Friday 31 October 2008

COUNCILLOR JOY GARNER (LABOUR GROUP LEADER) GIVES PITSNPOTS THE ANSWERS ON THE TRANSITION BOARD

I would like to sincerely thank Councillor Joy Garner for taking the time to post on our blog. She has been following several of our debates and seen a number of questions raised by our posters on the recent Transition Board Blog.
I felt that it was neccessary to post her comments as a new blog and allow interested pitsnpots readers and posters the chance to publish their comments and reactions to her in depth statement.
We, at pitsnpots are delighted that our local politicians are using our blog to communicate with a number of the cities electorate. This is the reason that we set this blog up.
Here are Joy's comments:

"John Healey, Minister for Local Government, commissioned this report into the Governance of the City of Stoke-on-Trent.
The review was actioned, and they came up with 14 recommendations, the 14th being to appoint a Transition Board and the development of an Action Plan.

Both to ensure the Council actually did what the report says.Para 5.29 onwards explains the make up of the board which it describes as a "Transition Board of local stakeholder representatives which will monitor progress on the implementation of our recomendations and help hold the Council to account."

Para 5.31 suggests the board should be in place for at least 3 years... It lists the areas its members should be drawn from... The size no more than 15...

Para 5.32 requires the Council to draw up the action plan(timetable to achieve the other 13 points), as a matter of urgency. January 2009 full council meetings will be important for this.
The new Council constitution should be ready then, and the full council to formally request the Electoral Commission to review the ward boundarys with a view to single member wards.
A vote on all out elections every 4 years is the trigger.The EC then sends in its Boundary Committee.

They start from this request, but can not be fettered by us or the Government, and after CONSIDERABLE PUBLIC CONSULTATION, they draw up their plans, which may not, and often do not agree with the Goverments view.

Of course, this is a light touch by government, and is intended to be a 'critical friend' as well.

If the Council fails to start moving forward with some urgency, or even fails at the first hurdle - the Council vote to all out elections in January, which triggers the EC and then the BC - then it is hard not to think of what may happen.

I dread to think that a complete take over, like happened in Walsall, could ever happen here in Stoke.

We are told, at present, that the members will only get allowances to cover costs.Mike Tappin, as far as I can see (and there is a couple of names I am unfamiliar with), is the only member with experience of being an elected representative, MEP, County Councillor and City Councillor. Certainly the only one ever elected in Stoke, and should be able to eloquently voice these experiences.

The Elected Mayor position is in place till next May/June (Euro elections may extend his service).If he were to stand down now, it is too late for a by election so his Deputy, Cllr Pervez would act in his place till then.

The publics views will be crucial to how all this pans out.It is the views of groups like on this blog, and individuals to make their feeling known at the right time.

To have your points worked out in time, as a group, it would be worth starting some serious debate on the points in the report, seeing how some work or do not work when taken together.

Some obvious ones are: Less Councillors - but more scrutiny work, and spend more time in the ward.

Higher calibre Councillors - will need to be paid properly if younger proffessionals are to be attracted, especially if you have to have alot of time off work, and a £200,000 mortgage to pay ??
Recommendation 135.24 A wider North Staffordshire Authority ??

Recommendation's 5 and 6Both are about community involvment, firstly for all citizens, then especially the young, and our diverse communities.You could easily start these very important debates on this Blog site. I wish you well, and if I can assist further, I will."

Councillor Joy Garner

Vaccinations – are the policies right?

In recent times we are periodically seeing outbreaks of tuberculosis. A couple of articles in the Sentinel recently illustrate this. On Wednesday we heard of a case at Clough Hall Technology School in Kidsgrove – click here for the story. Today we hear of a vodafone worker in Chesterton with the desease – click here for the story. Vodafone employs around 1,400 people in Chesterton, Newcastle and Etruria.

Now when I was a child, we had the BCG vaccine, which offers 70%-80% protection (
reference) against TB and I just feel it might have been a mistake to discontinue this vaccination programme in schools.

As a parent I am particularly concerned about my children when they go off to university. It’s great to go to university and that involves extensive contact with people from many other places. This is a good experience but inevitably means that new students tend to catch all sorts of illnesses, although most of these are minor. So personally I would have preferred it if my children could have been vaccinated like I was at school. We know the safety and efficacy of the BCG vaccine because it has been used for so many years. I plan, nearer the time, to enquire about getting my children vaccinated against TB. However the comment by Joanne Hymers, whose daughters attend Clough Hall school, does not bode well. Obtaining this vaccine even privately appears not to be easy, although I can’t see any reason why a private healthcare provider would want to refuse.

It also seems that cases of measles are on the increase – click
here for yesterday’s story on this. I also seem to remember an outbreak of mumps a few years ago. I suppose this is inevitable, as not all parents will choose to have their children vaccinated. I am supportive of parents rights to decide what is best for their children regarding vaccination, even if it is not the same as the choice I would make.

One of the most recent new vaccines to be introduced is the HPV vaccine – click
here for the story. Although this looks like it could be a good vaccine, I think they have got the timing wrong. I give more detail in my comment on this article.

What do you think about vaccination and the outbreaks of TB and other diseases?

Wednesday 29 October 2008

BLUE IS THE COLOUR - SHAUN SPEAKS TO PITSNPOTS!

In the second of our exclusive articles aimed at getting the party voice back into our city, we have the words and thoughts of Blurton's very own Conservative Party Activist Shaun Bennett.
Shaun is, like Labour's Tom Reynolds, a young, driven and enthusiastic party member, who knows his parties policies better than most!
I have followed his posts both on the Sentinel and on pitsnpots for a long time now and his reasoned debate has nearly had me turning blue a few times! I would like to thank Shaun for submitting his blog and wish him well for the future. I think the people of Trentham & Hanford could do a lot worse than voting Shaun in at the expense of "you know who!" at the next elections, they would be assured of getting a real Tory!

"I would like to begin by joining Tom Reynolds in his praise of Tony and the team who have set up the site to get local people involved in local political issues and perhaps in time more national debates too. I'm sure we've all thought that the voices of North Staffordshire have been ignored for too long, and I for one am very pleased that an outlet now exists for as many of those voices as possible to be heard. I'm particularly pleased that Tony and the team have gone out of their way to get a range of political persuasions involved without bias - be they Tories like me, Labour, Liberal or BNP.
These are actually quite exciting times for Stoke-on-Trent. The decision we made last Thursday is going to determine how the city is governed for at least another decade, and hopefully far beyond it. As a psephologist - hopefully in touch with the thoughts of people of the city - I never really had any doubt that the YES campaign to abolish the mayor was going to be successful. The demographic and procedural factors alone (such as differential turnout, the wording of the question and the process of casting the vote in a polling station rather than by post) were I think biased towards a YES outcome. The fact that people's natural reaction to an unpopular administration is to support change and my view that the YES campaign totally demolished all the main arguments for the mayoral system,and then a positive result seemed largely secured.
But then with the Sentinel's piece on the BNP being favourite to win the Leadership of the city just a day before polling, I have to admit that I briefly had cause to think again. As it turned out of course, the YES vote won by something of a landslide - albeit on a very low turnout. Whilst I agree with Cllr Reynolds that a low turnout is never desirable, I would gently remind him that Labour imposed a National Assembly upon the people of Wales on a turnout not far greater than we had last Thursday, and by a far, far closer margin. I can't be sure, but I'm convinced that the votes of Stoke South in particular were crucial and I would be interested to see how the votes broke down by constituency and by ward.
So should we decry having lost our right to directly elect the person who leads the council? Well I think not actually. We will GET our chance to decide who leads the council when the time comes to elect our councillors, in exactly the same way as the leadership of almost every other local authority in the country is decided. If we don't like what the leadership is doing we can vote to change it, and unlike under the mayoral system our votes in local elections will now be decisive and will have meaning once more. Perhaps now that the result of local elections will actually matter to the governance of the city, local parties will once more take an interest in winning them, as I'm sure we've all noticed a significant slide in the visibility of the various campaigns over the last 6 years.
My hope is that we can now make savings on the mayor's salary, give power back to councillors - which after all is what they should be elected to do - reintroduce some degree of order and democratic accountability in our political system and perhaps get clearer and - though let's not get too hopeful - better governance as a result. If we can see Mayor Meredith and his colleagues on the dole queue at the same time, well that's all for the better! The city never really wanted to adopt a mayoral system in the first place; certainly those that are most interested in local politics didn't want it. We started off by choosing the wrong type of mayoral system (since abolished by the government) and then not really giving it much of a chance. With a return to a system that we really wanted to adopt in the first place, perhaps things will change for the better - and I hope that we resist getting bogged down in a pointless debate about changing the system back again in the years to come.
I do however have two real concerns about the immediate future: First, I am concerned about this "Transition Board" that seems to have appeared out of nowhere. I don't remember any discussion of a transition board during the referendum campaign? I don't know how this panel of the great and the good have been put onto the board? They certainly haven't been elected. I don't know what powers or authority this board will have or even what the point is of them being there; surely we already know the way forward for the city in terms of the political system? On the other hand, if it is going to be available to 'hold the hands' of our local political leaders and to give them cause to think twice before doing anything stupid, then it can only be a good thing. The fact that it only seems to be in place for the next 6 months or so should probably ease our concerns about its being, since it is after all only temporary.
My second concern is however much more serious. It seems that now that we have voted YES to getting rid of the elected mayor's office, the sitting councillors will now start to discuss who is going to lead the city ahead of a big decision next May. In the short term at least, the people DON'T get any say over who that person is going to be. The democratic principle of the Leader and Cabinet system is that the electorate can still indirectly choose the leadership of the council by voting for councillors - the implication being that the party or group with most support delivered by the electorate as seats on the council will take the leadership. Unfortunately, the councillors who are there at present were elected under the old mayoral system. They were NOT elected to form an administration or to take the leadership of the authority. And yet it is this group of people who will now choose the Leader without any reference to the electorate.
In my view, there should be an all out council election next May or June so that people will be able to vote knowing that they are voting for a party or group to lead the council as well as an individual local councillor to represent them. At present we have expressed our preference for a local representative but not for who we want to lead the council. And if rumours that the next council election will not be held until ward boundaries change in 2011 are true, we could find ourselves in a situation in which whoever is chosen to lead the authority could do so without any test of public opinion for the next two and a half years!
An all out council election would not be extraordinary, given the circumstances. We have them whenever ward boundaries change - and so we will almost certainly be having one in 2011 anyway. In 1996 when the City Council became a Unitary Authority, a full council election was held then even though all that was changing was the extent of the powers of the authority. Are we really expected to accept that there will be no full election at a time when it is not just the powers of the authority that is changing but the entire executive leadership of the city? These councillors were not elected to lead us, they were elected to hold to account the person that led us; how can they get away with assuming power in their own right without an election? We may well find that the councillors who people thought suitable to represent them as a scrutineer will be different to those that they want to represent them now that the choice for a potential government. I can certainly name a couple of wards where a change of councillor will now be wanted by local people - and some of those changes may well affect the names in the frame to become Leader of the authority!
Nationally, the official Conservative position seems to be to support elected mayors. Of course, they would never attempt to enforce that opinion onto local parties that thought differently and that is what happened in the case of the local party in Stoke. Like all the main parties, except for the BNP, we were totally divided between the YES and NO options. Perhaps also like the other main parties - certainly Labour - the division goes much deeper than over the mayoralty alone. Issues of group leadership, support for the cross-party coalition and certain controversial policy decisions have all been tearing the main parties apart for a number of years now. Personally, I believe that the root cause of many of those problems have come from the demands of the political system under the elected mayor.
The YES vote last Thursday gives me great cause for hope and optimism for the future. The quality of our elected representatives may not improve dramatically under any system, and that will be in the hands of the people. To a large extent as voters we are the makers of our own fortunes,and we cannot really complain when we continue to elect the same people that we constantly condemn as being poor. In the short term we may well see a great era of instability as the smaller parties benefit from the 'cross party coalition' of Mayor Meredith. But in the long term I now can see the beginnings of reunification for both the Conservative and Labour parties. The City may never again return to the two party politics or even one and a half party politics that we have enjoyed for the past 30 years. In many ways that may even be a good thing, but I can at least see the Conservative and Labour parties starting to become competitive again if they really want to be and if they are prepared to cut off the dead wood and get back in touch with real voters. Only time will tell how this story unfolds..."

Shaun Bennett BA (Hons), MA Former Deputy Chairman, Stoke-on-Trent Conservatives.

BRING THE U.S. TO US!


Have you, like me, been following the Presidential Campaign in the USA? Wow! They know how to drag something out don't they?
It has been fun to watch though, and seeing the candidates Obama & McCain, turning out in all corners of the country to bid for those last few votes made me realise just how important it is for politicians of what ever level, to connect with the electorate.
I know that last week, it was a fairly intense news week. Feeling was running high throughout the city in the run up to the governance referendum, and for what? A below 20% turn out!
I found myself pondering why the turn out was so bad, do the people of our city care about what happens? Are the population so pissed off at the state of local politics? I came to the conclusion that councillors and MP's alike need to engage with the population of our city!
Over the next seven months, our politicians have a chance of a new beginning, a clean slate. There is too much complacency, councillors say all to often " this is the way it's always been done", well that just won't do anymore!
The debate in this city of who will be leader and what party stands for what has got to be re-ignited. The people of Stoke on Trent need to be won over and our interest in the local political issues awakened.
What I would like to see is for us to take a leaf out of America's book. I want to see the candidates for the Leadership contest go head to head in a number of public debates at somewhere like the Kings Hall (pictured top right) in Stoke with a packed audience and the whole thing broadcast to the entire city.
We have been small time for too long now, time to think big! It's is time for our politicians to be made to face their electorate and to answer the questions put to them from us, the public.
We don't want the Council's highly paid press officer fencing the more demanding and sensitive questions. We don't want it all to be kept "low key" and to be sorted behind close doors.
We want straight answers, straight talking and above all, we want the best man/woman winning.
By the time next May come around we want each party to state who is going to be their preferred Leadership Candidate and it should be this person that faces the public and fights to win the day for their parties! We want to know what each and every party stands for and what their manifesto is, so that we can make are minds up who will do the best job of leading our city.
They should know that if they do not deliver on their promises, both leader and party will be made to pay at the first chance at the ballot box, nowhere to run and no where to hide!
I would love the chance of chairing these debates. I would make sure every question was answered by all the leadership candidates. Imagine a packed Kings Hall and on stage the Labour, Conservative, Libdem, BNP and Independents leadership candidates all trying to win the day for their party and for themselves.
This would surely bring the party voice back into Stoke after so long of just hearing the same old, same old from the Elected Mayor and his Portfolio Holders.
We deserve more don't we? We deserve a choice of what party and we deserve to know which leader we will get from that chosen party, don't we?
So I throw the gauntlet down to the parties in our City:
Labour - Will it be Mike, Mark or Joy and what will you do for this City? Are your group united? Will you do better than when you had the majority last time? Will you look again at the decisions that made the Labour Elected Mayor so unpopular?
Conservative - Will it be Roger or Ross, and what will you do for the people you have so badly let down in Trentham and what Tory policies can we hear about?
Libdem - Will it be Jean or Keiran and how will you make your party electable in a city that has seen so few Libdem candidates in the past, will you tell us just what do you stand for?
BNP - Will it be Alby, Mike or Steve and is your party racist? What will you do for the sizable number of British people born here but who's skin colour isn't white?
What do we have to fear from you?
Independent - Will it be Alan, Brian or Terry and just what the hell do you lot stand for? What are your policies? Why do you court all the other parties in this city? Have you got a party manifesto?
I feel so passionate about getting this PUBLIC debate on and I want your help! I promise you I would make Jeremy Paxman seem like Bambi! I want to know what questions you want answers to! I want to know who you want as each parties Leader Candidate or who you don't want! I want to know if you would attend a U.S. type of debate at the Kings Hall?
If we applied the pressure on to our local politicians they would not be able to get out of such an event! Can we make this happen?

Tuesday 28 October 2008

WHAT DOES THIS TRANSITION BOARD MEAN FOR OUR CITY?

In the last couple of days, it's been reported in the Sentinel here, that we are to have a Transition Board to oversee us in the next few months, to "transform politics in the city".

Well, perhaps that's what we need. I don't know. The article goes on to name 13 people who either live or work in the city, who will make up this board.

Apparently, the transition board will analyse how the city council implements the result of the referendum and handles all electoral matters. Action plans and quarterly reports will be critiqued and members may make public comments about their findings.

I don't want to put too much of my own thoughts in this blog, just want to leave it open for debate.

What do you think? Is this Transition Board needed to transform politics in the city? How do you think it will work? Will it be a good or bad thing? Is this a case of the Government forcing something else on Stoke on Trent that we might not want or need?

Tell me your thoughts...

MICK WILLIAMS, CONVEYNOR DEMOCRACY 4 STOKE.

Recent winner of the Labour Party National Merit award, who challenged an ageism case against the Mayor, Speaks here:
1. D4S has fought for 6 years to get Friday's result - this is due to commitment to a principle [democracy] and an unwillingness to meekly accept the government's two-faced statements. For example the recent White Paper "Communities in Control" promises citizens power but only on the government's terms. It also 'supports and promotes' the concept of an elected mayor and says that once this option is chosen there can be no going back.However, if this is rejected, they will change the rules on how soon you can have another referendum !

2. The referendum result clearly expressed the views of the people but this will be ignored by the government - shown clearly by the appointees to the 'transitional board'. These include several 'faith' group representatives and one of these (Lloyd Cooke) says that he was approached over two months ago to serve. This means that 'plan B' was in existence before the decision to have a referendum was made - clearly showing that Minister John Healey had already made up his mind prior to the outcome. [On a personal basis I am apprehensive about the involvement of 'faith' interests - noting that their involvement in Northern Ireland resulted in a fractured society and an impossible political stalemate. Many other examples come to mind.]

3. D4S have been deluged with enquiries about 'where we go from here' and I have had to defer response to explain that we waited until the people had spoken before making any concrete plans. One thing is certain: our forward march of democracy will not rely on any shady power-sharing deals but will be driven by commonly agreed principles and will encompass ordinary people making informed and rational decisions.

4. Our meetings (next one on 29/10/08) are open and democratic and attended by people of most local political parties but dominated by none - we even rotate the chair to ensure this happenns. Further details a pleasure from:

Mick Williams,
Joint Convenor, democracy4stoke.

RAT WATCH


WARNING, THIS BLOG WILL SEVERELY DAMAGE YOUR POLITICAL HEALTH!
Do you know any Councillor on the fiddle? Call Me!
Do you know any plots, rumours or backstabbing backstabbers? Fax Me!
Do you know any cheats, liars or crooks in the Council Chamber? Ring Me!
Futile leadership canvassing?
Do you know of any Senior Officer doing something they shouldn't? Let me Know!
Hands in the till? I want the world to know!
Deals done that are illegal or immoral? Let me tell everyone!
Contracts to friends, relatives or just plain crooks? I'm begging you to tell me!
I've had enough of watching sleazeballs getting away with it. It's now time for action and it's time to HIT back!
Watch this space for serious outings! All Officers and Councillors of any persuasion will be treated with the utmost disrespect
Don't call 'crimestoppers' email me in absolute and total confidence:
The Police are watching. They have been informed. There is no use either running or hiding!
Watch this space and watch rats squirm in fear. Be afraid, be very afraid!
The Oracle is coming to get you and to take you away!


Monday 27 October 2008

COUNCILLOR TOM REYNOLDS TALKS EXCLUSIVELY TO PITSNPOTS!


In the first of a long series of blog articles, Longton North Labour Councillor Tom Reynolds, tells pitsnpots his feelings in the wake of last weeks referendum.

I would like to personally thank Tom for his blog, he is a hardworking young councillor and in my opinion we need more of his calibre in this city, no, not because he is Labour, but because he is driven and enthusiastic!

"First things first, I’d like to thank Tony and the team for giving me the opportunity to contribute to the blog. Despite the fact that some of the posts on here have given me and my close colleagues a rough ride, the aim of the site in raising interest in Stoke politics is invaluable. The 19% turnout in last week’s referendum was a dire demonstration of the indifference to politics as a whole in this city and any efforts to reverse this state of affairs is laudable.
I cannot proceed without mentioning the referendum outcome. I campaigned on the No Vote side of the argument as I believed in a model of governance where every citizen of the city was enfranchised to pick the person that leads the City Council. After six weeks of hard campaigning by both sides, the people of Stoke have spoken. I and the Labour colleagues that fought to keep the Mayoral model will of course respect the people’s decision to the utmost.
Paradoxically, as a group of councillors we are now much more powerful. We are now charged with the task of picking the new executive Leader of the Council, a leader who will have to face some enormous issues: education reorganisation, city wide regeneration and transforming the standard of services that the Council provides. So the big question is which direction?
There will be a lot of posturing from some individuals within the council that see themselves in with a chance of leading the authority in May 2009. Cllr Rigby, from the City Independents and Alby Walker from the BNP have both already thrown their hat in the ring. In my view, if either of these contenders succeeds the City is in trouble.
What do the Independents actually stand for? We know what they are against but do they actually have any ideas for moving the City forward - if they do I have not heard them. If Cllr Rigby does lead the council I cannot see what his platform would be. He has after all, admitted on Question Time that he supports BNP councillors and has campaigned for the Tories. What does he actually stand for?
Conversely we know exactly what Cllr Walker and his party stand for, and that is equally worrying. I am not going to enter into a tirade about their repugnant far right ideology or where it could lead. Instead there is a far simpler argument – the BNP is bad for business. If Cllr Walker ends up as the leader of Stoke-on-Trent City Council we can all kiss goodbye to any inward investment.
The only people who can lead this authority, make services better and improve the city are the Labour Party (but that’s what you would expect from me). That is not to ignore the shift against Labour across the City. We must recognise that there is a widespread dissatisfaction about how things have been done in the past. What is absolutely crucial is that as a group of councillors, we demonstrate that Labour is the Group with the vision to improve our city."

Sunday 26 October 2008

TERRY & CRAIG CONTACT PITSNPOTS ABOUT CHURCHILL CHINA MONSTROSITY





As many of you will know, Terry Cope and Craig Pond both live at the North end of the city, whilst most of Pitsnpots bloggers live in the South.

We at Pitsnpots are keen to ensure we cover stories from all areas of the city, and, to this end, Terry and Craig have provided further information on a local news story which we were all aware of, but didn't quite know the full details. Terry Cope writes to Pitsnpots as follows:

"Why is it that the stench of hypocrisy hangs over the Churchill China factory in Sandyford? Mr Roper - he who complains of the noise coming from Alton Towers two miles from his home in Alton- builds a giant warehouse surrounding the residents of Birchall Avenue, not more than 100 yards away from the rear of their houses. Add to this the future constant comings and goings of 40 ton Heavy Goods Vehicles, the noise of forklifts loading and unloading, an internal tannoy system and radios, and you start to get the picture of what the residents of Birchall Avenue will have to put up with, not to mention the Health and Safety risks of carcinogenic diesel fumes wafting their way into the homes of residents, and their children’s lungs.

When this monstrosity is finally built, sunlight to their homes will be cut drastically, as it towers above all the houses on both sides. The risk of subsidence created by the HGV's has not been calculated into the risk to the adjoining properties. They have also seen their properties' value decrease substantially because of this problem.

Churchill’s have recently laid off personnel, but this monstrosity is still going ahead despite all the objections to it, with this City Council's blessing. Local Councillor Lee Wanger, it is alleged by some of the residents, is informing people that those residents of Birchall Avenue have been financially compensated, which they vehemently deny. There are disputes over the validity of planning permission, public footpaths, and the road subsidence in Holywall Lane , that was reported to the highways department by a local resident who is known to me. One other local resident, also known to me, has been fighting this case for thirty years but is constantly blocked by the City Council and Churchill China ’s insistence on getting their way come hell or high water.

This will not only affect the residents of Birchall Avenue , but those of Reginald Way due to the increase of traffic and noise. There is a proposal for a large Central Fire Station to be built adjoining the Churchill monstrosity, causing further traffic and noise.
Now don’t get me wrong I want more businesses to expand, but they must work with the local community, not bully them, as this case proves. The residents of Bichall Avenue feel as if they have been imprisoned by the surrounding buildings, and once where there was an open countryside view, there is only blue steel walls to look at. I and my party will fight to support the residents of the affected area, as we believe this is wrong. I will update you has to how I get on."

Craig has also provided photos, which are shown at the top of this blog post.

It certainly seems like a monstrosity, along similar lines to the Screwfix building in Trentham/Blurton.

Are you a local resident blighted by the Churchill China building? Tell us what you think - how has it affected your daily life and how will it affect you in the future? Are you happy with the way the council have dealt with this issue? Terry says the BNP are fighting this on behalf of the residents - are there other local councillors from other parties supporting this cause? Or do you think the Council were right to allow Churchill China to carry out this expansion project?

What do you think? Over to you...

SUNDAY - FUNDAY!


It's been a fairly intense news week hasn't it? So we've decided to have some fun at the expense of the movers and shakers who could possibly end up as Council Leader in the near future!
What we want you to do is to pick an Election Anthem for the contenders for the cities number one post.
Below are my suggestions but we want your suggestions and let's have some fun on this one!
Joy Garner & Debra Gratton - "Sisters are Doing It For Themselves!" (Aretha Franklin)
Mark Meredith - "Leaving on a Jet Plane" (John Denver) or Don't Look Back In Anger (Oasis)
Mervin Smith - " To Know Him is To Love Him" (The Teddy Bears)
Mike Barnes - The Winner Takes It All (Abba) or We are the Champions (Queen)
Adrian Knapper - Tears of a Clown (Smokey Robinson)
Roger Ibbs - Sorry Seems to be the Hardest Word (Elton John)
Ross Irving - The Man Who Sold The World (David Bowie)
Mike Wolfe - I'm a Pink Tooth Brush (Max Bygraves)
Mark Davis - Puppet on a String (Sandie Shaw)
Peter Kent Baguley - Back in the USSR (The Beatles
Alan Rigby - Making Your Mind Up (Bucks Fizz)
Terry Follows - Follow You Follow Me ( Genesis)
Alby Walker - The Immigrant Song ( Led Zeppalin)
Mike Coleman - Everybody Wants To Rule The World (Tears For Fears)
Steve Batkin - I was Kaiser Bills Batman (Whistling Jack Smith) or I Predict a Riot (Kaiser Chiefs)
There are loads more, but you get the idea right? So it's over to you and remember it's all for fun but as Nick Lowe said in 1979 - You Gotta Be Cruel To Be Kind..........................................................

Saturday 25 October 2008

LAME DUCK OR ALRIGHT DUCK?


Mark Meredith has today stated that he intends to stick around until next May and will be anything but a lame duck! What will worry many of the cities population is that he intends to push some of the policies that I think were his un-doing, like the very controversial BSF programme.
I have said many times on this blog that we connected with Longton High School accept that it has to close based on the projected pupil numbers in the coming years. But what of the other schools facing closure? What will the campaigners of Trentham, Berryhill & Mitchell High Schools expect the prospective candidates for Council Leader to do now?
Unlike many of the TAG and other pressure groups from the vulnerable schools, I have no personal issue with the outgoing Elected Mayor, and at the risk of being a tad controversial (unlike me!) I think that Mark Meredith came in for some nasty personal attacks and comments from some factions.
Do I think the Mayor's/SERCO's plans are wrong? You bet your life I do!
I think that because it got so personal between some of the TAG and Mark Meredith, it came down to some kind of "Mexican stand off" and yet the solution to the schools fiasco is just a couple of small changes in the proposal.
I have said that to make the whole process work, what we need is to be prepared to make Two small but potentially unpopular decisions. One is to close Edensor High and not select it to be a predecessor school, and to move the location of the proposed Parkhall Academy.
So if the BSF proposals were altered to include a) a refurbishment for Trentham High School. b) A new Academy on the Blurton High site for the catchment areas for Blurton & Edensor. c) Edensor High to close ( their site is unsuitable for a new building) d) A new academy to be built on the Mitchell High site for the catchment areas of Mitchell, Berryhill & Longton areas.
Now the question is, will any of the likely candidates for Council Leader, pick up on the need to make these relatively small changes that would attract huge support from the parents and teaching staff of the closure faced schools.
Mark Meredith is hell bent on seeing the BSF process through. He knows better than anyone that this policy was the most unpopular of his time in office.
In the next few weeks the Mayor will try and prove through actions, that he is not a "lame duck", the different groups on the council should make sure that the schools issue is the first policy to be reversed, and it has to be a real priority for any wouldbe Leader, to seek urgent talks and consultation with the campaigners and interested parties.
The electorate in this city will, now the decision has been made to ditch the Mayoral system, expect the main players in the council to come out and state their intentions for both their parties, and to inform us of their policies, because we are the stake holders! Nothing less will be acceptable.
Parents and Pupils, the young and the old, have felt for to long that their opinions have not been listened to.
The time as come for the prospective leaders to engage with the city and prove to us that we did make the right decision and that there will be a positive change, what better place to start than with the School reorganisation?
Read The Sentinel article about the mayor by clicking here

(UN) ELECTED MAYOR HITS OUT AT STOKE!

Mark Meredith (lame duck) sensationally hit out today at those he considered responsible for his downfall.
In a remarkable interview given to 'pitsnpots', he says it exactly how it is and pulls no punches!
WARNING! Younger viewers, may find this interview highly amusing !
http://

Friday 24 October 2008

QUACK QUACK, WHO'S THERE?

LAME DUCK MAYOR TOLD TO GO!

THE PEOPLE OF STOKE-ON-TRENT HAVE SPOKEN!

The charges made against you by the PEOPLE OF STOKE are:

That you were and remain an imposed agent of the West Midlands Labour Party.

That against all experienced advice, you by-passed the local Labour Party.

That you used the NEC of the Labour Party to GAG local members!

That you used ignorant power to turn against all parents using SERCO!

That you used further ignorance to turn against old people.

That you did not leave the Labour Party and felt no SHAME!

That your fellow Labour Party members/candidates took the rap for your idiocy.

That we remain a one star authority!

That you chose to rule by stealth of coalition, partonage and with a payroll vote.


That YOU and YOU alone are responsible for the rise of the BNP in this City!
VERDICT:

GUILTY AS CHARGED!

THE SCHOOLS POLICY MUST BE HALTED AND SCRAPPED!

AND YOU MUST GO AND GO NOW FOR THE SAKE OF THE ELDERLY, PARENTS, CHILDREN AND DECENT WORRIED CITIZENS!

Please close the door on your way out. The next train leaving Stoke to Birmingham is at 17:55pm, precisely.

The puppet rats of Longton that have fed from the poisoned hand of politics are now worried.
Be afraid, little ratties, be very afraid, for we are coming to get you and we're going to take you away. We have put out an APB on your whereabouts and there is nowher for you to hide, so give yourselves up and help Mark onto the train and then help yourselves on it also.
Go on, do the decent thing and go back to those who sent you. Leave Stoke-on-Trent to decide what to do with itself, good or bad, succeed or fail. We don't want you, we never needed you, we never asked for you. Go away! Rentokil are on their way.

LEADER & CABINET WIN THE REFERENDUM!

As Tony is unavailable at the moment, you've got my blog on the results of the Mayoral Referendum.

Well, the YES camp won, and some! Click here for the Sentinel article which broke the news.

Mike Barnes is over the moon, and has said "“The result today I think is a victory for democracy. Democracy is back in Stoke-on-Trent.” Let's hope he's right.

What we now must wait to see is who the front runners are for the Leader's job. I am sure there will be scurryings in the Council Chambers, deals being done on who will vote for whom, etc.

As citizens of Stoke on Trent, we must now ensure that are Councillors become ACCOUNTABLE and do what we want them to do, rather than push through some Government agenda (as our friend Mayor Meredith did).

Paul Breeze, for the NO camp is quoted: “I’m deeply disappointed. We’re going back to a system that led our city into decline.” Well, it's up to those 60 councillors (including the Council Leader), the council's (highly) paid officials, and the good people of this city to ensure it doesn't go into decline.

It's time we all started working together for the good of the city, not any one political party.

What worries me is Meredith's comment that he's now going to push through what he's started. Things like BSF etc. Well, he's done enough damage already, so I think it's time it was called to a halt. And the councillors who will be left to run this city after May 2009 should do exactly that.

There are lots of comments flying around, people saying they will leave the city etc. Are these the people that have actually bothered to vote? With a very low turnout of just over 19%, it seems people are apathetic about what happens in this city. But they will probably be the first ones to start moaning (and probably already have).

What do you all think about it? Sorry my posts aren't as exciting as Tony's, but you are stuck with me (and hopefully some additional satire from The Oracle), for the next few days.....

Thursday 23 October 2008

BNP COUNCIL LEADER, ALBY, SPEAKS HERE, LIVE!


Your intrepid reporter brings you the very first LIVE interview by the man chosen by God and the people of Stoke-on-Trent to save us!

The SENTINEL predicted his overwhelming victory in the polls but your favourite newsman around here has beaten them to the first exclusive interview by our new hero
(eat your heart out Ian Robinson)!

Alby had every intention of speaking on globalisation and its effects on our City, the massive increases in food prices, energy prices and the credit crunch. His first public engagement was to lecture on the benefits of mass immigration but unfortunately...............he forgot to take his medicine!

Take a look...

BREAKING NEWS: LOW TURN OUT FOR MAYORAL BALLOT!


I have just come off the phone to some inside sources and there are indications that this ballot will have an incredibly low turn out.
It appears that the percentage turn out will struggle to hit 20% and one polling station locally to me reporting a turn out of just 10% up until 5.30pm!


There has been some last minute campaigning by both the YES & NO campaigns and with such a low turn out many people, including some of the councillors I have spoken to today, say the result is just too close to call.

We here at pitsnpots were delighted with the comments posted yesterday and we have been told that many councillors, the odd MP and even the Mayor himself are dropping in regularly to read the posts and comments.

Some of the councillors I have spoken to today said the article in last nights Sentinel had an effect on some people. The article prompted this response from Potteries Alliance Councillor Peter Kent Baguley:

The local daily paper's headline today reads:
REVEALED: If you decide to vote "YES" in the mayoral referendum tomorrow, the BNP could soon be leading YOUR council.

Illustrating the story right across the page is a picture of some of the BNP councillors with the BNP national leader, Nick Griffin. The story claims: "In an anonymous survey, The Sentinel asked every member who they would choose as council leader." Anonymous? Strange use of the word since the supposedly anonymous survey was a topic of conversation amongst most if not all councillors! And, though it may not have crossed the collective mind of those running The Sentinel's extremely biased, pro NO referendum campaign, The Sentinel was the last source to which the majority of councillors would confide their real thoughts on the issue of leader! So, given the councillors' reticence, not surprisingly the BNP leader emerges the front runner with a tally of 8 supporters, presumably all of his BNP colleagues.
The Sentinel well knows that there is not the slightest possibility of the 51 other councillors ever voting for a BNP councillor to be the leader of the council.
The Sentinel also well knows that if the referendum produces a majority of NO votes, there is every possibility that a BNP candidate would be elected in next May's elected mayor election.
The Sentinel's sly and shameful scam has turned reality on its head.
The stench of having sunk to the sewer of stitching up stories so shamefully will pervade the paper for a very long time.
Were it merely an in-house magazine, it may have been a bit of a laugh, to be followed by something equally gutter press-ish from the opposing camp. But it isn't an in-house magazine or student rag but claims to be a serious daily newspaper. This kind of squalid journalism has done nothing to enhance the reputation of the paper. Like so many of the business people who make their money in Stoke-on-Trent, the editor lives well away from our city. Perhaps he could make that a permanent arrangement and perhaps the owners could consider installing an editor charged with upholding the highest standards of journalism and to try to rebuild confidence with the people of the city. After all, fewer than half of the households across the City see The Sentinel and that proportion continues to decline.
Unfortunately, its squalid, sordid, sniping at the YES campaign which advocate the quite sensible system of the councillors electing the leader of the council has unsettled some elderly readers. I know, because my telephone has been busy this evening. The supporters of the mayor system never mention that the prime minister is not elected by all of the electorate! Of course, business people are lining up in support of the elected mayor under the guise of strong leadership! More wishful thinking than so-called hard-headed business sense, since the past two elected mayors during the last six years have not demonstrated leadership, strong or otherwise!
Neither have had the remotest influence on the ever changing bureaucratic structure of the council and have singularly failed to enhance decision making processes, failed to enhance transparency of decision making and failed to be honest about most of the controversial issues such as the high schools' re-organisation, closure of elderly people's homes, withdrawal of council-run pre-school nursery provision, the sale of the council's stake in the Britainnia football stadium, privatisation fronted by a so-called strategic partnership, and much more, all compounded by endless spin, recycled stories and more spin.

It is time that The Sentinel acted like a proper, mature newspaper, and thought more about its responsibilities to democracy and less about its rights for making profits through cheap journalism.

These are the words of Peter Kent Baguley, this is his opinion.

We the pitsnpots bloggers have had great support from the Sentinel which we really appreciate, but we remain true to the ideal of presenting a balanced view point. Hence the posting of Peter's point of view.

So over to you, what do you think of Peter's rant about the Sentinel article? Do you agree with him, What do you think of the predicted low turn out? and finally who will win the YES or the NO campaign?.................

8.15PM UPDATE:

Just had one of the main players from the "YES" campaign on the phone and they are very confident in the outcome of the Ballot. Turn out is well up in some area's so the expected percentage is thought to be well over 20%. The "YES" campaign think they have pulled it off!

As yet no news from the "NO" campaign, I will let you know if Paul or any of his campaign team get in touch by either phone or email.

BRIDGE OVER THE - "ROAD INTO LONGTON"

Everyone who follows our blog will know by now that until recently I was an active member of the Labour Party. I resigned from the party because I was not happy with the direction that the Labour Elected Mayor was taking our city and also that no one from within the party would go public and distance the party from the actions of what I feel was a Mayor working on a West Midlands Labour Party agenda rather than a Stoke Labour Party agenda.
Regulars will also be aware of my total support for the three Longton North Councillors Mark Davis, Tom Reynolds & Denver Tolley. These guys work as hard as any councillor I've seen, in their ward.
They have worked on anti social behaviour and to improve facilities in the Longton North area. They attend countless meetings to try and get the best for their electorate.
These guy's know that Longton Town Centre isn't the most attractive and they have been instrumental in the work done to get Longton a much needed face lift.
Key to this is the railway bridge over the King Street entrance/exit to the town.
It's fair to say it is in dire need to refurbishment and there is an old saying about "painting the Servern Bridge" well let me tell you, the Severn Bridge could have been repainted a bloody million times since the last coat of paint went on Longton Railway Bridge.
The three councillors have started a campaign and a petition, to get this bridge repainted and I for one will be signing it! Have a look at this video, whilst I accept that these two aren't the best looking of men, nor are they natural TV presenters for that matter! They send a very clear message and one that deserves support..........

SAM'S BACK! - FOCAL FOR LOCAL!

Now me and Sam Plank go back years to when
Robateux's was the place to be seen and Sam was the number 1 nightclub DJ and I was....... somewhere near the bottom of the pile! Sam went onto BBC Radio Stoke and then onto Signal2 and i drifted off into obscurity and a bit of Sports Commentary and a wee bit of News.
Sam's programme was axed by Signal and a huge public outcry happened, why, simply because Sam and his wife Verity are ours as sure as Wedgewood, Doulton's and Oatcakes!
Sam has recently fought a fight bigger than keeping a radio show on air, he has successfully battled cancer and the great news is that he is back looking good and sounding great!
Focal Radio which can be found on DAB and the Internet will commence broadcasting on 5th November and it will hit the airwaves with a bang!
Focal will be what Sam & Verity have always been LOCAL. Great music, from great presenters, news and sport with a good smattering of the "Plank" thrown in.You never know you may here me occasionally as well!
What I want you our followers to do is tell everyone you know that Sam's Back and where you can find him!
Focal is the only Radio Station we will work with and that's because they want what we want, the local voice to be heard!
Click here to visit the Focal Radio Website, that's right do it now!

Wednesday 22 October 2008

YOU CAN'T KEEP A "GOOD" MAN DOWN - OR OFF A PLANE!

It would seem that you can not keep the Darling of the Trentham area Roger Ibbs (pictured) out of the news! Yesterday Councillor Peter Kent Baguley told the followers of pitsnpots that it was Mr Ibbs who signed off on the deal to sell the council's 36% share in the Brittania Stadium to Stoke City FC for £4.5million and allowed them to repay over 3 years INTEREST FREE! Now it seems he is in the news again!
BNP Leader Alby Walker has hit out after Mr Ibbs was sent to Zagreb for a 5 day health conference in place of Jean Bowers who is the portfolio holder for health.
Mrs Bowers was unable to go to Croatia for family reasons and asked Mr Ibbs (portfolio holder for children's services) to go in her place. This outraged Alby Walker who felt that as Chairman of the council's Health Overview & Scrutiny Committee he should have gone instead of Mr Ibbs! He also was not happy that he was only told about the trip on Monday of this week.
Mr Walker said
"Councillor Bowers pulled out and asked Councillor Ibbs to go.

"But when Jean Bowers pulled out of a presentation three weeks ago, I was called at the last minute to stand in for her.

"So, when there's a job to be done, I'm asked to help, but when it's a nice trip somewhere, I'm not.

"Why Roger Ibbs was asked to go, I do not know.

"As councillors, we find most of our information out from reading The Sentinel and that is appalling."

Mrs Bowers defended her decision to send Mr Ibbs by saying that it "Was by no means political" and that she had "asked the council officers to draw up a protocol should a similar situation arise in the future"

This to me highlights how undemocratic the mayoral system is. It seems only right that Alby Walker should have gone to this conference in his capacity but because he is not a part of the EMB he was totally overlooked.

This backs up my case that it is pointless having 60 elected representatives on our council when anything of any importance is decided between the Elected Mayor and his band of Merrymen/woman!

Read the Sentinel article by clicking here

THE MASTER RACE TO RULE STOKE!

IT SEEMS THAT OUR CITY'S FATHERS WANT TO SCARE US INTO BELIEVING THAT WE ARE TO HAVE A CITY FATHERLAND!

The Mayoral rat pack want us to believe the notion that Oberlieutenant, Alby Walker (see http://www.redwatch.org/index2.html will become the only Councillor they will collectively trust!

Vote NO and keep the Mayor , they say as they appeal to our conciences, as this will stop the Nazis! (a desperate Meredith, I may add).

Vote YES and the Master Race goose-steps into the Town Hall and starts on the mass deportation of Jews, immigrants,trade unionists, vicars etc.....

The truth is that our Elected Mayor, if he wins the referendum, will INVITE the BNP onto the EMB in MAY 2009. It's a given that he tried it earlier but increased power on Friday will see all opponents, crushed.

So let's not have any of this scare story nonsense and face facts.

1. This Mayor is in a corner, put there by himself.

2. His small deluded bunch of supporters will sell this City out to the BNP as they cling to power.

3. This City will then deserve its tag of 'Sick City' (Premier League, one star status).

The electorate of the City should have none of this and DEMAND that our Councillors grow up and do the DECENT thing and be the conscience of the people for this City that elected them.

It blows a wide hole into the notion of 'coalition politics' in Stoke and also asks a question of each and every one of our 60 (a few exceptions, granted) 'political' Councillors, of which the answer is: GO AWAY!

The likes of Mo Chaudry love this sort of stuff and so does Peter Coates. You bet your life they want to keep a Meredith, or any other West Midlands puppet, in a position of power! (Flello, Davis, Reynolds, Meredith etc..) Dimensions and Britannia Stadium is just the beginning.

VOTE YES! KICK THIS MAYOR OUT!

In one go, we will remove a Dictator that has assembled a 'payroll' group of YES men and women who have ignored the entire City on subjects that we should have all agreed on.

Step two, will see the Puppet Masters in the West Midlands, admit to their failure in securing Stoke-on-Trent as a satellite City of Birmingham..

They Will feel dejected, as we reject them, as we have always rejected their ambition for our City.


This is OUR City now clear off. Take your Mayor with you and just send us a fair share of our tax and let us decide how it should be spent!

Update: 'Sources' inform me that Mo (short for, monopoly in splash pools) is ripping his hair out at this blog! The Oracle: 'feels your pain, Mo'.
Update 2:'Sources' within the Town Hall tell me that our Mayor is 'spitting feathers and is hopping mad' at this blog! The Oracle 'feels the pain of both 'monopoly Mo' and our Dear Leader'.
Update 3: Mr. Flello's, little puppet rat, Tom Reynolds, is busy pushing NO leaflets around the Meir area in his futile quest to save his beloved Mayor! Has anyone seen Mark 'Roland' Davis doing similar? I think we should be told!

Sentinel letters on election eve.

There are a lot of letters in the Sentinel today about the referendum tomorrow.

Mark Breeze, from Hanley

http://www.thisisstaffordshire.co.uk/letters/People-vote-yes-democracy/article-417207-detail/article.html

makes the obvious point. He wants a NO vote just so the people get to elect any mayor and do not have to be led by a councillor. But he thinks a mayor will mean no closed door deals and no murky alliances! Just what planet is he living on at present then?

Mo Chaudry, from Waterworld

http://www.thisisstaffordshire.co.uk/letters/progress-stop-going-old-days/article-417204-detail/article.html

wants a NO vote because he thinks a mayor is better for regeneration. He thinks with a leader system there would be more fighting, scheming and power playing. But we’ve got the scheming and power playing now, it’s just it’s all in the hands of one mayor. There might be more fighting under the leader system, but bring it on, get the debate going. It’s far better than the labour/tory/libdem twits alliance just blindly voting according to whether the mayor gives them the thumbs up or thumbs down.

Councillor Pervez, Burslem South ward

http://www.thisisstaffordshire.co.uk/letters/Dire-warnings-Stoke-Trent-referendum/article-417188-detail/article.html

wants a NO vote because he thinks it will give investors more confidence in Stoke-on-Trent. He points out that the governance commission’s report highlighted a need to re-engage with communities. But this report was written under mayor system, so it shows how badly it is working. You just need to look at the schools reorganisation issue to see that. If power were given to communities it would be sorted out in no time, but with a mayor, admittedly this mayor, it is a complete shambles that communities do not want.

Now my letter

http://www.thisisstaffordshire.co.uk/letters/Mayor-privatisation/article-417198-detail/article.html

addresses a different angle, picking up on the point made by Councillor Barnes in our PASSION ON THE POLITICS SHOW blog, that SERCO is a corporate partner to the New Local Government Network, which campaigns to have more elected mayors and for more services to be privatised. It makes me think this could explain why SERCO is forcing academy schools, controlled by private sponsors, on the people of the city and why Mayor Meredith continues to insist that academies are the way forward despite all the evidence to the contrary. I suggest that to vote YES for leader system may mean that we could seize back control of our schools for the benefit of communities.

Now just by the way, there is a great letter by T. Latham, from Trentham

http://www.thisisstaffordshire.co.uk/letters/distraction-Trentham-council/article-417196-detail/article.html

who, like so many of us, was outraged by Ged Rowney’s comments

http://www.thisisstaffordshire.co.uk/news/LL/article-409807-detail/article.html?cacheBust=Ppx7wdtHOQfc&authid=c7TChL3iOxFfTYHoLPrzz551KsYYWPRhvOiLKOGhV7jBa3O7VN1224334209605#community

against the people of Trentham and their forward thinking vision for their school and their community.

There were a couple of good letters yesterday.

Mr Chadwick, from Trentham

http://www.thisisstaffordshire.co.uk/letters/good-candidates-mayor/article-413563-detail/article.html

admitted to changing his mind from a NO vote to a YES vote after giving it some thought. It shows to me that the YES vote is the thinking persons vote! Mr Chadwick thinks there are some councillors who will listen properly to the people of the city and has less faith that a mayor would.

D Brown, from Stoke-on-Trent

http://www.thisisstaffordshire.co.uk/letters/Voting-mayor-year-gamble/article-413565-detail/article.html

wants a YES vote because we get to elect councillors every year and they are in the best position to choose a leader. The point is made that with a mayor we take a 4 year gamble.

I have presented these letters in a biased way because I want a YES vote. But now it’s over to you, you can say whatever you like – so go ahead!