Wednesday's hatching.

Originally Posted by andrewb (Post 816989)

I have no bone with criticising anyone I perceve to be in the wrong, as I have done in the past.

Originally Posted by andrewb (Post 816989)

I'm not counting chickens. I'm just saying what I think about all this fuss. If you know something we don't then do say. If Malcolm has changed his mind and Peter moved the AGM because of it, I'll criticise Peter for it. I know you're reluctant to criticise your own mans expenses. I have no bone with criticising anyone I perceve to be in the wrong, as I have done in the past.

Originally Posted by Ken Moss (Post 816991)

I won't criticise Graham for claiming for a train ticket that would have dented his wallet, nor will I say that it pleases me that as a taxpayer I am footing the bill, but the current Leader of the Council is well aware that 1.30pm is damned awkward for the majority of Labour councillors to attend and it is his actions that have presented the borough with this situation, not Graham Jones' personal greed.

It is costing hundreds of pounds in lost wages and man hours and has caused inconveniences for at least half of the council to rearrange their day just so that Cllr Britcliffe can have the AGM at 1.30pm instead of 7.00pm.

Defend that.

Originally Posted by andrewb (Post 816993)

I haven't seen any explanation and I'm not in constant contact with Peter Britcliffe to find out, despite being acused of being his mouth piece on here before.

Originally Posted by Gayle (Post 816995)

As for the argument raging on here - well that doesn't really make either party look good in my opinion - if you were my children and you were bickering like this I'd have sent you to your rooms.

Originally Posted by Tealeaf (Post 816998)

So now it's come to this. Raw, violent brutality.

Originally Posted by andrewb (Post 816993)

Ken, unless Peter holds it on a Friday, Graham is going to be in London anyway. He shouldn't be charging the taxpayer for coming back for business that isn't related to Parliament. I don't think his £66,000 wallet will be dented that heavily.

I don't particularly understand why it's at 1.30pm rather than 7. I haven't seen any explanation and I'm not in constant contact with Peter Britcliffe to find out, despite being acused of being his mouth piece on here before. :D

I'd prefer it to be at 7.00pm because it's easier for the public to attend. I just think that the way Labour councillors have come about this when as far as everyone knows Peter has the majority of votes to be leader, is rather daft.

Originally Posted by Gayle (Post 81699)

The Tories have the most seats and therefore, morally they should be allowed to form the council

Originally Posted by JCB (Post 817002)

I thought all the councillors formed the council.

Originally Posted by Gayle (Post 816995)

I don't think anyone comes out of this in a good light. When it all boils down to it, the Tories have 17 seats and Labour only 14. Yes, they can up that to 17 by scratching around to get the independents votes, but at the end of the day that means that everyone is selling their soul for something. The Tories have the most seats and therefore, morally they should be allowed to form the council - isn't that the argument that everyone, including a lot of Labour MPs (our own newly elected MP Graham Jones as well) were saying about the national situation?

There are 4 independents on the council - one was voted in as Conservative and is now siding with Labour, one was first voted in as Labour then fell out with them so was then voted in as an Independent but is still happy to side with Labour when it comes to this vote and one was voted in as a LibDem, went over to Labour, then became Independent and is now seemingly happy to side with the Tories. The people who voted for these Independents didn't vote for for either Labour or Conservative so are now being short changed by these allegiences.

I think it also proves, what we suspected all along, that it is near impossible for one person to be a Councillor, County Councillor AND MP!!! Far too many demands on your time.

As for the argument raging on here - well that doesn't really make either party look good in my opinion - if you were my children and you were bickering like this I'd have sent you to your rooms.

Originally Posted by jaysay (Post 816469)

I only comment on things which interest me, cancelling a meeting is not a phenomena, and doesn't warrant any serious thoughts from me, I'll leave that to those with little else to do:p

Originally Posted by jaysay (Post 817017)

I agree fully with your statement about being a Local Councillor, County Councillor and MP its just not workable, its like the old saying jack of all trades master of none, no matter what the reasons are being an MP IS a full time job, end of story, its not like Peel ward would fall into Tory Hands in any by election is it, Accrington South at County could be more contentious, but the bottom line is Graham can't do all three jobs, trying would only end up in all three suffering

Originally Posted by garinda (Post 816975)

I wonder if all those councillors, with full time jobs to do, have been awarded massive pay rises recently?


'A VOTE to increase councillor's expenses sparked cries of disgust from the public gallery at Accrington Town Hall on Tuesday, during a Cabinet meeting.'


'Labour members had tabled an amendment which would have scrapped an estimated £5,000 rise in the allowance for council leader, Councillor Peter Britcliffe but this was defeated.'


'His basic allowance has jumped from £17,032 to £19,842, but he is also allowed to claim allowances for more than one special responsibility, which has led to the extra £5,000 he can claim.'


'This equates to a whopping pay increase of around 20 per cent.'
Expenses rise sparks fury in council chamber - Accrington Observer


:rolleyes:

Originally Posted by Gayle (Post 816995)

I don't think anyone comes out of this in a good light. When it all boils down to it, the Tories have 17 seats and Labour only 14. Yes, they can up that to 17 by scratching around to get the independent's votes, but at the end of the day that means that everyone is selling their soul for something. The Tories have the most seats and therefore, morally they should be allowed to form the council - isn't that the argument that everyone, including a lot of Labour MPs (our own newly elected MP Graham Jones as well) were saying about the national situation?.

Originally Posted by claytonender (Post 817128)

Gayle, you argument about the Conservatives being the largest group and morally bring allowed to form the council is rather dubious when you look at the situation in Blackburn, where Labour have 31 seats and the rag bag coalition (of tories. fib dems and for for darwen) have 33 seats. Surely by your argument there should now be a Labour administration there.

Originally Posted by g jones (Post 817066)

I don't believe the arguments are worthless or simply mere bickering. Trivialisation is unacceptable. Look at the real issues around us. Woodnook is a boarded up ghetto. One party wants to do something serious, one admits they do not really want to do anything about it. People are playing with (poor) people's lives and that important fact is being forgotten all to easy.

I think when you represent a poor area, or live in one, these matters are important. When you can drive past these issues, they don't seem as important.

Whilst no longer a council member after Wednesday, I feel for the honest person who is going to see £millions miss spent by The Leader and their lives blighted. (I could also include the incompetence of Spring St. in Rishton). This money won't be available again so it is imperative that every argument is exhausted so that ordinary people get a fair deal.

And that is just one issue amongst many.

Originally Posted by Less (Post 817052)

Please excuse me, what gained your interest?

Or maybe from the first quote, you have little else to do?

You just had to have your...

Originally Posted by Gayle (Post 817000)

Hardly brutal, it's not like I deprive them of their tea or anything!

Originally Posted by Gayle (Post 817132)

Let's face it, you were fighting to keep it on a day when you knew that two Conservative Councillors would be unable to attend - Paul Barton because he's been in a crash and another one who's name I forget right now but it said she was unable to be there. If those two had failed to turn up then Labour would have taken control.

The battle on this thread isn't about who would deal best with the issues but who would win the vote.

Originally Posted by Ken Moss (Post 817174)

It simply doesn't make sense to do this when a 7pm slot would have circumvented the whole problem.

Originally Posted by Neil (Post 817176)

You can't have meetings at 7pm unless you want to have them in the Black Dog :rolleyes::D

Originally Posted by g jones (Post 817258)

The Conservative 17 by the way is based on a lower share of the vote than Labour so I would question their mandate simply based on seats.

Originally Posted by Gayle (Post 817396)

What have you based your figures on - because I've just done some sums and going back to when each of the current councillors won their seats, the Tories have more votes. It's very close.

Originally Posted by claytonender (Post 817509)

The figures for votes cast in the 2010 HBC election are as follows -
Labour 11047 41.59%
Tory 10562 39.76%
Liberal Democrat 281 1.06%
Independent 4480 16.87%
BNP 192 0.72%

TOTAL VOTES CAST 26562 out of an electorate of 41515 which means there was a 63.98% turnout.

Originally Posted by Gayle (Post 817519)

The local council election this year was only one third of the seats - if you factor in the last two elections when the other two thirds were elected, the Tories were elected on most votes.

Originally Posted by Gayle (Post 817519)

The local council election this year was only one third of the seats - if you factor in the last two elections when the other two thirds were elected, the Tories were elected on most votes.

Originally Posted by Bernard Dawson (Post 817526)

We can all play at that game Gayle. During the Poll Tax years the Tories hardly got a vote.

Originally Posted by Bernard Dawson (Post 817526)

We can all play at that game Gayle. During the Poll Tax years the Tories hardly got a vote.

Originally Posted by andrewb (Post 817539)

She's hardly playing games. Only a 1/3 of council were elected in 2010. You can't ignore the other 2/3s of council in your calculations on vote share!

Originally Posted by andrewb (Post 817539)

She's hardly playing games. Only a 1/3 of council were elected in 2010. You can't ignore the other 2/3s of council in your calculations on vote share!

Originally Posted by jaysay (Post 817549)

Shushhhhhhhhhhhhh Andrew :rolleyes:

Originally Posted by Less (Post 817555)

See, even your biggest fan is getting impatient with you andrew!:D

Originally Posted by cashman (Post 817557)

Perhaps its a tactful way of tellin him hes wrong.....AGAIN.:D

Originally Posted by MargaretR (Post 817648)

Live coverage of wednesdays AGM here -
Hyndburn Council - live coverage here - Accrington Observer

Originally Posted by Tealeaf (Post 817652)

I can't get 'owt. What's happening? Has the meeting started yet? Are they still down the pub? Has the Observer reporter not turned up? Is he down the pub? Can anyone explain?

Originally Posted by cashman (Post 817651)

good un cheers margaret, hopefully people can see what the score is.;)

Originally Posted by jaysay (Post 817662)

You actually mean your going to watch it cashy, beam me up Scottie, even cashy's gone to hell on a hand cart:eek::eek::eek:

Originally Posted by Tealeaf (Post 817652)

I can't get 'owt. What's happening? Has the meeting started yet? Are they still down the pub? Has the Observer reporter not turned up? Is he down the pub? Can anyone explain?

Originally Posted by JCB (Post 817700)

Should be interesting , Margaret.

Anyone placing bets on the result ?

Originally Posted by Tealeaf (Post 817725)

Come on you lot...what's happened at the AGM today? Surely the meeting should be over by now?

Originally Posted by MargaretR (Post 817648)

Live coverage of wednesdays AGM here -
Hyndburn Council - live coverage here - Accrington Observer

Originally Posted by Tealeaf (Post 817747)

Whats this nonsense? Be serious, you fool. Is Pritchard mayor or not? Is Britcliffe still the leader of HBC?

Originally Posted by Tealeaf (Post 817782)

Look garinda...get off this thread until you have something positive and serious to say. Get back with your bible-bashing chums. I've waiting here to phone some senior citizens back in Hyndburn with news of this council meeting so the sooner I hear, the better.

Originally Posted by Ken Moss (Post 817880)

Good grief, the AGM is on Wednesday.

It hasn't happened yet.

Originally Posted by cashman (Post 817903)

give us time n place n ya never know.;)

Originally Posted by cashman (Post 817903)

give us time n place n ya never know.;)

Originally Posted by Ken Moss (Post 817902)

Just under 14 hours to go until my first walk-on part in Council AGM.

For those who have never made it, come and sit in the public gallery and just spare a few hours for some top flight free entertainment.

Originally Posted by flashy (Post 817989)

any of you lot other than the councillors going to this? i fancy a gander even though i'm not from the area, i think it will be interesting (and yes, Flashy is being serious, for once)

Originally Posted by Tealeaf (Post 817998)

Well, it looks like I was erroneously informed the AGM was yesterday...which idiot told me that? Come on, own up, whoever you are.

Originally Posted by cashman (Post 817996)

gonna pop in if time permits, ya just never know, never witnessed n execution.:D

Originally Posted by MargaretR (Post 818003)

Don't forget to take your knitting :D

Originally Posted by cashman (Post 817996)

gonna pop in if time permits, ya just never know, never witnessed n execution.:D

Originally Posted by MargaretR (Post 818043)

I have been waiting now for 20 minutes and the Observer link shows nothing

Originally Posted by cashman (Post 818062)

Pritchard is new mayor, Britcliffe again re-elected, the farce continues, 30 pieces of silver musta changed hands, Ken Moss introduced himself to the council, Gotta say honestly the tories must be complete pricks a ****** is a ****** in any party. they can do much better than that arrogant git surely.:confused::rolleyes: hour n half was enough fer me, as they dont provide sick bags.

Originally Posted by jaysay (Post 818072)

Oh cashy you should have called in here before you went I'd have given you an ASDA reusable bag, specially for the occasion, they hold a lot too:D:D:D:D