Cllr. Gavin Ayling

Adur’s results are in

The bottom line is that the Conservatives retained all their seats and with the postal votes counted it’s a reasonable turn-out and satisfying majorities in every ward.

Congratulations to the successful candidates and thanks to the electorate for not subjecting us to nuisance politics.

The numbers in Worthing are similarly reassuring with the Conservatives picking up one seat and the Lib Dems retaining their tally.

Obviously I’m delighted about the results so far for the Conservatives but we’re yet to see how Adur’s results come in — I’m not counting too many chickens.

That said, I’m sure that Debbie Kennard has won Buckingham Ward in Shoreham. Based on our canvas data, though, there was an interesting stat I’d like to share.

Unfortunately Debbie wasn’t able to canvas the whole area due to a combination of factors including getting less help from people like me! Apologies Deb if you’re reading this.

But of the two-thirds of homes that were canvassed, over 20% turn-out was experienced, while the third that was not canvassed only showed a 10% turn-out. And our canvas records show that the turn-out was slightly higher among Conservative pledged voters who were canvassed than ‘Againsts’.

So this is a lesson to us all. Canvassing definitely helps increase turn-out!

The BBC and ITV have been accused of attempting to stymie political debate. They objected to part of the content of this video by the Christian Choice Mayoral candidate about a mosque in London:

Now, watch the first half of that video (and don’t get suckered in — religion and politics are separate things and I cannot condone the Christian parties that are united behind this candidate) and tell me whether you see anything offensive. I don’t.

Now, back on message:

Vote Boris in London
Vote Kennard in Buckingham Ward
Vote Conservative in Adur

I’ve written before about Mrs Alibhai Brown (search above), but she’s at it again and deserves to be taken down a few more pegs.

A colleague disagreed with me about the tone of Yasmin’s piece. What follows are some extracts from my responses:

The colour of someone’s skin has absolutely nothing to do with their attitude to anything, any more than people with size nine feet all think the same or act the same, or make the same decisions.

There are stereotypes, of course, which is why one of my friends calls himself a ‘coconut’ and their half-Philipino friend once called himself a ‘banana’, but the same may be true of people with big noses. They’re likely to have a chip on their shoulder, no?

Yasmin has every right to say what she thinks, but that doesn’t change whether she’s wrong or not. And she is wrong: morally and when it comes down to whether something is true or not.

Race becomes an issue because people place so much emphasis on it — aside from some facial features its even more meaningless than skin colour. Compare, for example, Colin Powell’s skin hue with that of George Bush and Condoleeza Rice. Colin Powell is actually as pale as George Bush. Now lets suppose skin colour was somehow relevant to someone’s attitude or political outlook, how should Colin Powell behave? White or black?

And while she’s making these sweeping generalisations, are black people more left-wing or more right-wing? Is strong family a policy of the right or the left? I would say right, but how much stronger is the family unit in Italian, Hindu and Muslim families, those supposed Boris-haters? Is positive discrimination a sop to their guilt-ridden white population or is it a genuine attempt to help those people who are not given as many chances because of racism in the white-dominated management structures? I’ve yet to meet someone who has thought carefully about the situation who would benefit from positive discrimination (a non-white in other words) who supports it. But positive discrimination is a policy of the left (and Ken) and not of Mr Johnson. And what about homophobia? Mr Livingstone (and other left-wing extremists) welcome Islamic preachers who spout homophobic diatribe, while the right (and Boris) condemn them. Yasmin would claim this is a race issue, but I would argue that it is just bad manners: if you invite and welcome someone with openly hateful views without publicly criticising those views, you are implying support for them. It is not racist to condemn preachers of hate (and no-one outside the BNP to my knowledge has condemned Islamic preachers without referring to those among them who preach hate) but it is homophobic to embrace them.

So back to my point, is it left-wing or right-wing to be non-white? Is it reasonable to suggest that a particular colour would vote for Boris? And is it acceptable to label people that you are criticising by their skin colour?

So, I’ve neglected you since March 16th? How time flies.

So here’s an extraordinarily brief bit on each of the things I’ve missed:

On May 1st there are local elections here in Adur. If you’re in Buckingham Ward, vote for Debbie Kennard. If you’re elsewhere in Adur or if you’re in Worthing, vote Conservative. And if you’re in another District, Borough, Unitary, Parish, County etc. then check out your local candidate and assuming they’re not insane (hey, I don’t know that their selection processes are perfect) vote for the Conservative one.

Ken Livingstone has five children… Who cares? And even if you do care, don’t read his responses because they’re far too clever. No, instead, ignore the story and vote Johnson anyway.

Car trouble has forced me to use public transport. Sort out the prices will you (whoever you may be) please?

A trip to London, and a savvy companion caused me to invest in an Oyster card. Say what you like about civil liberties (only applicable if they become compulsory in my humble opinion), but they’re fantastic. They just need to work on the rest of the public transport infrastructure and you may find people giving up on their cars (not likely given the infrequency of services to and from some locations).

Embyro Bill

Discussions about the so-called embryo bill set some dangerous precedents. Religions have no reason so claim the right to direct people’s ethics and MPs voting on religious grounds scares the bejesus out of me. If I don’t agree with the Catholic Church’s take on ethics (you know, the one where condoms are evil even if they protect African women from their promiscuous husband’s HIV) I am presumably forced to vote along religious lines. In some future where Islamic votes reach a critical point, will people start to find that Islam in the UK is politicised? Is this not the very thing we are fighting in Afghanistan and which Turkey’s constitution protects against?

MPs who wish to violate the whip because of religious reasons should be sacked from their party before the vote’s even taken place. Religious zealots who would put the country on the path to politicised religion in the House of Commons should not be welcome in mainstream parties.

That said, the gradual emergence of primaries in British politics may be the thing we look back upon as the reaon Britain didn’t fall into the politicised religion trap.

Apologies to you if you couldn’t get here recently. If you’d like to help me out, check out the adverts!

For the first time every member of the party is being given an opportunity to vote on the rankings of Tory MEPs and candidates. This is fantastic news as it counters my comments in this post.

While it is a secret ballot I am keen that everyone knows which MEPs are Eurosceptics and which are Europhiles. Then people reading this can vote along those lines without having to go to the same effort as me!

So here’s how I’m voting:
1. Daniel Hannan MEP
2. Nirj Deva MEP
3. Richard Ashworth MEP
4. (Because you are required to rank all candidates) James Elles MEP

You may remember that Mr Elles is a pro-EU Tory who supported the Lisbon Treaty and who wishes to remain in the EPP-ED.

And in Ballot 2:
1. Richard Robinson
2. Nina Kaariniemi
3. Sarah Richardson
4. Tony Devenish
5. Therese Coffey
6. Marc Brunel-Walker

Please bear in mind that my decisions regarding Ballot 2 were largely as a result of answers on Conservative Home’s Goldlist site

What a wonderfully varied week this past one has been when it comes to local politics.

On Monday I attended a party committee which concerns itself with the organisation at a very local level of the party machine. The people who do all the work to support the three of us at that meeting who are elected by the general public (two District Councillors – Debbie Kennard and myself – and the County Councillor – Clive Williams).

Tuesday was a Council committee meeting of the Housing and Central Services committee. And an entirely frustrating rubber-stamping exercise it was. All of the decisions we had to make were no-brainers: Increase Council home rents because the government’s slapping us with a negative subsidy or (you’ll love this) burn our reserves and increase them by even more next year? I think you’ll agree there’s no choice.

And the same was true of all the other agenda items – we had a choice but it was a non-choice.

But the variance came into play tonight with two of Adur District’s and Worthing Borough’s joint committees meeting one after the other. At these meetings we discussed the budget for the shared services (the refuse and recycling collection service and the joint management structure) as well as a report on coastal erosion.

The first item was great news. The Councils have saved, already, £67,000 through being able to buy fewer vehicles because of shared efficiency and we effectively did not have to pay for the new bins because of savings due to economies of scale in the procurement process as well. We have also saved £32,000 in the nine months to the end of the financial year that the service has been running just because of the increased quantities of recycling that are now being collected!

But I cannot be all positive. There was something much more important that came out of this evening’s meetings. The first meeting was of the Joint Overview and Scrutiny Committee and the Worthing Liberal Democrat members did not have a single negative comment to make about the services or the savings. They did, momentarily, suggest that Worthing’s Council tax payers are being subsidised by Adur (which isn’t true), but they could not see anything wrong with the savings etc. being made.

It didn’t stop them making a fuss though. And when it came to voting on the recommendation before them, they decided to abstain even though they did not disagree with the recommendation and, as I say, could not find anything negative to say at all.

As a result of this experience I want to make a plea to the residents of Adur and Worthing who may be reading this: Please don’t vote Lib Dem in May – if they win seats the members elected will just be a nuisance and if they win one of the Councils they won’t do a better job because they cannot see anything being done that they would do differently!

Vote Conservative at the local elections in May 2008 and ensure that your Councils continue to run smoothly and efficiently despite the government’s obsession with attempting to run the country’s Councils remotely.

I watched Michael Moore’s Sicko the other day. It’s a fantastic film; not completely free of Moore’s inevitable bias, but there’s so much less bending of the truth this time because, ultimately, there’s little controversy in what he is saying.

But loads of people have seen this film — what can I possibly add that will be interesting?

Well, I just had a cup of tea from my office’s coffee shop and, on the side of the paper cup, there is a ‘Rainforest Alliance’ logo. This logo “guarantees that the farms meet demanding, SOCIAL, ENVIRONMENTAL AND SUSTAINABLE standards” (capitalisation as in original). It continues “workers are… given access to education and medical care…”

So the Rainforest Alliance requirements are more demanding than the social conscience of the world’s richest and, apparently, good country?

Quel surprise.

The NHS isn’t perfect, but it’s infinitely more humane than the US system. Infinitely. And any reform of the NHS must maintain that fundamental requirement that is fairness (and especially free at the point of use).