Now that the beer-à-rear's finally cleared up after Tuesday night's garglethon, I suppose I ought to be making my mind up (as Thanet's newest celeb would say) about who to vote for in today's electoral bunfight.As you know, we're blessed with three elections in one day here in the Millionaires' Playground - Euro, county and for the first time ever, teeny-tiny town council. Now, any unfortunate who has studied this outpouring of unadulterated drivel since its inception way back in 2006 will know that I'm naturally of a Libdem bent. But there's no Libdem action in these parts to speak of, and I'd rather stick pins in my willy than vote Conservative. Which is why my ballot paper will be green all the way. That is - caff-crushing, car-crushing Councillor David Green (Lab) for the teeny-tiny council; Mrs caff-crushing, car-crushing Councillor Elizabeth Green (Lab) for the county council; and the lovely Caroline Lucas (Green) for the Euro nonsense.
Why? Well all three seem prepared to stick up for the rights of individuals over international conglomerates like Infratil who want to fly knackered old 747s over my head all night every night, that's why. Yes, I know there are other candidates who have similar views, but frankly they are jokes. At the local level, both Lord and Lady Green have been councillors in these parts for yonks. And in my opinion they do a pretty good job. Yes, I know they belong to a party whose leader is about as much use as a chocolate teapot and whose cabinet appears to be even shakier than the one my Aunt Mavis bought from the late, lamented MFI last year. But local is what counts in these elections, and they're the best people for the job in my humble opinion.
This may seem rather disloyal to the man responsible for gaining us a town council in the first place, Ramsgate First's One and Only Gerry O'Donnell, who is also standing in the East Cliff ward for both county and town councils. And it's true, he's a nice enough fellow, and his teeny-tiny ice cream kiosk is a real asset to the area. His heart is definitely in the right place - Ramsgate - but on a broader political front he has some rather, er, quaint ideas which don't chime in with my showbiz liberal streak. He really does appear to have dropped an enormous political bollock by telling SmegHead Steve Higgins that he has no right to complain about the airport because he hasn't lived here long enough. Not very inclusive of the DFLs (comme moi) who are the town's lifeblood there, eh Gerry?
Still, whoever you're voting for, the main thing is - make sure you vote!
38 comments:
Thanks Richard
From Walter
I am with you ECR on the MEP and County but as we have three votes for the teeny tiny council I will vote for Dave and Jerry the other ones can swivel.
I trust you'll put your second county vote for Alan Poole not least because he is against night flights and wants airport expansion on strictly controlled terms. I know he is very hard-working, knows the area like the proverbial back of hand etc.
The funniest thing round here is seeing farmers with UKIP banners in their fields. Surely they've been sucking off the public CAP tit for 30 years now? Have they finally had their fill?
I think Gerry is right Steve Higgins, who in his own mind seems to constitute a protest group appears to be driven by a hatred of air transport.
Gerry has a point one which I share, that being the airport has existed for 80 years and the reason he and you find so uncomfortable is that it happens to be true.
On the no Lib Dem action, why don't you join up and get involved and if you care to look at your ballot paper note Georgina Romaine Maddox and Richard Gilbert Harrison Perry two local candidates from er Sandwich standing for Lib Dems who will be more Liberal friendly than Elizabeth Green.
Also you have more than one vote for the county elections in Ramsgate (I would have typed that last bit in capitals since its important but I know how sensitive you are) also I think this applies the Ramsgate's Toytown
Thanks for the electoral info Tony. Having never had the pleasure of a three-for-the-price-of-one vote I'm finding it all a bit confusing!
As for the Libdems, I wouldn't trust anyone from Sandwich to have my interests at heart, frankly, even if they are of the LD persuasion.
Which brings me on to the night flights. If your (and Gerry's) rather faulty ex priori logic were to be followed to it's ultimate conclusion, I think you'd find that Ramsgate has existed for a whole lot longer than the airport, and that therefore it's the airport that should go.
You are in effect arguing that there's no point objecting to anything because it was here before the objector came along. If we followed that dictum, we'd still be living in the dark ages.
My suspicion is that your love of the airport is not born out of any sensible argument, merely a sad feeling of nostalgia for the good old RAF days, mingled with an unquestioning awe of climate-wrecking technology and the vain hope that one day you might be able to avoid the parking fees at Gatwick and hop on a flight to New York.
Certainly the fact that you don't live in Ramsgate, and therefore do not have to put up with the pollution and inconvenience, rather invalidates any views you might have on the subject in my view.
Anyway, have a nice vote!
Bring back the dark ages when every meal was organic and bloggers did not fall out over trifling matters of air transport.
You know that I would willing swap my Margate shack for your Palace on the cliff, where I could while away a pleasant afternoon watching endlessly for the occasional 747 cargo plane to glide by.
'Gliding', one assumes Tony, because it's so old and knackered that its engines have dropped off somewhere over the Channel!
I'm afraid Infratil blew any goodwill I might have felt towards them when they started their ten times an hour, all day long, illegal training flights a couple of years ago. They are not good neighbours. If they were, I might feel differently.
All indications so far today are of a reasonable turnout - maybe the weathe has helped
Something that may make you think again about the Green Party, but then again maybe not!:
http://timesonline.typepad.com/science/2009/06/political-science-be-careful-what-you-vote-for.html
I was always told to eat my greens when I was a nipper. The idea of voting for them seems rather odd.
If Caroline Lucas gets elected to the EU, will that make her a Brussels sprout?
tony, kcc were here before you, therefore any excellent ideas like, Kent tv, should not be complained about.
Richard two things put me off of voting green in the euro elections, one I am pretty sure they are for letting the north Wantsum sea defences go (this would take out the railway as it did in 1953 and the Thanet Way) the other is their opposition to nuclear power, without which global warming should make the planet uninhabitable in less than 100 years.
I couldn’t bring my self to vote for any of the three main parties because of the expenses issue and a vote for any of them seemed to be endorsing what they had done, so UKIP seemed the only alternative.
Anything that's not Anglo-Saxon Peter. Although they fielded their first Jewish candidate in 1973 so maybe they're not all bad.
BTW, good to see that flock of pigs coming in to land over Ramsgate earlier.
I quite agree ECR. I won't be voting for Gerry. He's a pompous *rse. No wonder he's ended up in a party of one. I've spoken to him in the past and he really isn't prepared to listen on t5he issue of the airport. On the other hand, both Green's have always given me a fair hearing and Caroline Lucas is very supportive. I will also be voting for Mr. Shonk because he's as honest as the day is long and calls a spade a spade.
I think you are being too generous saying Big Twat Margate's problem is the good old days of the RAF.
I think his problem like Gerry O'Donnells is DFLs and Blow ins daring to have an opinion about the future of the area. Yes come and buy property use local shops but do not dare to bring an opposing view. One of the areas biggest draw backs is the mediocrity of the local representation and the inbred stupidity of a lot of second and third generation Thanetians .
Nearly every Tony Flaig story starts with a preamble about his humble education blah, blah, yeah we know it shows in your quality of arguement .
The old "here first" bollocks does not hold water (just like the runway at Manston). You cannot get more people to buy in Ramsgate with a load of jumbos grinding overhead.
Anywhere else in the country the local council would be opposing the airport on grounds of public safety and that it will never provide enough jobs to offset its disadvantages.
Tony Flaig will probably say good no more irritating newcomers pushing house prices, But is his type of chippy locals that keep Thanet in the mire.
It is the pushy middle classes who get things done and improve a local economy , not the local ingrates like Tony Flaig .
1:46 reasonable turnout? I voted around 9pm and well less than a third of the page showed any markings against the list of residents listed there. Mind you, this is Westgate and politics is rather vulgar and beneath us.
central harbour, the ballot box was full. A good turnout by all accounts
The argument is a relatively simple one!
Manston has existed for the last 80 years and has 'co-existed' quite succefully, over that period with the towns of Thanet. It is rather quieter today, thanks to advances in engine technology.
Manston represents one of the few areas of potential economic growth for an island starved of opportunity and jobs. Losing it would remove any advantage Thanet has to offer the wider country beyond seasonal tourism and agriculture etc.
If we lose Manston then you can predict with some certainty that central Government will see the space it presently occupies as the foundation for a 'New' town in Thanet to meet its social housing targets for the South East.
I for one, and many others, I suspect would rather see a working airport than run the risk of seeing the island become a convenient focal point to meet the growing social housing problems of hard-pressed inner London councils.
Dr M. Like the social housing outcasts from inner London currently filling every possible space in Margate?
Your scare mongering about a new town sounds similar to the utter tosh spouted way back when the RAF were leaving. "10,000 jobs" I think was the war cry, plus all the nonsense about londons inner cities decamping to a huge housing estate at Manston.
If TDC were so concerned about attracting the wrong kind of people down here into "social housing", you'd think there would be a ban on planning permission to build the endless one bedroom flats in Cliftonville, Ramsgate.
If you think Manston represents potential economic growth, I'd be interested what indicators you are seeing that suggest this.
I remember when RC meant Ramsgate Council rather than Roman Catholic (does the Pope shit in the woods) that was probably when you were at Thanet Tech with Cyril Hosier and his brother learning how to be a lousy journalist who specialises in split infinitives, poor sentence structure and an ability to only deprecate rather than appreciate.
It is easy to destroy, not construct, but hey ho Richard, that's what happens when you are frustrated with a lack of accomplishment in life.
Can we look at the good side?
As an ex-Thanet Pot Hole Dodger, and as my cousin pointed out some weeks ago, much has changed on this sceptic isle, it's just a shame that movers and shakers are sceptic too.
Synominous or Margate?
"Still, whoever you're voting for, the main thing is - make sure you vote!"
Samuel Clemens once said that "If voting changed anything, they wouldn't allow us to do it"
Hmmm... Even though elipses' are terrible English...
Synonymous or Margate?
Peter
Sorry, I've not got your point.
TDC built Westwood. It seems TDC wouldn't want a housing estate at Manston.
Who are the "them" you identify as allowing Westwood?
So, Dr M, the airport is a masterplan for keeping the oiks out of Thanet, is it? How come various Tory administrations in the past welcomed them with open arms then?
And what would your Mrs T have to say about the Tories artificially preserving and subsidising a loss-making business which is well past its sell-by date for the purposes of social engineering?
I have a Plan B for Manston which will reinvigorate the place, preserve most of the paltry 85 jobs it currently sustains, and create a national and international attraction for the area, at very little cost. Would you like to hear it? Or are you stuck in an 'airport, airport, airport' loop like those knackered old jumbos that go round every 8 minutes?
@ anon, 4:30am.
ECR may slip the odd split infinitive in but at least we understand wtf he's talking about. You appear to be one of those types who can't 'lower' themselves in order to communicate effectively with the majority.
As for old Gerry's mantra about a 'responsible' airport, if he'd bothered attending the meeting a couple of weeks ago he'd be horrified to learn the current extent of irresponsible behavior Infratil and TDC are allowing by their negligent management practices. As it is, and just like his stance on education, he talks from a firm position of entrenched ignorance.
"DR" Moores comment smacks of huge self interest as he needs a local airport for his banner dragging business.
The simple fact (to paraphrase the "DR") is that is loosing money hand over fist, employs few people and if it was such an economic kingpin why could it not establish itself as a viable concern in a booming period for air traffic.
For the rest of us who do not have a plane parked up there it is a dangerous polluting eyesore.
For "Dr" Moores to spred his alarmist rubbish, no Airport and Thanet becomes South Central LA, is irresponsible nonsense. We have the airport have you driven through Cliftonville recently ? .
A businesses like Thanet Earth will employ 500 people and has little or adverse no impact on other residents , that is the business template to look at not a shagged out WW2 airport in the wrong place to be of use to anybody
You are quite right Peter, Dr Moores is a Maypole Airfield man.
Quite Right Peter, I have my aircraft based at Maypole and Rochester and as such have no interest to declare in Manston!
Fortunately, I don't need a mile or so of runway to takeoff and can't afford the landing fees anyway!
Manston is a large commercial operation. The job of a local council is to provide public services and support and encourage the local economy wherever possible. I would argue that the great majority of the population are quite happy with the presence of an airport on the island and that quite possibly less than a dozen people are expressing - quite forcefully - a minority opposition to its existence here an on the SMEG blog.
Just to be clear Dr Moores, I am not against the airport per se, I am against the training flights and night flights. I certainly know more than 'a dozen' people who object to those. And when you take the time to point out the appalling consequences these have for Ramsgate and Herne Bay, most people who knee-jerk support for the airport tend to back off and see the sense in banning them.
Of course, I wouldn't expect you or your administration to have a proper dialogue on the subject with the populations of those towns as your inflated talk of a successful airport and job creation, along with your threats of 'sink estates' should the airport go under, keeps people like you in power.
Elsewhere, councils of whatever political flavour tend to stick up for their residents who are affected. Why are you so hellbent on ignoring them? Where are the noise and pollution monitors? Where are the subsidised double glazing schemes?
In fact your arguments are so transparently idiotic and your administration so hamfistedly corrupt that it does make one wonder whether there is some hidden agenda. Does Sandy or one of his millionaire mates have shares in Infratil?
I am not one of the previous anonymous's.
But it is a good idea to have an identity to distinguish these anonymous comments Peter so I have given myself a name.
10:59
Does it really matter if someone's identity is known when considering an argument, Peter?
Surely the content of the point being made is the important thing and that 'who the person is' that makes that point, is purely incidental.
Your constant demands to have people identify themselves, presumably because you think it's brave and honourable to do as you do yourself (egocentric?), coupled with your declaration that you're a minor local 'celebrity' (though 'curiosity' or 'crank' would probably be more appropriate), leads me to ask the question...
Are you so egotistical that you believe it's not what a person says, but who they are, that's important?
Blogger is a useful tool for the communication of ideas and opinions, which I personally believe would be distracted from by putting an identity to. For instance, you could make a good, valid point that someone disagrees with. Rather than simply argue that point, you lend the opportunity for your antagonists to make personal attacks, such as "Please wear a shirt in your photo, as you're making me feel ill", which then detracts from your original point, doesn't it?
That happens to my alter-ego a fair bit, which is why it's there. It exposes personal attacks as the ridiculous things that they are, because, believe it or not, I'm neither a pig nor a dog, as my ability to type and articulate as a human should clearly demonstrate, and what the Hell has that got to do with anything, anyway?
Possible exceptions to this would be local politicians or business people, where it would be useful in deciding whether to either vote for them or become a customer, based on their viewpoint.
But you, like many people on blogger, are neither of those, are you!
Even being able to distinguish one anonymous blogger from another is pointless, unless you're going to give more credence to one, rather than another. Again, what has that got to do with the point being made or the question being asked?
I know you'd like to see us all naked, but demanding it is a bit rude, darling!
Unlike some others here, I try and express my opinion without resorting to personal insults or bad language. Descending to such a level only illustrates the paucity of an argument through attempting to shout more loudly than the other person.
We have an airport. The council supports the airport and through it, the potential economic opportunities that it may bring to an area of the country experiencing chronic recession.
Any changes to this policy of support for the airport under any administration, Labour or Conservative, given the prevailing economic climate would appear unlikely.
People are free to object and protest to the council and if there is a sufficient level of support for their views, then I'm sure these will be treated with the respect and attention they deserve.
But of course 'the respect and attention they deserve' could, in many cases, be interpreted as 'utter contempt'.
I agree with Lucy completely and raise the extra point that expressing an anti-airport/council view whilst revealing your identity , could lead to problems such as planning consent etc at a later date.
We know the council officials read the blogs and I would not put it past them to be as vindictive as possible, over say the request for a dormer window or a parking bay or help over any council service.
if we had a less frightened local press this blog would not be so lively it is great that people can express themselves given that the council and local media do not give that forum .
If you want to pollute the drinking water supply or tarmac over any remaining countryside but shout jobs then you can do what you want with this council.
I proudly remain anonymous have not left a previous blog on this thread and agree with Jean that there are many more people I know against the airport than for it.
As for Dr Moores ,"it is a large commercial operation " it is large that's the problem ,and it is not commercial as it is losing money on a grand scale. I challenge the Dr to have the courage of his convictions and do a postal ballot to every house in Thanet asking people what they feel about the airport and night flight extensions.
Just saying I feel everyone has no problem with the airport is not based on any factual content. He seems to be ridiculing anyone who is anti airport as a nut or crank, given its two most ardent supporters are Peter Checksfield and Tony (the poor mans Jeremy Clarkson) Flaig, I rest my case.
I live in Broadstairs so the noise does as yet not effect us, but when I go to Ramsgate the noise of the planes is awful , and its regeneration is finely balanced encourage the airport and you discourage people wanting to live in Ramsgate as they look for a house with a jumbo overhead .
The council cannot have it both ways and I suspect a vibrant economically successful Ramsgate will fill the council coffers quicker than a clapped out airport which will continue to lose money. It really is not that complicated just to put my talking down to you hat on for a moment, it works for the Doc so lets give it a go.
If the airport was a pressing local issue then your local councillors, as your democratically elected representatives would be remarking on it. However this is not, I gather, the case, as was remarked upon by several of my colleagues when the question of night flights last came up at a full council meeting.
From what I understand and on the broadest 'Thanet-wide' scale, the airport simply isn't an issue of significant concern to local people who have more pressing worries but is a source of lobbying by a minority of concerned residents here.
That may change and next time th elocal elections come around it coul dplay a part if sufficient numbers of people are really interested in the topic.
I think 5.25 was raising the point that at the moment Ramsgate is still predominantly renters and locals who are used to being given what is handed down to them by the local councils so apathy rules.
If the great urban renaissance is ever going to happen on the back of the much heralded rail link (doubtful now we know the commute time)then you will be dealing with a group who are used to campaigning and open government so the Dr is right it will be more of an issue.
Lumme! 'Campaigning' and 'open government'? In Thanet? That'll frighten the natives!
Post a Comment