Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I voted Labour on three counts because I believe James / the Lib Dems focused on things that aren't important. I am hoping our fully red council will now work to reduce poverty and build enough housing.


Good luck to all the new Labour councilors.

Jim1234, James worked tirelessly on things which mattered locally. If you really believe Labour will reduce poverty and build enough housing, I?d love to know where you get your information from. After all Southwark is a Labour led council and see no signs of this wonderful world you dream of.

Jim1234 Wrote:

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

> I voted Labour on three counts because I believe

> James / the Lib Dems focused on things that aren't

> important. I am hoping our fully red council will

> now work to reduce poverty and build enough

> housing.

>

> Good luck to all the new Labour councilors.


Well you can hope as much as you like but it will get you nowhere- I've been to a few council meetings over the years and Labour are the worst kind of politicians- they have not got an altruistic bone between them- they are ONLY after votes and furthering their own careers...and as for doing anything for the WORKING classes- dream on

Uncleglen, sure you're right to be honest, but they're at least meant to be the party of the working classes.


Singlato, for all their faults (there are many), Southwark Council are the only one building new council housing in London.


I would have voted for someone further left if I could have...

I thought the Women's Equality Party did a formidable job this year. I can't remember seeing a "fringe" party making such an impact in recent years and their share of the vote is a testament to that.


However, I suspect that WEP's success has taken a share of James's vote and it's sad to see someone else who has put so much into the campaign and contributed to the neighbourhood has lost his seat as a result.


Of all the canvassers I spoke to, I found Labour to be deeply unpleasant. I felt they talked down to me and had no interest in listening to my concerns. No doubt they will all be toasting themselves with champagne, congratulating themselves on how many fish they managed to shoot in Southwark's barrel.

Very sad to hear this. You have always been very supportive be it from helping me to get a bike anchor to sorting out the Japanese knotweed creeping onto my neighbours property. Always friendly, always making time for a chat.

Best wishes for the future James

Just adding my thanks, and also consternation at the seeming injustice that someone who works so hard, and has so much local support, can fail to retain his post. I think we were actually always just on the other side of the boundary of James' remit, but we've benefited from more than one of his initiatives, including one that is now a fundamental part of our family's life, for which we are particularly grateful.


James, I hope this cloud has a bright and shiny silver lining and that your career goes from strength to strength.

Alan Medic Wrote:

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

> As long as idiots have a vote, things like this

> will happen. Thanks James & good luck.



Erm .....


I'm guessing not everybody in East Dulwich knows of James, particularly if they don't read this forum.


And the boundary changes won't have helped.


So they probably voted solely on party lines.


That doesn't make them idiots.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Does anyone have any knowledge as to who (if any) is taking over the old Poundland unit in Lordship Lane? 
    • 100% agree and eloquently put. Trump's lawsuit will go nowhere. He can't sue in the UK as he is out of time and the bbc would have a case to countersue given all the times he has lied about the BBC. A court in Florida will have no jurisdiction in the UK and he would still have to prove malice and reputational damage. Well he won the elction so there's no argument on damage there. The program was not broadcast in the US, so very few if any people saw it. His entire speech is readily available to view elsewhere anyway. And on reputation, does he really want all the facts dragged out as you have listed them above? In what world does Trump thinks that leaves him with a good reputation that someone else could damage? It will go nowhere, like so many of his other lawsuits and court actions. The BBC should hold firm. A more curious question though is why the Telegraph waited until now to do their predictable mischief?   Agreed. To downplay the state murder of a journalist, in an embassy on foreign soil of all places, because he was 'not liked' by a lot of people, is just ludicrous and offensive. Compare that to his narrative around the murder of Charlie Kirk, who was also not liked by a lot of people. Trump is playing his guest as always, but it shows just how morally spineless he really is. 
    • He's done 34 foreign trips to 26 countries since becoming PM.  With all the in-fighting going on at #10 and with some MPs and one Labour mayor on manoeuvres,  should he not be staying at home and fighting for his premiership and the interests of the party?  or does he reckon he is already doomed and feels better away from it all?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...