Friday 28 March 2014

Councillor Martin Terry

I suppose it was inevitable how Martin Terry, who always portrays himself as the great defender of democracy, would justify his chicken run from Westborough to Thorpe. However he has outdone his usual levels of cant in the Echo today by being quoted as saying “It’s not in my own interests. I’m doing it on the basis that one of my colleagues was elected on a large majority as an Independent and then switched parties”. Of course not Martin! The fact that you are running away from the residents of Westborough a year before your term ends because you know full well that you will not retain your seat has got nothing to do with self interest. Are you really going to continue to try to peddle this nonsense that the Independents are not a political party? It seems you regard the alleged slight to your party brand as more important than remaining in post to represent the voters who have elected you. Your use of the word “switched” is also telling. In 2009 you were happy to complain that in moving to Southend West from Basildon David Amess had acted poorly nothwithstanding that his parliamentary term had come to an end and there had been significant boundary changes to his constituency. You argued that the action was “self serving” and said that “There are many angry, deserted and disgruntled people in Basildon and Southend following what became known as his “chicken run” to a safe seat”. Isn’t it time you owned up? You are running early because you think you will lose Westborough and there will not be an “Independent” vacancy in Thorpe next year. It will be interesting to see with your Labour roots whether you and your team will be telling the good residents of Thorpe that you “are really a Conservative” like they have done with more right minded candidates in recent years.

4 comments:

  1. WHAT ALWAYS AMAZES ME IS THAT ALL THE ARTICLES ON THIS BLOG HAVE NO COMMENTS. COULD IT BE WHAT PEOPLE HAVE TO SAY IS NEVER APPROVED, BECAUSE THEY DISAGREE WITH YOUR POINT OF VIEW? WHEN WILL COUNCILLORS SAY WHAT THEY BELIEVE AND PRINT THE FACTS, RATHER THAN RUN OTHER COUNCILLORS DOWN

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thanks for your comment. In fact until recently I was not moderating and the change of policy was only forced by an inappropriate and annonymous comment left in response to an earlier blog and referring to a third party. I am always happy to say exactly what I feel and hope this is reflected in my blog items. In this case I believe that it is worthy of comment that a local politician who was so vocal in castigating an MP for changing seats at a general election should seek to defend his own premature flight by suggesting that he is acting in the interests of the electorate. It is complete hogwash.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Thank you for posting my comment. Having dealt with this Council, for the first time, but now for over 2 years, what I cannot accept is saying things like "Doing nothing at Shoebury Common is not an option, which is why we are pushing ahead with the preferred option". Although not a direct lie, you know full well that all FIVE options provide the same level of protection, but you give the impression that your unwanted design is the only one and we are against Flood protection. Consultation is just a "tick the box" exercise. You also know your option 2 is £5.2m CHEAPER, but you never told the Place Scrutiny Committee and you still want to push ahead with closures.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Peter

    Thank you for your further comment. Based on the feedback I have received the opposition to the current option includes people with a range of views to include a significant number who oppose any flood defence work being undertaken in this area. I am pleased that you do not share this view and agree that work to prevent flood damage is essential, but it is clearly not the case that opponents have a common voice. There has been very extensive consultation on the proposals. The decision taken by members was based on the expert advice and information provided and I would refer to the relevant committee reports which appear on the council website. These reports also highlight the problems with the alternative schemes. I am afraid that we will have to agree to differ save on the underlying need for improved flood defences in this area.

    ReplyDelete