Local Election result

[dc]

Separate.

[PeterW]

I'm personally glad the LD/Con coalition were kicked out. They've not entirely covered themselves in glory - take the Lakanal House fire as one example.

As for the question above about how poorer people fare in Conservative-run councils in generally wealthier areas, I found this article fascinating:

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/johann-hari/johann-hari-welcome-to-cameron-land-1962318.html

[James Barber]

I'm chuffed to be re elected to represent East Dulwich. Huge thanks to all those who voted for Rosie, Jonathan and me.

Disappointed that all the improvements in Southwark were'nt enough for the Lib Dems overall to still lead the council. Most of Labour's pledges are just Lib Dem things in the pipeline - doubling recycling etc. Monday primary school allocations will be really good for example.

The Southwark Lib Dem group, compared to others, have done well but still having the national election had even more impact than we bargained for.

It will be interesting for those living in College ward as the two elected Labour councillors were paper candidates never expecting to be elected. I'm sure their colleagues will support them.

Looking at the voting papers during the count many people split votes between candidates from different parties and others just seemed a little confused. Lots of ballot papers with just Jonathan Mitchell voted for. Clearly some read the instructions for the general election and did the same for the local ballot paper.

A couple of residents have contacted me stating that when they went to vote some one had already voted under their name.

I've directed them to Deborah Collins the Director of Legal and Democratic Services at Southwark Council. I'm not really comfortable representing this type of casework as the operation of voting systems should be neutral and my involvement wouldn't be seen to be neutral.

Again, many thanks for those that voted for Rosie, Jonathan and me.

[Townleygreen]

I am delighted that you and your three LibDem colleagues were re-elected. I am sure the main reason you lost control of the council was the higher turnout because the election was at the same time as the General Election. I.e., people just voting the same way on both meant the Labour vote went up in several wards.

[dc]

James Barber Wrote:

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

> It will be interesting for those living in College ward as the two elected Labour councillors were paper candidates never > expecting to be elected. I'm sure their colleagues will support them.

Given that one of them is Andy Simmons who was Tessa's election agent and, before standing down in 2006, had previously been a councillor for eight years, I wouldn't be too worried about the lack of experience in the Labour team in College (which includes a chunk of East Dulwich btw). Andy is an absolute legend and one of the many reasons why Tessa increased her majority locally, and Labour increased its number of councillors from 8 to 15 across Dulwich and West Norwood. He was a brillant local councillor as I'm sure College ward residents will quickly discover. And Helen Hayes will be excellent too.

[bil]

dc Wrote:

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

> bil Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > i hope ED stays under lib dem (please don't let

> labour take over and destroy us)

>

> Quick question. How old are you?

why?

33 ....labour have been in government since i have been old enough to vote. i am guessing u thought i was younger and melodramatic

[bawdy-nan]

I think he might have b een wondering if you were too young to remember the tories in government

[????]

The really old of us remember what this country was like in the 70s....we'll all soon know again

[Gavin Edwards]

Townley Green - The implication of your post seems to be that Labour supporters are unable to distinguish between council and general elections, whereas Liberal Democrat supporters have no trouble in telling the difference. I don't understand why you make this assumption. Higher turnout brings out more people to vote for all parties surely?

I think most people would agree that a council elected with a higher turnout has more legitimacy and a stronger democratic mandate than a council elected by a lower turnout. There are a couple of posts on this thread which seem to be bemoaning the high turnout in the election. The excitement of a General Election has significantly increased the number of people voting in a local election on the same day. Even if this hasn't delivered the council you would have chosen, this is something to be celebrated not sneered at.

Gavin

Peckham Rye Labour

[????]

Oh is that right...are you realted to Harriet Harman? You have her lecturing, patronising tone to a tee

[Peckhamgatecrasher]

Oh goody, does that mean I can get out my Sweet/Slade/Bay City Rollers records Quids?

[James Barber]

hi dc,

They may well prove to be excellent but they weren't expecting to win and their life plans may need to change to support being a councillor which should be a very demanding role.

[dc]

???? Wrote:

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

> Oh is that right...are you realted to Harriet Harman? You have her lecturing, patronising tone to a tee

Typical EDF - why not play the ball instead of the man for a change?

We get that you didn't like the result but Gavin's post makes a perfectly reasonable point in an entirely reasonable manner. Anyway, fwiw I think the results show that many people were voting locally - the result in Village for instance where ex-Tory now LibDem Robin C-H topped the poll with two Tories in 2nd and 3rd; East Dulwich where the Libs were soundly beaten by Labour in the GLA elections in 2008 but came back with a 'robust' local campaign over the past few months; and College too, where Labour won two seats but Tory Cllr Lewis Robinson held on - a testament to the hard work he has put in over the years.

It does seem strange to effectively bemoan a high turnout given the wringing of hands over a supposed lack of interest in politics in the run up to these elections. 74% turnout in Village, 71% in East Dulwich and 68% in College seem like a good cause for celebration to me.

Duncan Chapman - Village Labour

[????]

I don't really care that much, I supported LDs this election but have been a labour voter before. It's just your talk down tone - some people may not give a flying F about the turnout - anarchists, the terminally unengaged etc so don't tell us all to be pleased...it's just your opinion not a lecture on how 'we' all feel

[Gimme]

Isn't this great for democracy. Suddenly there are all manner of politicians on EDF providing their pennyworth.

Question is, DC, Gavin Edwards etc, are you going to continue to use EDF to provide an interface to your constituents and to help resolve issues raised here? If so, that would be great news for all.

James Barber has won himself a lot of fans by effectively becoming much more accessible to a lot of people who wouldn't have otherwise gone to a councillor surgery or council meeting.

The more councillors who are accessible to those who voted for them, the more likely the concerns of the community are likely to be dealt with (although knowing politicians... the more likely we are also to see the bickering and point scoring that everyone outside of politics hates).

[Townleygreen]

Hi Gavin,

Thank you for the unpleasant tone of your comment addressed at me.

Shows me I was right to vote for the Lib Dems as opposed to hectoring b*stards like you.

Maybe you could take up Gimme's point and post on here like James Barber has done so effectively? Only it might be an idea to adjust your tone, if you do!!:)

[bil]

Bawdy-nan wrote:

I think he might have been wondering if you were too young to remember the tories in government

.............................................................................................

I do remember the last tory government but didn't really understand what was going on at the time. However, i am a "dividend" of a conservative government financial investment.

My parents, both low income working class, applied for a assisted places for both my brother and I. This funded a private school education. Additionally my school awarded me bursaries which helped with costs and allowed me to have additional interests such as learning to play the piano and flute. I was even more fortunate to have teachers willing to go the extra mile and have small group tutorials for A-level preparation for pupils that needed extra help.So i gained the grades to study at medical school. I am now a Dr (contributing tax etc). I had a number of jobs whilst i was at med school and my parents weren't able to offer financial support so i have been paying off debts accumulated whilst studying for many years but it has been worth it. In todays world, I wouldn't have been able to afford to study in med school now (due to fees). Although I would like to think i would have found a way.

I am so lucky (and thankful) to have had those opportunities (that so many people with our household income didn't have) because it is almost 99.9% sure that i wouldn't be where i am today if it wasn't for this funding. i wouldn't have aspired to study at university-because where i came from (the schools were awful), that wasn't what people did. No one else in my local area (that i knew) gained good A'levels, went university, entered any profession, with little prospect of earning much.

Assisted places were abolished by labour and free university education was abolished by labour

obviously with a view to giving every individual the same but fair opportunity for good education including entry to university..except that hasn't happened and now everyone is restricted to schooling in their local area which varies in quality and opportunity... i THINK more people are worse off than before. To be honest i don't know what the solution is.

now you know all about me! soon & one day i hope to contribute to give someone the opportunity i had (through creation of bursary /charitable donation) until then will keep on working.

[bawdy-nan]

bil, I think I love you: for your reasoned response, your life-story and your general good cheer...

[dc]

Townleygreen Wrote:

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

> Only it might be an idea to adjust your tone, if you do!

'Tone' in prose writing is very much in the eye of the beholder - and that's the problem given that tone is an auditory phenomenon. I can see nothing wrong with Gavin's post. He makes a reasonable point in a reasonable manner.

Of course, the use of phrases such as 'hectoring b*stards' does clarify the implied and inferred tone of a post.

[Mark]

Typical Councillor - why not play the ball instead of the man for a change?

[Mr Mann]

.

[????]

I think you've confused me with someone who gives a sh1te about your opinion Mr M

[DJKillaQueen]

I am very happy we have a Labour council. The Lib Dem Tory council came near bottom of many lists in both efficiency and performance. The final straw for me was the lie they published on their election campaign leaflets that labour intended to sell off housing management to Lambeth. A complete lie born out of a meeting that some labour councillors had with Lambeth regarding some border issues - and NOTHING to do with housing. Good riddance.

[Mr Mann]

.

[Huguenot]

As it thappens DJKillaQueen Labour candidates have appeared on the forum here defending the centralisation of services between Southwark and Lambeth as a reasonable cost-cutting exercise.

If you didn't know then you can read it here.

If it was a 'lie' then it was lie created and sustained by Labour candidates, which would be a bit daft really?

Smearing people is unpleasant, and not very clever when you get caught out.

That trunkline to the truth of yours needs an overhaul.