Posts Tagged ‘Adur’
A Perfect Coalition
Posted by: Gav in Gavin Ayling's blog on May 12th, 2010
The coalition agreement on the Liberal Democrat website is a masterpiece.
For a Liberal Democrat, it delivers key, sensible and important policies including those on taxation, pensions, civil liberties, electoral reform (including an elected, proportional, House of Lords, fixed term parliaments and alternative vote and the West Lothian question) and, most amazingly, the environment (go Chris Huhne!)
For Conservatives, on the left of the party, it delivers policies that they may well have sympathised with and ensures that fairness is central to the way the country runs.
I cannot overstate how pleased I am with the agreement (which is a short and very readable document) and I am excited about how this will continue.
This is all national politics, however. Locally, I shall fight the ruling Adur Conservatives hard — we need to move on from this tired administration and improve the service that our excellent and loyal officers are asked to provide.
Statement to Council
Posted by: Gav in Gavin Ayling's blog on December 8th, 2009
The Liberal Democrat Party
I will post again soon with some radical proposals that I personally believe are long overdue and desperately necessary.
But on with what I said:
“When I requested an opportunity to make a statement to this meeting, my intention had just been to explain my reasons for leaving the Conservatives in favour of the Liberal Democrats. I will still do that, but afterwards, I would also like to address some specific accusations levelled at me.
“Over the last year or so I have been struggling with my conscience: At the next General Election could I go and ring on the doors of residents of Adur and Brighton & Hove and explain to them why they should vote Conservative?
“Since it became clear to the media that the next government would be Conservative, more and more honest policies have been released. So the Conservatives will set an arbitrary limit on the number of immigrants allowed into Britain. Regardless of the fact that immigration from outside the EU is very difficult in any case, there will now be a limit set by politicians for political rather than economic or cultural reasons. Now, presumably someone’s husband will be told he cannot come to the UK; or the next Director of a large UK company will be denied access because he is that one person over the limit.
“The Conservative Party has been at sixes and sevens over its policy on the European Union promising referenda on treaties that would be illegal under international law and then, when realising this, making no decision at all about what to do about the supposed problems with EU membership. To be clear I have, in the past, been critical of the EU because like most institutions, it is imperfect, but it is better to have a policy of positive engagement than no policy and be isolated by hostility.
“A Conservative government would remove Stamp Duty for first time buyers, but this tax slows movement in the housing market at all levels and it is extraordinarily non-progressive to tax one group just because you can. The Liberal Democrats have a coherent taxation policy that will favour those who most need lower taxes.
“For the last six months, the Conservatives have been publicly confused about their stance on the Financial Services Authority. The FSA currently plans to introduce tough qualifications to try to improve the skill-level of this country’s financial advisers. The current hoo-har over Structured Products backed by Lehmans and likely future crises are the fault of advisers who do not understand how these products work resulting in poor advice being given. A Financial Stability Committee with the FSA left alone to continue where it has expertise is the Liberal policy and the right one.
“Finally, the Conservative Party website describes its policy for National Security thus: “we must defend and make the argument for our shared liberal values” while it intends to continue the fight in Afghanistan where recent laws have stripped womens’ rights back to a Taliban-level of liberality. I quote from the charity Human Rights Watch “[The law] allows a rapist to avoid prosecution by paying ‘blood money’ to a girl who was injured when he raped her.” A new law also allows men to deny their wives food if they fail to obey sexual demands. If these are our shared liberal values…
“I could go on about national and international politics but I shouldn’t ignore the local arena. Our Council has argued for a long time that interference by Whitehall is the one major reason that we are unable to make real, significant and valuable changes to the way we run things. The Liberal Democrats have issued strong words in this respect at a national level.
“So I left the Conservative Party in my heart earlier this year. And then I found my natural home in the Liberal Democrats.
“I had hoped to work with the Conservative administration until May for the benefit of the people of Adur District and I believed, perhaps naively, that the Tory leadership was honest and, like me, here for the benefit of the residents. But it seems holding onto power is more important.
- “Rather than issue a press release that suggested that Cllr English had missed many meetings, when he had in fact missed one;
- “Rather than issue a press release that suggested I had been deselected when actually I had not sought reselection for the reasons I just gave,
“they could have spoken of their personal disappointment in the decision Cllr English and I had taken and reassured the public that they were a steady hand to run the Council.
“I made this decision on principles and I hope, despite this bad start, we can work together in a constructive and positive way in the future.”
Conservatives’ attempted smear
Posted by: Gav in Gavin Ayling's blog on December 4th, 2009
I was called by the Argus this afternoon unfortunately while I was at work in my day-job so sadly I was not able to speak to their reporter in time for it to be certain that my response will be included in a story that will be published shortly.
I am extremely disappointed that the Conservative leadership have decided to take this path as I had every expectation that we would be able to work together in the future for the betterment of Adur District in a friendly way. In fact, in my letter to the Leader of the Council I made it quite clear that my reasons for leaving were not in any way a reflection on the Conservatives as individuals. The following is an extract:
I have had my differences, since 2006 when I was elected, with a few people in the party locally, but none of these differences are the cause, or even contributed to my change of heart.
I have found it an extraordinary culture shock, actually, since joining the Council as there’s a lot more ‘politics’ than I have experienced in the real world. At my usual place of work the vast majority do not gossip or insult their colleagues behind each others’ backs and if there’s a problem that needs resolving, people tend to have a chat with the appropriate person. Not so in local politics it seems!
The friendly chap who answered the phone at The Argus read me the Conservative press release and in the absence of an opportunity to respond in the paper, I have drafted the following response:
The Conservative press release suggests that I was deselected as a Conservative Councillor and rather than choosing to leave the party I was compelled by the potential of losing my seat to seek alternatives. I would like to make it quite clear that I have had no interaction whatsoever with the Conservative Party locally in relation to seeking to defend my seat as a Conservative. At around the same time as I decided to switch parties, for idealogical reasons, I also spoke to a Conservative colleague who had expressed an interest in representing the Buckingham Ward and told her that she would have my personal support (she’s a very likeable person as well as being a great Councillor and a hard-worker).
I will be the first to admit that I have not put the hours into being a Councillor that some of my retired colleagues have been able to, but I believe I have represented my constituents’ interests well where I could, and I have provided valuable input to meetings that I have attended.
One of the comments in the press release attempts to associate the amount of allowance that I have claimed to the number of meetings I have attended. This is extraordinarily spurious and should never be the way these numbers are used. It is simplistic in the extreme to suggest that the amount of allowance a Councillor ‘deserves’ should be related to how many meetings they have attended. I did miss a few meetings this year but I have responded promptly and in a helpful manner to my constituents’ requests for information, assistance and advice.
The constituents of Buckingham are fortunate to have Councillor Kennard represent them and she does work very hard for them — I hadn’t previously chosen to shout about the number of people I have helped — I think it is more appropriate to respond to the question and move on!
Since the representatives on each committee were decided earlier this year, I have only been a member of the Constitution and Audit Committee aside from Full Council meetings. This has reduced, significantly the opportunities that I have to be present at Council. This allocation of committees is carried out by the very ‘inner circle’ that was criticised in the press release announcing Carl English’s decision to represent the more reasoned, Liberal Democrat party.
Earlier in my term, however, and before the Cabinet system was adopted, I was welcomed onto the Policy & Strategy Committee for the very reason that I was able to apply intelligence and calm consideration to complex issues at Council. I was vice chair on the Housing and Central Services committee I believe for those same reasons.
So I find it shocking that the Conservatives would now suggest that they would not have chosen to retain these, sadly rare, qualities in one of their own. I believe, if the party wants to be judged on the record of its Councillors (again, according to the Press Release), it should look carefully at some of the people that have passed their supposedly stringent criteria. There are a few highly competent Councillors in the Conservative ranks at Adur and I could name them if I didn’t think that that would be rude. This reliance on a few, though, is not good for the health of Adur Council and reflects strongly on their new criteria given some of the people that I understand have been reselected.
I have requested an opportunity to speak at the next Full Council meeting on 8 December and I would encourage members of the public who are interested, to come along. The meeting starts at 7pm at the Civic Centre on Ham Road (Google Map) and if you enter the main entrance, a friendly person will let you know where the public seating area is.
The Liberal Democrat Party logo
Second Adur Councillor Joins Liberal Democrats
Posted by: Gav in Gavin Ayling's blog on December 3rd, 2009
Carl English says
LibDems offer real democracy for residents
The ruling Conservatives in Adur have been rocked by a second defection in a fortnight, as Southlands Councillor Carl English has followed colleague Gavin Ayling in choosing to cross the floor to the Liberal Democrats.
“Since my election in 2006, I have found it increasingly difficult to defend Tory policies, locally or nationally,” said Councillor English. “On the doorstep, when people have attacked the Tories, I have found myself agreeing with them more and more that Adur is being let down by the Conservative administration. When you are asked to put party ahead of people; when you’re told what to think and say by an inner circle: then democracy goes out of the window. I felt that as the electors of Southlands ward had elected me as a Conservative then I should serve as much of my term as possible as a Tory, but I also wanted to have time to explain on the doorstep my reasons for leaving a party that has no interest in serving the community.
“Now it’s time to go, and I look forward to being able to campaign and fight freely for the residents against unjust plans and policies. I’ve joined the Liberal Democrats because they offer a chance for real change; the Labour party have nothing to offer and no chance of winning in Adur.”
Cllr English was elected for Southlands ward in 2006. With Carl on board, the LibDems have now become the official opposition to the Conservatives on Adur District Council.
Councillor James Doyle, leader of Worthing Liberal Democrats, said “Carl has made this decision because he believe in putting the residents of his ward first, a belief at the heart of Liberal Democrat philosophy, and a principle apparently sadly lacking in local Conservatives. Like Gavin, Carl sees the ongoing merger plans being pushed through for Worthing and Adur as undemocratic and unfair to Adur. I’m delighted that Richard Burt and Gavin Ayling have another colleague so soon, and I look forward to working with them to increase the number of Liberal Democrats on Adur Council, and increasing the real representation for Adur residents.”
The Liberal Democrat Party logo
The trouble with politicians
Posted by: Gav in Gavin Ayling's blog on June 2nd, 2009
It’s liberating. Or so I was told today. And the teller was right. It is.
But the line that triggered it is typically considered politician-poison. And why? Because we have a system which relies upon people who are not intelligent enough to listen to an argument before deciding whether the argument is cogent or not. That system, in case it’s not clear, is democracy using First Past The Post and political parties. Ya boo sucks and I’ll do what I like while wearing this red/blue/yellow rosette and see if you can do anything about it.
The sentence that caused the ‘It’s liberating’ comment?
“I don’t know anything.”
I could claim to know that I believe it is wrong to treat particular sections of society differently to others on the basis of some arbitrary feature or idiosyncrasy. But would I follow my argument to any logical conclusions or would I reach, at some philosophical point, a point where I would have to add a proviso?
If I was interviewed about my political beliefs I could not defend any pre-written ideology to the end. I could not claim to be more able to follow philosophical, moral, cultural or political arguments past the first few bends in the road than the next person. And, actually, very few people have ever been able to. It is why, actually, Greek philosophers and philosophers from a long time ago are still read, enjoyed and debated — there are no right answers.
Politicians in interviews inevitably end up not answering questions. It’s not because they’re stupid, more stupid than the interviewer or, even, because they’re wrong. It’s because it’s bloody hard to make a point that cannot be argued against. And the media that tries to trip politicians up isn’t helping push on the argument.
When a politician says “I believe gay marriage is fair” he’s saying that he does not believe in discriminating arbitrarily against homosexuals. He is not saying that he understands the cultural imperative of marriage (because I’m not sure I do), he’s not saying that it is wrong for a couple (heterosexual or homosexual) to cohabit, he’s not saying that he thinks that the bible is wrong or right, he’s not saying that everyone should like his opinion and he’s not saying “this is what my party thinks”…
He’s saying that he believes gay couples can be as in love as straight couples and they should be allowed to publicly express this in the same manner.
Okay, I know I went off on a tangent about homosexuality but I know it’s a particular divide between the so-called right and the so-called left.
Can we please stop employing interviewers who are after soundbites. Can we please stop quoting soundbites in the ‘news’. And can we please use the BBC (a public service broadcaster afterall) to remind people that at all elections except those to the EU ‘parliament’ we are voting for individuals not parties.
I am a Conservative Councillor but that doesn’t mean I agree with any more than a certain proportion of what David Cameron, John Redwood, Ken Clarke and William Hague believe. It doesn’t mean I agree with any more than a certain proportion of what Adur District Council’s leaders believe and it doesn’t mean that I can be pigeon-holed. In fact I am sure there are Liberal Democrat, UKIP and Green politicians who I share more beliefs with than I do with some Conservatives.
I stood for the Conservatives at the last election to my Ward in Adur and I am still pleased I did that. I shall make an announcement at some stage about my plans for next May (2010) when my seat will next be contested. But if I do contest that seat base your decision on me, not on my party affiliation and not on what the Council as a whole does or does not do (which is a whole other post).
When the public care
Posted by: Gav in Gavin Ayling's blog on March 3rd, 2009
I’ve said before (I didn’t check to add a link but feel free to have a look using the search box) that the public do not seem to care about anything District/Borough Councils do unless they live in a Council house except, that is, for planning.
Last night’s planning (‘Development Control’) meeting was typically busy (in the gallery) and today I received five letters from members of the public on another planning application. Normally I will receive an average of one per week on any other topic, but today I received five week’s worth of normal post on one planning application. The application can be found here Adur Council planning reference: ADC/0023/09.
The separate documents, if you struggle with the above site, are here (These links will likely go out of date so do use the above link if you want the current information):
When I was first elected to the Council I was told that I should not discuss a planning application before a meeting. And at the time I thought that was a little draconian. But as time has passed, I have seen why. Despite thorough research, reading the application, viewing the drawings and visiting the site there is always something said at a meeting in the committee that affects your opinion. I never cease to be amazed that my opinion on an application can be so swiftly affected by what people say at these meetings.
If a debate is held outside of the meeting then a decision may be made for perfectly good reasons but the lack of public conversation of the matter would be anti-democratic and frustrating for the general public. It is for this reason, and not because of the law, that I will not discuss this application or give any hint to my (initial) opinion on it.
But wouldn’t it be great if the public were motivated to care about more that the Council does? I think there are a few reasons why they are not:
- Central government in England (the UK Parliament) tells us mostly what we can and cannot do and so there is little to get animated about — whatever we do is because it is the only thing allowed within the London framework we are given.
- People don’t like some of what we do but because of (1) see no point in telling us.
- They don’t understand the democratic process and doubt that we will change our minds.
This last one is the most poisonous. Cllr. Searle and I attended a public meeting about a proposed development last year and it resulted in the land that was proposed to be developed being given village green status (Adur Press Release) — the arguments were cogent. But if you were at the meeting you would think we had already made a decision — the public were angry, aggressive (in a few cases) and dismissive.
Cynicism has destroyed civic spirit and I don’t know how to resolve that.
Liberal Democrats, England, Scotland and the Conservatives
Posted by: Gav in Gavin Ayling's blog on February 9th, 2009
A lot of what a party is, is in its supporters.
The UK Independence Party, for example, is supposedly a libertarian party which also believes in withdrawing from the EU. The Liberal Democrats, apparently, are a partially libertarian party that believes in social justice and support EU membership with mild reform.
The Conservatives believe in many things being a broad-[cough] church but mostly it is the free market and (currently, in any case) liberal attitudes to how people live their private lives. And the Labour party traditionally believes that the solution to everything that needs a solution is to take state control.
But these descriptions — which may be debated, I admit — do not tell the full story. For example, the local Liberal Democrats here in Lancing and Shoreham-by-Sea appear to err when it comes to telling the truth (Beach Green, Adur and Worthing Council Services) and appear not to have any opinions on anything else (at least not cogent opinions that they feel able to debate in meetings).
The UK Independence Party locally fielded a candidate at the 2005 elections whose performance at a hustings would have marked him as a BNP candidate if it wasn’t for the ‘UKIP’ sign in front of him.
And the Labour party… well, they actually have a man who stands by his convictions locally and means what he says even if, inevitably, I don’t agree with him most of the time.
So the local parties and members do not reflect the nation-wide parties and what they claim to stand for. Rather than being about politics, actually, local party membership appears to be tribal and party-preference down to the party their friends and family belong to. It is, if you like, as if everyone whose Dad supported Manchester United supports Manchester United despite preferring everything about Manchester City.
I like to think I have thought deeply about my political convictions not only in the last three years as a Councillor, but also before-hand when I chose to join the Conservative Party in 1996.
But since 1996 I have changed my convictions quite strongly. In 1996 you would have spoken to a bigoted and not-entirely, but mostly, unpleasant (politically) Gavin. It is curious to me now that I had such strong opinions that I believed I could defend with argument. And it is mostly by argument and debate (with myself and with others) that I believe my opinions have softened and become, as a friend said earlier of me, “wetter”.
But some things do not change. Take, for example, Scotland’s preferential treatment by the British Parliament. Today four stories were pointed out to me:
- More clarity over free elderly-care in Scotland
- Free prescriptions in Scotland
- Scottish crime scenes clean-up funding
- British government rejects EU subsidies for England
In all these cases English taxpayers have either lost out or not gained to the same extent as Scottish taxpayers.
For some reason, when I mention this topic, I always have to make a disclaimer as I get attacked by an offended Scot. To be clear, I don’t blame the Scots as a group or, with the exception of Gordon Brown, as individuals. Scotland benefits from devolution not because the Scots have done something wrong, rather because the English do not have devolution and no-one actually sees fit to offer them a referendum on the subject.
Now nationally David Cameron has not endeared himself to supporters of an English Parliament but he has at least indicated that the Barnett Formula would go. The Liberal Democrats, with many seats in southern England, are currently taking a great risk by continuing to ignore the problem in favour of the status quo plus English Regional Assemblies. The UK Independence Party solution is interesting but I doubt practicable.
And Labour’s opinions are not really in doubt: the Labour Party do not support an English Parliament because they would be unlikely to run it and, more importantly, it can be supported as a solution using logic.
Development Control Committee (Planning)
Posted by: Gav in Gavin Ayling's blog on February 2nd, 2009
The Development Control Committee (known as the Planning Committee by most) has been cancelled tonight because of the weather. Please don’t try and make the journey!
And if you’ve read the Have Your Say on the BBC today with hundreds of people whining that Sweden can cope with this weather, please ignore them and enjoy the snow — this weather is entirely unsuitable for walking in, let alone driving in!
Icelandic banks and Adur Council
Posted by: Gav in Gavin Ayling's blog on October 10th, 2008
I was reminded last night that I was on the committee that approved the continued use of advisers for our Council investments. Obviously with responsibility the Council must retain some money for use in emergencies and for day-to-day expenses and overnight this money is invested in special markets.
I am advised that our advisers told us “several months ago” it would be an idea not to invest in Icelandic banks. I understand, from the grapevine, that neighbouring Brighton & Hove received similar guidance.
It is for this reason that Adur do not have exposure to Landsbanki or its subsidiaries.
Adur results 2008
Posted by: Gav in Gavin Ayling's blog on May 2nd, 2008
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.
