Heathrow and Hoo as Tory Truth outs?

As someone with a big mouth you may say, I actually admire Boris Johnson for his brazen ability to put his proverbial foot in it.

Quirky characters in politics can be a good thing; they can make elections more exciting, engaging and energetic.

Boris Johnson however - gaffe prone that he is - presents a clear and present danger to Medway.

Thus far local Conservatives, many of whom slavishly serve the party machine in Westminster, have dutifully followed the line on Boris Johnson.

Many who actually stood apart from him in December and January are now effectively boosom buddies to him now. Endorsing his every move and whim.

I have expressed my major concern that local Conservatives need to make it clear that if they are now backing Boris, which many on the Peninsula appear to be doing, they are effectively backing the Estuary Airport. Boris is the lead, indeed the arch, proponent for the destruction of the Peninsula and with an electoral mandate for a Conservative in London we will see an elected individual with the full force of millions behind him. It makes the prospect of a full-blown fight, an expensive fight at that from your council tax, all but inevitable locally.

And what slipped out today should send shivers down the spine of anyone living on the Peninsula.

All the debate thus far has been about Heathrow v Estuary Airport and whether one woud need to close to open another. What if, the estuary airport was in addition to Heathrow; a smaller airport in the Thames Estuary.

That prospect today came very much closer when Boris spoke to the Evening Standard:

Read the Full Article Here

So there we have it. It is not either / or anymore. It is Heathrow AND Hoo. A very very different position indeed.

Cameron should come clean now; and tell us whether the government is considering the maintenance of Heathrow with additional capacity in the North Kent area.

Tory endorses Estuary Airport

This blog has commented upon Tory splits over the Estuary Airport before; one may remember a Chairman of a Chatham Conservative branch or club that wrote on the Medway Messenger website that the local Conservatives were wrong to oppose a referendum.

I have also spoken and blogged on a number of Peninsula Councillors who are backing Boris instead of backing Hoo.

Bullingdon BoJo is the primary actor behind any bid for an airport on the Peninsula and was up until May 2010 the most powerful Conservative in office across the UK. He has a huge influence and sway in the grass-roots Tory party and he is targeting the Hoo Peninsula for the biggest slab of concrete in living memory.

If Boris looses in May; the pipedream of the airport will die. Simple

As this blog has exposed and will continue to expose: for any Tory locally to be backing this harbinger of destruction for our local community is to show total contempt for the area for the sake of partisan posturing.

I have held my suspicions that we observe a number of two-faced Tories in our local blue-rinse brigade, but up until now many have been careful to tip-toe on the grey line. Attacking Ken but witholding fawning loyalty to Boris.

It therefore came as surprise that last night, according to reports, that Cllr Rodberg - a Peninsula Councillor no less - endorsed the Estuary Airport against the apparent position of his own party, own Association and own group on the Council.

All the residents on the Peninsula know that Tories are being two-faced. For one to step out and be honest about it is to be applauded but also lambasted. Applauded for highlighting the truth to the charge of Conservative duplicity and how they can never ever be trusted; lambasted because he, like the other blue-rinsers on the Peninsula, cant have it both ways.

They either back Hoo or back Boris. What do they want?

Tory referendum cost spin

It seems the cost of the referendum keeps on increasing; first the Council cost it at £250,000 and now it goes up to £382,000.

Of course it is always difficult to isolate the costs of a referendum when combined and the government does have measures to mitigate for referendums when shared with the local election.

It is disengenious however to compare a government referendum with that of a local ballot which is not binding and could be conducted in a different way.

The increase in cost is also all a bit co-incidental given the number seems to increase in proportion to the vocal opposition expressed by DRINK and pro-airport campaigners. A cynic would say the Tories are running scared of a clear movement of people who believe the public should have a say; these calls incidently will only increase with time.

I am particularly interested to read Cllr O'Brien's response tonight on talking waste of money.

Lets just put aside the multiple millions of pounds in waste that him and his cabinet colleagues have over-spent on a glut of programmes and projects; or indeed money they are spending on behalf of other organisations they have no authority over. Lecturing people over value-for-money from a party that has lost grip of the finances is a bit rich.

Lets also put to one-side the abject denial of Conservative Councillors who ran a failed campaign last year and were totally caught up in their own local hype. Remember had our Tory MPs and Councillor's had an iota of grip we would not have had an airport proposal near Medway in the first place. As a result of Tory failure, Cameron has u-turned, so adding £50,000 to the cost of now opposing the airport.

Thirdly; if we do accept the Council figures then someone in the Council got it wrong by £132,000 the first time they 'spun' the claim of £250,000. Either way for the Council to get something £132,000 incorrect is what it is, and proves my first point well.

It is also rich for a Conservative Party; that preaches about localism and empowering people but only it seems for issues they care about. Openly calling for an EU vote by many, and indeed the squandering of money on a Police Commissioner. I bet not one Tory has thought how much that sum of money could pay for Police; but then their votes are totally fine, anyone elses a cost. What utter tripe.

Now lets challenge the assertions; the Tories are now claiming that it could be illegal to hold an election at the same time as a referendum.

Advice that has never been given by Council in public or indeed at the time the airport referendum was proposed at full council

As far as I can tell there is no reason why a ballot on an airport can not be held on the same day as any other ballot. If Tories have legal guidance proving the point; publish it.

Referendums have become a regular feature of the local government scene in the past two decades, principally owing to the number of mayoral referendums which have been held. Other (advisory) polls have been instigated by local authorities including four on levels of council tax and a number in connection with proposals for local government reorganisation.

The Labour Government said in its 1998 local government white paper, Modern local government...in touch with the people, that it wished to see

“...consultation and participation embedded into the culture of all councils. The Government believes that councils should see and use referendums as an important tool to give local people a bigger say. The policy was introduced so that local people on such issues as major local developments or matters of particular local controversy."

Section 116 of the Local Government Act 2003 provides a specific power for principal local authorities to hold polls in order to ascertain views on any matter relating to:

(1) their services, or

(2) expenditure on those services, or

(3) their power to promote well-being in their areas.

The act gives power for Councils to hold the referendums how they choose as far as I can translate.

So lets look at the cost argument

Despite the Council briefing £250,000 cost I have finally received the above calculation putting the cost at £382,000

However a ballot at the same time as the Police Commissioner would nulify all of these costs because they would already be spent. Therefore the only additional cost would that of the ballot papers themselves and the additional time for counting.

Of course on ballots such as this we do not as I understand need to print off the full 100% because local ballots do not fall in the same rules; we could assume a turn-out of less then 66%. The ballot papers would be extremely simple; as such if we accept the above costings come out at say £5,500.

The only other cost as I can tell that would not be duplicated is for staffing time to count. Once again; assuming a simple yes/no vote this can be done at speed because the level of spoilt ballots and 'vote split' is nullified. I believe a seperate team at the Council could count ballots at speed. Assuming a cost of £4,500 which would cover for counting staff for designated period. All other staffing costs shared.

Of course if you used one ballot box splitting the vote and other costs would arise but this does not come out at anywhere near the £382,000 figure.

Lets be frank and honest with the public. Sharing a ballot would be better value-for-money, it would be common-sense

Backing Boris or Backing Hoo?

Labour Mayoral candidate Ken Livingstone attacks Estuary Airport. Where do local Tories stand?

Over the last couple of weeks it has become increasingly apparent to readers that a number of Medway Conservatives and their surrogates are openly backing lead Estuary airport petitioner, and arch Tory, Boris Johnson for Mayor.

Ordinarily this would not be a surprise. Many of the same backed him in 2008 despite his manifesto containing a statement on an Estuary airport solution.

Today though; Backing his campaign which if successful will make an Estuary Airport more likely not less. A direct betrayal to Medway residents and the cross-party position signed up to by Medway Conservatives.

Sometimes we all need to put party affiliation aside and campaign against the greater threat to our wellbeing as a community. Whilst both parties oppose Labour had made it clear that we want people to have a direct-say on the proposal at the ballot box; a chance for people to send a message to Cameron.

Putting aside Boris Johnson's uncanny ability to be a clown with public money he is the only candidate openly backing the destruction of the Hoo Peninsula.

Medway Conservatives need to stop sitting on the fence and start to campaign against their own Conservative Party mayoral candidate.

Medway Labour will be challenging Conservatives about who they will be backing; the party machine or local resident interest. Will they back Cameron's candidate for the Estuary Airport or candidates opposed.

Raw politics is simple; if Boris loses the idea goes down the pan. If Boris wins; rest assured the consultation in the summer will contain an Estuary Solution and more and more of our tax payers money will have to be spent on having to challenge this ludicrous idea.

The people of the Hoo Peninsula want to see local Conservatives are not being two-faced Tories. It is time for them to back the party machine; Boris Johnson or back candidates who oppose the Boris Airport.

Where do they stand? Make you mind up.

DRINKin away credibility

Once again Councillor Chamber's feels it is appropriate to send letters in response to DRINK and not seek the cross-party consensus that is needed.

The fact is Labour has led and will continue to lead on the anti-airport campaign. We called it three years ago and have placed relentless pressure ever since on the stonewall Two-Faced Tory attitude to the airport; which was until January effectively a denial of the problem behind the infamous letters to Tracey Crouch and Mark Reckless.

Belatedly we have seen Tories get a grip but they have had to be forced every single inch. Labour forced the change in pace on the failing 'Pie-in-the-Sky' campaign by highlighting the failure to get a grip and despite controversy with some anti-airport campaigners. Labour is keeping up the pressure on the Council and Conservatives to get their proverbial lazy backsides in gear.

Labour has also led on calling for a public vote and whilst Tory Minister's have shunned Hoo Peninsula it is Medway Labour that has engaged with people at the height of influence to ensure that the Hoo Airport never takes off. We are setting the agenda locally and for a party of opposition this shows the new strategy and leadership in the Labour Group is beginning to pay significant dividends, and credibility. The referendum idea is something the public will warm too over time; the Tories and Lib Dems rejected it out of spite...

As it is I suspect that Cameron and Osborne may now be warming to the idea of Heathrow and Gatwick expansion and this is a good thing. Not only for Medway but also the supply chains and jobs that surround the airport site. Put simply expansion at Heathrow in the short term and re-engineering of flight roots and Stansted and Gatwick is the only sensible option on the table. Birmingham is a good option but too far away from mainland Europe; this counts against it.

The pro-Heathrow lobby is also increasingly wealthy; they do have strong funding links with the Tory party but also with groups within the Labour Party including Progress. Contrast this with DRINK - Demand Regeneration in North Kent has zero political connections with the decision makers and is effectively a make-shift band of business owners and past politicians. I can only say that they are lobbying the wrong people at the wrong time. Local politicians cant make a decision on this issue; so moaning at the local Council is utterly pointless... I suspect this group is far too parochial to mount a serious campaign.

Let us look at the core campaign argument for DRINK and dismiss them (some rather easily)

• More opportunities for local businesses

The simple truth is that there is no survey or actual empirical evidence to support this position. None of the submissions to the DfT have undertaken a survey of current local business and there is no evidence to say that with current contract arrangements with BAA (or whoever) that any contracts would go to Medway companies. Indeed; it would be illegal under EU law for it to occur. Medway has a diverse economy but its skills base is primarily in business services, health and education; the services industry may benefit but it is very likely that current supply chains would be supplanted by other larger chains elsewhere.

• More jobs for local people

Again there is no statistical or empirical evidence to support this claim. Employment contracts are likely to be awarded with sector-specific multinationals who will look for particular skill-sets. As Medway does not have an airport currently it is expected that individuals with the right skills would move into the area rather then be based here. Over the medium-term this could cause issues around house-prices and community cohesion as the area would gain a more transient community feel

Whilst Medway does have a major problem with unemployment currently the major build and jobs from this would not be until 2015 onwards. It is worth highlighting that Medway did not have an employment problem prior to 2008 with Medway around the national average for employment and claimant count.

In short, we already have enough capacity in the local economy and with access to London for jobs if the market turns. DRINK wll try and piggy-back of current unemployment statistics and concerns around employment and this is disengenous and crude.

In addition the Hoo Peninsula already has a number of small employers. The short term will see many businesses close in the height of a downturn. Therefore the airport plan will make worse our current situation whilst only giving employment rates from 2015 onwards when we could already expect a normal economic upturn.

Of course I have no empirical evidence to support this other then looking at previous employment and claimant counts and the stated obvious immediate flight of capital and business should an airport be designated for destruction.

• A better environment for the community

This is probably the most swinging eyed of the statements and it is quite simply gut-wrenching stupidity to include this in the aims under this title.

This airport will destroy and uproot countless historic communities and thousands of residents, make Medway an effective building site for a decade and it will undermine our quality of life with noise and higher pollution. A rural idyll with significant natural interest will be concreted over. Houseprices will plummet in surrounding areas and the thousands of pounds of taxpayers money spent on plans for regneration on the Peninsula will be undermined.

There is absolutely no argument for saying a mega-airport will improve the quality of our wellbeing and environment at all. It will blight us for twenty years and once completed we will get the noise and fumes.

Why do you think no one wants an airport or expansion in their area? It is because these things destroy communities and everyone knows it.

• A better environment for wildlife

This is also a simply rediculous statement. The airport would concrete over an RSPB reserve and not one nature charity, lobby group or organisation has ever stated that this mega-airport is good for the environment over all. There may be marginal benefits to marine life to an island airport only.

There may be some marginal benefits to 'sponsored' land reserves for nature or somesuch but this is nothing more then a mask for development.

• Improved transport, housing and education

We already have HS1 which gives us good access to London; the improvements to Essex are already happening with a further bridge across the Thames. We already have widened motorways M2 and M20. The benefits to transport on road and rail will therefore be negligible to that which we have an are to expect without an airport.

It is likely that high-speed trains will pass straight through Medway into London stations (as does Gatwick and Heathrow Express).

There are benefits to having an airport with access to the world; but for an extra 30 minutes you already have Gatwick and Stansted. Heathrow is an 45-60 minutes away. This is not a justifiable position when people have cars and access to a twenty first century transport network.

• The elimination of poverty

Medway does have significant pockets of poverty but this is related to a number of issues which are utterly unrelated to whether an airport is close by or not. I can point to many airports which have areas of poverty next door including City Airport which is situated in the poorest borough of London.

The simple truth is that poverty is related to upbringing and education; an airport will not magically transform schools, teachers or change whether parents are bad and good. Medway unemployment rates on average over the last 10-15 years have been or just below UK median levels so the likelihood is an individual will change from a low-paid job in one area in Medway to another in the airport. Pay may actually be depressed because of increased connectivity and a mobile workforce competing with our local talent. Education is the key to reducing poverty and the airport has no impact on this whatsoever.

• Better quality of life

DRINK are effectively using an economic argument justifier for this position but as I have just stated this is a flawed assumption. Quality of life however is not just an economic metric; it is about having a peaceful nights sleep, having access to clean air and the countryside and about living in communities with friends and relatives. General Well Being can not be calculated as an economic statistic but it makes our lives immesurably fuller.

It is very likely that a mega-airport will break up communities, reduce green spaces, increase air and noise pollution and for marginal economic benefit, if any to the majority of Medway residents whether employed or unemployed currently or in the future.

There is a reason why Heathrow residents dont want expansion. A reason why residents secured a Gatwick cut-off until 2019 and why Stansted residents are up-in-arms.

This is blight on our quality of life for marginal economic benefit which is why if Medway did have a referendum they would make the same choice that all the other communities have made where any propsoal has occured; they would reject it.

Cameron U-turn complete

Cameron is backing Boris Johnson

A very worrying development from an article tonight in the FT concerning the Estuary Airport proposal which highlights that Cameron has now been actively persuaded to the idea of a North Kent airport.

We all know the Conservative Party has distorted, u-turned and snubbed local residents, and have quite frankly, treated the residents of the Hoo Peninsula with utter contempt. The countless snubs to our repeated petitions is just the beginning of the 'divide and rule' tactics that London Conservatives will foist on our area.

I have to ask why Cameron picked Justine Greening MP last year to be Transport Secretary; a cynic would say she was picked to totally rule out Heathrow whilst actively open to an airport elsewhere.

Cameron has lied. Pure and simple; Lied. You can not trust local Tories if they continue to support a leader that can go through such a brazen and overt u-turn. They are simply not to be trusted.

According to sources behind the scenes quoted from the FT on the Estuary Airport

"The prime minister’s allies confirm he is drawn to the idea and that there was a “fairly high” chance the option could emerge as the best means of increasing the south-east’s airport capacity at the end of a study of all the options."

The letter today in the Telegraph was not good enough; a tiny number of signatures from a tiny number of MPs and campaigners. It was almost worse to have a letter with such few signatures...

If we are to fight this off the mass ranks of Conservative MPs need to declare where they stand; I fear many want the airport.

Three years ago I warned Tories and residents this Cameron u-turn would happen.

Residents snubbed as MPs ignored

So after almost two months of waiting, delays and obfuscation from the Conservative Government we have received a response from our cross-party letter on a meeting of all parties locally to discuss the airport.

It does not come as a surprise that the Conservatives have kept the people of Medway and the Hoo Peninsula waiting for a response, nor included any apology for the delay, or that they effectively sat on the public will of 250,000 residents.

Tories have a particular kind of arrogance which is to treat the public with contempt and delay, and then claim credit within the letter for ‘able representation’ and mutual back-slapping.

The simple question which comes to mind is if our MPs were so robust, why were none able to secure a meeting of our Council leadership with Justine Greening MP?

So ‘full’ that the collective voice of Medway residents has eer, been snubbed. The letter written as it was after the ‘frank’ conversation with our MPs and ably represented; well done for winning absolutely nothing.

As usual; nothing

A recurring theme through out this process; MPs who have collectively failed to represent, who then run away, and who are now trying to claim they are ably representing our interests. Clearly not.

It is their collective failure to represent our interests that has led us to a consultation process in the first place as we can read in the newspapers every single week. Why on earth do we think our MPs have any credibility, unless aggressively pushed and pursued by the community and opposition?

Our Tory Council; instead of representing our cross-party position, or trying to challenge the Tory government, has predictably and noticeably rolled over, and that should be noted by residents reading. Noted closely.If ever you needed a clearer indication that our Conservative Councilors’ are not independent of the government line you need only read the toadying press statement today from Medway Council. If only you could; the letter is on another website and the statement as far as I can see is not on the Council website.

A statement the press office does not seem to think warrants a news item.

To say that you are ‘disappointed’ has to be characterized as the biggest understatement on behalf of the 250,000 residents who are all represented by Councillors as a collective majority.

Where there should be outrage, there is an anodyne and limited statement of concern.

Tories using the Council are trying to cover for Tories in government.

The strategy over the last six months by them has been totally mismanaged; from trying to remove MPs from the debate post November, with now an attempt to state that they are now the only people with any credibility; which makes this letter today as overt a change in policy as ever.

This has a deliberate whiff of a mid-long term objective to project MPs as the sole campaigners-in-chief for the towns. The problem is the public can not trust the Tories. Why should we think the Tories have our interests, over the self-evident knee-bending to the party machine, we saw today in the Council statement?

People are expected to support a party that in government is proposing the very destruction of their own communities. Come off it.

If you are the Friends of North Kent Marshes, or independent Parish Council chairman, or indeed just a normal resident; you will be utterly ignored. You try writing an open letter calling for Justine Greening MP to visit your community; you will get exactly the same response. No No No

What utter contempt for democracy that the only people who can command an audience with her are the Airport Lobbyists, Boris Johnson and our lackluster Tory MPs. What a desperate and tawdry position.

The low frills pie-in-the-sky campaign

Labour should continue to call for more overt and visual campaigns and more direct democracy over the next couple of months. Other opposition parties should get off the fence and support engagement.

The only message Tories will listen to now is direct democracy; public meetings, a visual and aggressive campaign and a direct referendum

Cameron InDirect on Peninsula

Conservatives are leading proposals for airport in North Kent

Have just returned from a rather windy and wet afternoon on the Peninsula canvassing opposition to the Estuary Airport referendum.

It is clear in the community that there is a dawning realisation that this government plan is not just a pie-in-the-sky idea. Many residents recounted stories from previous airport proposals from Maplin Sands and beyond and many appreciated seeing us on the doorstep and listening to the opposition.

Labour need not make any excuses for being out on the doorstep canvassing and speaking to the public, and getting them involved in the democratic campaign to oppose the proposals.

I have to say the Tory attack on us speaking to residents is a bit baffling; whilst on the doorstep we also advised some people on how to register postal votes. I might add these were elderly voters and many who worked shift patterns. For the Tories and supporters to jump on this to claim this is some sort of agenda is absolute and total nonsense.

This is not about electoral calculus; for the same Tory argument they have themselves given in the 'non-Tory' 'Tory-leaning' blog from John Ward. If Labour were about a purely party agenda why would we not spend out time in Strood South or Gillingham; those are the most marginal seats for our resources. The Tories are totally wrong; this is about standing up for people wherever they may be and whether they may or may not vote for us is secondary to the public interest.

Labour has a clear and consistent position on the airport people find refreshing; it can be read in the FT article below:

It is only a Conservative government that now seeks to bulldoze over the Peninsula.

The simple truth about why the opposition is being aggressive is because we know the local Tories have sat on the airport campaign, with a non-existent and in their own words failed 'pie-in-the-sky' campaign, for three years. They have ignored any attempts, including motions in full Council by the Labour opposition, to raise this issue up the agenda and for a proper campaign.

It is particularly gauling as David Cameron was specifically challenged on the airport proposal at a Cameron Direct event in Chatham & Aylesford by a member of the public. He has simply not held to his word (or has he...)

Watch live streaming video from conservatives at livestream.com

If you want to see the Cameron wriggling; please see his answer to the direct question in 2009 (from 5 minutes 33 seconds) answering to the Friends of North Kent Marshes

Despite the assertion by Medway Lib Dem Ginger Blog there is no mention of increasing aviation capacity, merely more high speed train capacity.

And still we see the same Conservative arrogance; ignoring cross-party letters and managing a campaign which, when compared with 2002/2003 is nowhere near the level of engagement required yet. The simple truth is that those involved in the campaign in 2002/2003 can remember the public meetings and lamp post posters; there is simply no excuse why we should not have full, public and aggressive campaign against this proposal.

Initial Tory dithering and denial can not become obfuscation, ignoring the public and lip-service.

The Labour and Liberal Democrat Council in 2002/2003 did allow a full-blown opposition campaign. The comment below from Cllr Stephen Hubbard makes clear the difference between now and then.

The simple truth is that these proposals are more detailed, have more support, and have more feasibility then any posed in 2002/2003 because the Tories have trailed the coversation on an Estuary airport in the press for three years.

Labour believe it is our obligation as an opposition to stand up for residents and push for a stronger and more robust campaign position, not outside of, but from within our cross-party position of being anti-airport.

It is right to ensure the administration is not beholden to two masters and is managing and running the most effective campaign as possible.

We also believe it is important for the national party to have a position which reflects the public in Medway. We are working to have an influence on the policy agenda.

It is also right to highlight the hypocrisy of MPs because we are self-evidently here now because of local Conservative inaction. It is also right to expose the hypocrisy of talking about a referendum for Europe and 'trusting the people' but then rejecting the idea on a matter which could have a fundamental and existential threat to the fabric of our towns. We had a referendum on Europe; we have never had one on any major airport proposal.

Labour is right to compare the campaign in 2002/2003 with the campaign now, and call for more public and overt visual campaigning.

It is time for lamp post posters; time for open public meetings and it is time to give people in Medway a referendum so that forty years of airport proposals in North Kent can finally, in the ballot box, be put to rest.

Size Matters

Remind me to buy a microscope...

No expenses spared it would seem for the Stop Estuary Airport Campaign. The car stickers and posters, though a convenient blue shade of blue, are going down a storm.

It is good to hear and read of volunteers of all political parties and none getting out and about for the campaign against the airport.

The campaign has now, finally, after months of pestering, started an effective response to this rediculous London Tory idea.

We can all DRINK to our eventual victory over the Barmy Boris Airport

Rodney sighted on Peninsula

Labour rejects the airport. The Tories are the only party backing it.

The lesser spotted Cllr Chambers has been sighted; indeed after three years of dithering on the airport we finally see him don a pinstripe (shirt) for the non-doorstep campaign on the Grain Peninsula. All smiles it would seem from the boys in blue.

No comment from him, or them, on the cross-party letter from Justine Greening MP. All conveniently forgotten; but then the media weren't invited apparently. The self-appointed guru is managing the brief.

And talking about invites; it seems that the Rural Liaison get-together / update / meeting / event scheduled for next Tuesday 6th March is closed to the public. Instead it would seem the only people invited are the great and the good from the Parish Councils only***. Many of the 'great and good' are of course Conservative Parish Councillors whose interest could, perhaps, maybe be split.

All very different of course in 2002/2003 when the then Conservative opposition organised open village meetings and tried to engage the public. In addition, no lamp post posters and no delivery for the posters as far as I can read. Punters are expected to pro-actively collect the posters from a number of newsagents.

Labour has just distributed several thousand leaflets on the Peninsula; with a £50,000 budget you really can afford to deliver leaflets to residents.

The good and bad news for residents is the low-octane 'pie-in-the-sky' campaign poster has now, well eer, flown on to a full consultation by the government despite the assurances of our Conservative MPs.

We finally have a half-decent campaign poster; all a bit late but still welcome

Copryright: Christopher Irvine; all rights held by the photographer

Incidentally; still have not received my 2p sized campaign badge; I had thought that some bright spark in the postroom could have included it in my regular weekly mailing. I suspect they may have read my mischievous tweet last week; my grapes are waiting.

*** The Council have since clarified that this is actually a meeting of the Rural Liaison Committee which is the Council's liaison forum with the Parish Councils. This meeting, although called a Committee, is really a Forum and is therefore not subject to the access to information rules and is not open to the public. Still; a meeting like this, no advertising, no lobbying, no communication... I let the public decide.

Big Airport Weekend

A very successful weekend with 25 activists from across Kent Young Labour, Labour Students and from the CLP itself. A couple of thousand leaflets delivered and for the most part; very dry indeed.

A number of the video's below from the weekend and the leaflet beneath:

peninsula1-1

Two-Faced Tories

A little sneak peek for Saturday...

The big No-Tory Airport event on Saturday is open to everyone who believes David Cameron and the Tories have fibbed about the Estuary Airport.

Do drop me an email tris.osborne@gmail.com even if you are not a Labour voter / supporter but are interested in opposing the Conservative government plans.

Lets send Cameron a message that he will not forget. No Airport.

Tory colluding as Airport looms

The news that the #TwofacedTories have been colluding in government over the Estuary Airport may shock readers on the Peninsula, but does not come as a surprise to this blogger.

This blog has consistently stated for months that there was active lobbying in Whitehall by pro-airport groups, which is the reason why it suggested that the actions of Tracey, Mark and Reh were next to useless. From the news today I was entirely justified in my angry musings to this effect; it was pity that some of our MPs were and remain in dithering denial.

Up until December we were getting the same old trite spin from them that the government had 'no plans.' The news today shows how utterly two-faced they really are on the airport.

It is ludicrous for them to represent, in all good faith, a party that is secretly colluding with engineering groups whilst on the other hand asking residents to 'trust them' on the airport. Only a true fool would put any stock in anything the Conservative say on this issue; they are simply unbelievable.

The proximity of little-known MEPs and smiling blue-rinsers on the Peninsula also does not mask the fact that we have had no response to any of our cross-party letters calling for an immediate meeting with senior policy makers.

How much longer will we have to wait?

I suggested at Full Council the lack of response is because sunset Cllr Chambers was little-known and ineffective; I was shouted down for suggesting as such but almost one month later and he has been Ignored, Ignored, Ignored.

If I were a resident on Grain I would have next to zero trust on any Tory representative. Not only are Tory Councillors not planning to resign, instead pledging their fawning loyalty to the party machine managed by the pro-airport brigade, but they seem very happy to ignore the wishes of residents when it suits them. Just take a look at the numerous tweets of Grain LNG campaigners who appear to have been blacklisted by local Tories and ignored.

We have a brigade of elected Conservative parish and unitary authority Councillors all seemingly paralyzed by fear. Fear of action which could destroy them but fear of inaction as they see the impending political car crash. We have a government soon to be actively consulting for the destruction of homes and a local Conservative Party that has been in dithering denial, and which now refuses to endorse a public referendum and any form of active campaigning.

At this point in 2002/2003 we had public meetings, lamp post posters and active campaigning. This time we have a refusal and delays from Tories to having any form of action.

It is that dithering which is the reason why plans get more developed; it is the mutual back-patting which typifies the greasy and 'jobs-for-the-boys' attitude of Kent Conservatives more generally.

Labour must now step up the campaign and stand up for the Peninsula and it's residents. We will be.

Chicken Run