Jonathan Mitchell - candidate for MP in East Dulwich

[Huguenot]

This Amina Graham character is coming across as increasingly flaky.

No sign of the man himself.

Just a shedload of (inconsistent) party line that feels manipulative and duplicitous.

Amina, mate, change it. Your head's in the wrong place. You started off by assuming your audience was stupid, and then in spite of the evidence you decided like a blind bull in a crockery shop to continue the strategy.

[dc]

There's a link to the story about the Secretary of State for Health's visit this week which you can see undoctored - if you'll forgive the pun here: Tessa Jowell and Health Secretary at Dulwich Hospital

It is entirely disingenuous for Amina Graham to state that Tessa has not been active on this issue given the historical evidence on her website - including a survey returned to her by some 900 local people as part of her contribution to the consultation last year: Tessa Jowell consultation response

I would not like to be accused of 'hijacking' the Forum for political ends (I have been a regular if unprolific contributor on a variety of subjects over the past three years), so I would just point out that my own contribution on the other thread was in response to a somewhat vituperative post by 'm7post' to a letter circulated on behalf of my fellow Labour candidates and me in Village Ward which actually made no mention of the hospital original 'm7post' post here - my contributions further down the thread.

Ditto this thread where some statements have been made that really cannot be allowed to go uncorrected.

Duncan Chapman

[Chick]

Amina,

Sure the Libdems were against us invading Iraq, but don?t they support our presence in Afghanistan which is just as horrific? All those civilian deaths and all those soldiers dead with the devastating effect on the families?

[SteveT]

Peckhamgatecrasher wrote:- Any chance of the organ grinder himself? It is his local forum after all.

Yes that is an interesting point, why isn't he doing his own thing and stating his position, or is it beneath him?

Is he just too busy and important to write to the people of this award winning forum?

There are around 25,000 read this forum on a daily basis, and if he is that good they could get him elected to the post.

Jonathan Mitchell MP wannabee, come out come out where ever you are!

[James Barber]

Up until now the East Dulwich ward Lib Dem councillors have broadly divided up tasks to avoid stepping on each others toes etc. I've taken interest in the East Dulwich Forum almost totally from a casework perspective. I think this is my first post in the drawing room.

I'll point out this thread to Jonathan.

I would like to highlight though that East Dulwich ward is one of 8 wards that make up the parliamentary seat of Dulwich and West Norwood. Clearly supporting regular threads across the multiple forums covering DaWN by a candidate is asking a lot while they have final 30 days to campaign in. Tessa has several offices with interns to support her.

NB. Afghanistan. I also was against our presence but had the good fortune to hear Paddy Ashdown talking about this issue. We're there. If the Taliban retake Afghanistan, Pakistan will be destabalised and could fall to radicals. Pakistan has nuclear weapons. Can you imagine a 9/11 involving nuclear weapons.

[SteveT]

Jonathan Mitchell's picture which dropped through my door today, makes me think he is a serious drinker of alcohol, and yet they got rid of their last leader for that behaviour.

How much does he imbibe daily, weekly or monthly?

Are you going to lie low until after the election Mr Mitchell, lest you talk your way out of a possible seat?

[Administrator]

SteveT Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Is he just too busy and important to write to the

> people of this award winning forum?

>

> There are around 25,000 read this forum on a daily

> basis, and if he is that good they could get him

> elected to the post.

...

I would like to clarify that this forum has never won an award and the daily readership is about 3,000 daily.

[SteveT]

I was refering to the 22k lurkers per week not just the subscribers, and if it hasn't won an award then it jolly well should have if only for services to South East London.

This Jonathan Mitchell what do we know about him?

Why should we vote for him when he seems less than interested to air his political views on here?

Is he religious?

Does he drink alcohol?

I think we should be told.

[*Bob*]

Steve,

Did you click on the link to his website and read that yet?

[James Barber]

Hi SteveT,

Dulwich & West Norwood Parliamentary seat has 8 wards and roughly East Dulwich Forum covers one of them with bits of the Camberwell and Peckham parliamentary seat.

He has circa 40,000 doors to knock on. And knowing Jonathan he'll be trying to ensure he knocks on them all at least once. Zillions of leaflets to support being designed, printed and delivered - apart from the fund raising to support this. He doesn't have a private office or parliamentary office or parliamentary communications budget to help with this.

While you await his coming you could always email him [email protected]

[Old Yeller]

Oh dear, I was just thinking of transferring my vote to the LibDems (ex-Labour) when I read James Barber?s comments on Afghanistan.

Much as JB might feel fortunate, and much as Paddy Ashdown might be perceived to be a moderate and congenial person, let?s not forget his military background.

Afghanistan?let?s please remember why we went in there originally.

Let?s also remember that democracy, by its very nature, is not something that can be imposed, much as we might like it to be, in our superior ignorance.

And it isn?t that long ago that we were on the side of the Taliban?.when it suited us politically. And we were also allied, politically, militarily and economically to a military dictator in Pakistan whose own security forces were fomenting the problems.

The argument posited by James Barber is spurious. If you go down this line then we?d better get straight into Iran, North Korea, Israel and probably a whole lot of other places in the Horn of Africa.

Let?s not forget that the only country to ever use nuclear weapons is America. And, seeing what complete devastation they wrought, they did it again.

That, surely, is terrorism, just as dropping ?clean? bombs on people in Baghdad in the name of democracy , or slaying innocent families in Afghanistan in the name of freedom, is.

Now, apart from the hundreds of thousands of dead people, the destroyed livelihoods and shattered families, we have the issue of the extraordinary numbers of babies being born in Faluja with missing limbs and other dreadful abnormalities.

Anyone got any idea why? Rhetorical question.

I agree. There is no moral justification for terrorism - whether it?s the terrorism of the Taliban, the USA, the UK, Israel, Zimbabwe, Myanmar, or any other political entity.

Maybe, just maybe, Obama can make a little difference. We have to hope so.

[James Barber]

Hi Old Yeller,

Your conclusions about ending WWII with nuclear weapons is incredible.

It was 1945. The calculations of Allied casualties, after taking one tiny Japanese home island, was 2 million to invade mainland Japan. By using nuclear weapons it was believed 2 million allied casualties could be avoided. After dropping one nuclear bomb the Japanese command were in internal paralysis and did nothing. The second one ended the war. To liken that to terrorism seems to mis represent the moral dilemma faced. 2million vs. 1/4million.

We're probably talking about avoiding the death of 10,000's of London males who would have died invading mainland Japan.

The shock of those two nuclear bombs has meant they've not been used since.

You've also talked about Faluja in Iraq. The lunancy of invading Iraq has nothing to do with Afghanistan. And Lib Dems stancy on that folly well known.

Iran and North Korea although remarkably unpallitable countries with regards to human rights that are countries that have government and can be politically engaged. A Taliban controlled Afghanistan could not be politically engaged. Real risk that Pakistan finds it useful to have a little instability to ensure the west keeps propping it up. So we might be in position where we're trying to help Afghanistan srot its troubles out for a very long time. But as insurance aganst Pakistan nuclear weapons falling into the wrong hands it makes sense.

So the Obama arms reduction and talk about countries that sign up to nuclaer non proliferation helpful.

I'd be interested to hear your solution to Afghanistan that preserves our security from a future nuclear 9/11.

[SteveT]

I have Emailed J Mitchell, thank you for the convenient link Mr Barber.

Steve.

[jenny1840]

Er James i too am slightly shocked by your offhand comments about the dropping of nuclear weapons on japan.

the point is they were totally and utterly indiscriminate against non-combatents, it was murder on an horrific scale.

I hope when Nick Clegg talks about a new kind of politics he is not thinking like this.

This can all relate back to community politics; I was told that the livesey museum was closed so funding could continue on projects in East Dulwich, if this is true it is certainly not in anyway a new kind of politics.

I hope Nick Clegg is not just using a soundbite without substance when he makes this statement.

[*Bob*]

I don't see anything offhand about those comments.

Most of the main players in WW2 (England, Germany, Russia) had already engaged in their own indiscriminate mass-killing of non-combatants (in one way or another) - before America dropped the bomb - and to little effect with regards to overall purpose and intention.

But dropping the bomb was the only action taken that had an immediate and permanent effect with regards to ending the war. In that respect it was one of the more clear-cut decisions that was taken.

[Huguenot]

Ha ha jenny1840!

I think your quest for a 'new kind of politics' should start at home - and ruling out gossip and smear would be a fine place to start. I noticed on another thread you accused the forum of being run be a political party. Quite simply an unfounded lie.

Your reference to 'projects in East Dulwich' is quite simply a strategy to create conflict in our communities.

Don't get yourself a rep for that! ;-)

Council expenditure is limited by the tax contributions of local citizenry, not all of whom share your agenda. This means that not everything can be funded. Budgets get prioritised and the Livesey didn't make the cut, bad luck indeed - but also honest, democratic and transparent.

The reasons for the withdrawal of budget of the Livesey were fully documented, and subjected to a vote at council. The budgets were redistributed to other higher priority projects, not champagne and caviar.

[James Barber]

Hi Jenny1840,

Don't know who told you the Livesey Children's museum was closed to fund East Dulwich projects. Nonsense.

It was closed because budget cuts had to be made and officers assured us relatively few Southwark residents visited it compared to the revenue cost. It was also not open the whole year.

It is now being transferred to Peckham Theatre a children's theatre which with the much larger space than they currently have can work with many more children than ever before. They also undertake their work year round.

Why were we short of funds. Southwark has many more residents than the census reported. Central government funding is laregely based on population. Also, the government has decided to raise Southwark's funding allocation by less than inflation for quite a few years while increasing the responsibilities Southwark has to fulfil.

We also raised Southwark's meals on wheels, after 7 years of zero rises, to just below the London average prices.

If it wasn't for centralising 30+ back offices into one bigger single back office near London Bridge saving so far ?35m the minimal front line cuts would have been much more severe.

I'm sorry if my summary of the ending of WWII in any way suggested the consequences of using atomic weapons wasn't catastrophic for the people it killed, seriously injured at the time and since due to radiation. But not using them was viewed at the time and by historians since as probably having larger consequences by around a factor. Equally the limited use they had, being used twice, but the harm being so demonstrable, has probably contributed to the world never seeing them used in anger since. US seriously considered ending the Korean war with atomic weapons on China but western world abhored this prospect probably as a result of seeing what happens when they're used.

[jenny1840]

Thanks James, but it did seem rather throw away - 10.000 london males vs ......god knows how many from another country. As for the other stuff its ok throwing out figures but i think the focus on regeneration in certain areas is clear to see. I wonder if that fence that went up on the green then vanished could have been money better spent. But then again hindsight is a marvelous thing.

My comment on the forum was only made because i noticed that the Labour Councillor thread was moved here, out of the ED section and i wondered why.

as for 'The reasons for the withdrawal of budget of the Livesey were fully documented, and subjected to a vote at council. The budgets were redistributed to other higher priority projects, not champagne and caviar." thats surely is the point, i think it is a council alliance and the livesey is not in an alliance owned ward ! all transparent and documented but also i am afraid 'age old' tribal politics and certainly not politics of a new kind. As Nick Clegg's party have never been in power you can only judge them on what you see in front of you. They have got a fantastic new school opened in Dulwich/Peckham Rye and no doubt lot's of other great stuff and they are on board with Greenpeace's idea of scrapping trident so that's great too.

No doubt when councillors are re-elected there will be Champagne and Caviar so if you get invited Huguenot enjoy yourself !

Smiley face with tongue stuck out and smeared lipstick.

[Huguenot]

It wasn't a Labour Councillor (you're still repeating the error), it was a Labour candidate. The only service they could offer is 'vote for me'.

I'm sure if a Labour councillor wanted to engage with the local community they'd be very welcome to the East Dulwich Issues section.

The rules have been applied to all candidates so far as I can tell.

You may have noticed that this thread is also entitled 'candidate for MP' and it's in the Drawing Room.

Smily face with a tired and disappointed look slightly shaking it's head. ;-)

[jenny1840]

well whoever it is , was , could be, what you are saying is that everyone gets moved to certain sections unless you are currently elected? I think that you finally and thankfully have answered my question, so for that i thank you.

The rules as far as i understand it that are applied at the BBC are that during an election campaign all political parties should be on an equal footing in terms of exposure, we did not tune into BBC1 to watch Gordon and then BBC2 to see David C and then BBC3 to see Nick Clegg ! The rules here are different and that is all i was wondering.

So thanks.

Beating dust of carpet with large stick and not looking amused face !

[Huguenot]

No jenny1840, I still don't think you're getting it.

In the thread on the ED Issues page James Barber is actually doing his job. He invites people to keep him informed of issues as and when they arise and then attempts to deal with them with various levels of success. Try reading it if you're still not clear - it's about lamposts and parking and swimming baths.

He's not the only one doing their job on those pages - Station Manager Barry Jones also does part of his job the same way.

The other candidates are actually campaigning. Campaigning goes in the Drawing Room.

Your BBC comparison is inappropriate. In the EDF all campaigners have equivalence in the Drawing Room, in much the same way as the BBC offers equal coverage to the main candidates.

However, Gordon Brown doesn't stop being Prime Minister during the election - he still gets on with his job, and James Barber must be allowed to get on with his.

I sincerely hope that the winning councillors will continue with this very successful engagement strategy. They will be afforded the same opportunity.

[louisiana]

James Barber Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Hi SteveT,

> Dulwich & West Norwood Parliamentary seat has 8

> wards and roughly East Dulwich Forum covers one of

> them with bits of the Camberwell and Peckham

> parliamentary seat.

Hi James

Many of us on here live in the other wards of the constituency - not ED ward.

I live in College ward. Many others live in Village ward.

This is not, after all, 'East Dulwich Ward Forum'.

It is the most significant online forum for miles around - until you get to Urban 75 (Brixton) for example. It has thirty times the traffic of Virtual Norwood, for example.

I'm sorely tempted to vote Lib Dem this time - but finding it a little strange that the candidate is not even waving and saying hi on the most significant online forum in the constituency where he is seeking to be elected.

[BARA]

Perhaps Jonathan would rather spend his time actually meeting the electorate in person. Having come second in the last General Election - overtaking Kim Humphreys the Tory candidiate, Jonathan obviously feels that the personal touch is more important to him and his team. The LD team have been working hard in both College and Village Wards as far as I can see.

I was in the Village Ward yesterday and saw some LDs going round talking to people, plus loads of orange posters.

BARA had a hustings last week for East Dulwich Ward, only the labour candidates and Jonathan turned up, no sign of the Torys or the Greens who had personal letters and also their party was emailed in March.

On the same evening the Herne Hill Society held hustings relating to the Environment. Local Churches are arranging hustings for the DAWN candidates - you just need to look out for the various notices around the constituency. Since Jonathan is a councillor - he spends a fair time on his emails etc I would imagine so may be glad to get out and talk.

James has already given his ( Jonathan )email - you can always contact him.

[louisiana]

BARA Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Perhaps Jonathan would rather spend his time

> actually meeting the electorate in person. Having

> come second in the last General Election -

> overtaking Kim Humphreys the Tory candidiate,

> Jonathan obviously feels that the personal touch

> is more important to him and his team. The LD

> team have been working hard in both College and

> Village Wards as far as I can see.

> I was in the Village Ward yesterday and saw some

> LDs going round talking to people, plus loads of

> orange posters.

>

> BARA had a hustings last week for East Dulwich

> Ward, only the labour candidates and Jonathan

> turned up, no sign of the Torys or the Greens who

> had personal letters and also their party was

> emailed in March.

>

> On the same evening the Herne Hill Society held

> hustings relating to the Environment. Local

> Churches are arranging hustings for the DAWN

> candidates - you just need to look out for the

> various notices around the constituency. Since

> Jonathan is a councillor - he spends a fair time

> on his emails etc I would imagine so may be glad

> to get out and talk.

> James has already given his ( Jonathan )email -

> you can always contact him.

Dear "BARA"

I have no idea who or what BARA is (it seems to be both a person and a thing, from your post).

"Jonathan obviously feels": well, I take it that you are Jonathan's alter ego, as you clearly are able to read his mind.

I haven't seen Jonathan around these parts and feel I am unlikely to. Hence my interest in him addressing residents via the forum.

I would venture to suggest that a forum contribution - addressing thousands of local residents on any given day - would take around five minutes, the time it takes to "actually meet" one person or so. While "actually meeting" the same number of people would take months or years. Mr Mitchell does not seem to be showing good judgment in making effective use of his time.

This is causing me to start having serious doubts about him as a candidate. One of the serious issues we have with current members of parliament has been their largely dreadful relationship with (and understanding of) communications technologies. I was hoping for better from Mr Mitchell.

[Mick Mac]

SteveT Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I have Emailed J Mitchell, thank you for the

> convenient link Mr Barber.

>

> Steve.

Any response Steve ?