Another reply to Steve Tierney

Steve Tierney has left another long comment in reply to the “Steve Tierney gets a reply” post here.

(Steves points are in blue and mine are in black)

When you put a message on my blog that you had responded to me and I should come back and take a look I was quite excited. I thought I was heading for a decent debate.

What I got was a party political broadcast, and not a very good one.

Are you really trying to claim that your comments are not also party political. We are both interested in politics, we are both candidates and it IS election time.

You didn’t answer any of the points I made (with a couple of exceptions) and instead charged ahead just saying the things you wanted to say. Why use my post at all? You might as well have just written a new post.

I answered all your substantive points which you wrapped up in waffle to make your point. I don’t mind you being verbose, that’s just your writing style, and I’m not going to censor you, I am a libertarian, after all.

There were so many inaccuracies in your post, particularly relating to our local area, that I am at a loss where to start.

The Wisbech library – most renovations paid by the lottery fund, actually.

The total cost of the redevelopment is £2.5m of which £2m comes from lottery funding and £0.5m comes from the hard pressed Cambs county council taxpayer. Considering that there was nothing wrong with the current library and the redevelopment adds a cafe (there are plenty of commercial cafes nearby) and larger toddlers play area and NOT any more books, I think it is right and proper that I point out this clear waste of money. Considering that there are about 250,000 dwellings in Cambridgeshire, that works out as an additional £2 council tax for each house. You might think that its such a small number, why bother. After all, its only a few quid here, only a few quid there. But it all adds up and explains why every year since 1997, the conservative administration have put up the council tax by more than the rate of inflation. If I get elected I won’t mind spending taxpayers money where necessary but unlike the local conservatives I won’t regard the taxpayers wallet as a bottomless pit to be filched when ever the fancy takes me.

The College – The building is falling down and is in a terrible state. We don’t think “new buildings” are better than old buildings, but they are better than NO buildings. It is the LABOUR party who have dropped funding for the college and Conservatives are fighting tooth-and-nail to try and rescue the situation. I’m sure you know that.

The college is NOT falling down, don’t talk such rot. It may need a lick of paint and some renovation work but even so that would cost only a fraction of the £70m that a new college at March would cost. I’ve been out canvassing and the main topic of conversation was not potholes but the wanton destruction of the Wisbech college.

When the new March college was first proposed the conservative councillors went along with it with barely a murmer. A few local electors started to kick up a fuss and write to the local paper etc. Several conservative councillors then started to say that this wasn’t such a good idea. The labour govt ran out of other peoples money to waste and funding was then withdrawn and there was a big splash in the paper where Jill Tuck and my opponent Simon King said “we won’t let the govt off the hook”. In other words the local conservatives are using the situation as a convenient stick with which to beat the labour govt irrespective that the news appears to be just what local voters want.

Simon King also has the blantant audacity to claim support for a local nursery that uses the college buildings but has not even attempted to explain what happens when the he gets his wish for March and the college is bulldozed. Talk about treating the voters with contempt.

You seem to like having a pop at Jill Tuck, but you don’t specify any detail in your criticism. The Leader of a County Council is SUPPOSED to do precisely that, lead. Nothing that is being done at County Level is purely because Jill Tuck wants it to be so. It’s party-controlled, not a dictatorship. But I’m sure you know that too.

It certainly is party controlled. CONSERVATIVE party controlled. I have heard of no conservative councillor who thinks that forcing the taxpayer to cough up an additional £250,000 over and above what is strictly necessary, to be spent on comunity projects that the ruling conservatives agree with is a bad idea. Why not, NOT take the money and let individual taxpayers decide for themselves what local charities they want to support. It’s because you are all conservatives, and therefore authoritarian, that you act like this.

In fact, this streak of authoritarianism goes all through your party like a cancerous growth. Even your national party leader David Cameron has refused to say if he will allow a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty if he becomes Prime Minister next year.

You take a few paragraphs to have a personal go at me, which I’m not sure I appreciate but I suppose I can expect no better. You suggest i’d like to ‘bully’ people, which is a bit low really. You don’t know me from Adam, but I hope we’ll meet at some point so you can see that your criticism is far from the mark. My intention, should I be elected for my seat, is just to try and do my best to help people. I got into it for the same reasons you did, I’m sure.

I’ve never met you and I suppose that at an individual level both you and Mr King are decent enough sorts of chaps, most people are. It is only when an individual dons the uniform of a concentration camp guard that they start to become nasty and brutal.

You and Mr King are freely standing as candidates for the conservative party. This is a party that wants to give well off married people like me a tax break (simply for being married) that will be paid for by single young men working in factories. I am happy to accept your definition of that sort of behaviour as “bullying”.

Your party also have a policy of giving tax breaks to people like me (who is rich enough already to save money every year) to be paid for by those on the dole through no fault of their own. Again, if that meets your definition of “bullying” then I am happy to accept it.

I’m not going to engage with you any more at this point. It seems that, during ‘campaign season’, anything you say is going to be campaign-speak. I suppose that’s, at the very least, understandable. It’s pointless you and I bashing heads on it since we probably agree on more things that we disagree on.

It’s campaign season for both of us. To pretend otherwise would be silly and we both have campaigning to do.

However, if you really do have libertarian leanings then you will have to put up with the majority of your party ignoring you. I would invite you over to join us but you know as well as I do that you would lose the social side of things from Fenland conservatives if you did jump ship.

Your commentor “Henry North” says “I smell fear in the Blue Camp”. Henry, I’m a pretty relaxed sort of guy. I don’t tend to get worked up about these things. But I do understand what you are trying to say and let me just put you straight. Simon King, who Andrew is standing against, is one of the best councillors in Cambridgeshire. In my most humble and very personal opinion he will absolutely, completely and utterly wipe the floor with Andrew Hunt. I don’t speak for Cllr King so I can’t say if there is ‘fear in his heart’ or not. But if I were a betting man I know where my money would be.

To be fair, it did come across as being a bit “young upstart, how dare he”, although I am happy to accept that you didn’t mean it that way.

In conclusion, I once again wish you the best of luck Andrew. I admire somebody prepared to put themselves on the line, say what they believe and stand for election. I’m one of your constituents. I look forward to a leaflet, or being canvassed. Or something. Becoming a councillor is more than just grandstanding for your pocket audience.

Actually, I hadn’t realised you were one of ‘mine’ until I was in your road yesterday. I did go into your shop and try to canvass you but the young lad behind the counter said you were out (leafleting like me, I expect).

Since I didn’t get the chance to canvass you face to face, shall I put you down as a “don’t know”.

I’ll wish you ‘good luck’ anyway.

———-

Imprint – as required by electoral law. Printed and promoted by Andrew Peter Hunt of 73 Camargue Place, Wisbech, Cambs, PE13 2SX