A blog by Luke Akehurst about politics, elections, and the Labour Party - With subtitles for the Hard of Left. Just for the record: all the views expressed here are entirely personal and do not necessarily represent the positions of any organisations I am a member of.

Sunday, December 09, 2007

Worth reading

A good dose of reality from Andrew Rawnsley in today's Observer here.

Still no mention of the Abrahams affair from the 100 people we canvassed today.

Another mendacious Lib Dem Focus drops through the doors in Springfield: headline story asks "How can the Labour council make people live like this?" and is about a small estate called Tower Court, which is indeed in a mess. It neglects to point out that the reason that Tower Court is in this state is that it is being demolished and replaced with a totally new regenerated estate, and is in the process of being decanted i.e. everyone is moving out, which kind of answers the question in their headline.

It also says the block is "squatted by drug users " when in fact the crack house on the estate was closed down by the Hackney Council/Police Crackdown team in September and has a notice on the door saying that.

Promoted by Luke Akehurst of Flat 1, 8 Beatty Road, London, N16 8EB on behalf of Mohamed Munaf Zina of 91 Kyverdale Road, London, N16 6PP. Hosted (printed) by Blogger.com (Google Inc) of 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043 who are not responsible for any of the contents of this post.


Blogger Merseymike said...

Two problems here.

First, Cameron does not attract the sort of (agreed, very unfair) negativity which NK attracted when he was leader.

Two, the very last thing needed is to get a 92-style result. Major had at least 20 people on the Tory backbenches who were obsessed with Europe above all else. They made his government unelectable. But more to the point, he had no vision, nothing left to do, and the only reason he was elected was the, in my view quite unjustified, dislike many had for Neil Kinnock.

The problem is that 92 was followed by 97. And the Tories are only just recovering from 97 now.

6:47 pm, December 09, 2007

Blogger susan said...

Good dose of sycophantic bollocks........as we get from P Toynbee, M Kettle, J Ashley , M White and other overpaid colleagues in NUJ

11:19 pm, December 09, 2007

Blogger Hughes Views said...

Did my first bit of canvassing using the new voter id script yesterday. Of the people who answered the door and who made it past the "would you mind" talking to me question (I admit it wasn't many) the average score on the nought to five scale (where five = certain to vote Labour at the next General Election) was four. Not bad when we're firmly in mid-term blues and possibly as much as 28 months from the short campaign...

8:23 am, December 10, 2007

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Luke to foegt to mention Tower Court estate has been in that condition for the past 5 years. It is a disgrace the conditions council tenants have to live in. You expect them to be grateful for being decanted to soem other shitehole estate whilst the Tower Court estate is transformed into Private housing with an allocation of 20% social housing. You make me sick

8:54 am, December 10, 2007

Anonymous Anonymous said...

This should suit you Luke. From one of your fav websites The Clissold Leisure Centre

The Councillors Commission, a Labour dominated body has produced a 100 page report recommending a range of new benefits for councillors. It includes proposals to free Councillors from the requirement to turn up at meetings!! The Government wants to make council service more appealing and accessible to a diverse range of people, including those trying to paddle their own canoe in Panama, one would imagine.

9:20 am, December 10, 2007

Anonymous Fitzwilliam Ponsonby-Archer said...

I think you'll find that the bit at the end of your post isn't legal. You should check Section 66 of The Electoral Administration Act. Mind you, I don't suppose you care too much about being legal. Why would you, when half the Cabinet break the law with impunity?

6:21 pm, December 10, 2007

Blogger Luke Akehurst said...

Useful advice, not sure if you are right about needing to list the site's host but it doesn't hurt to add some extra detail. Local Tory website certainly doesn't as their imprint just says: "Hackney Conservatives. Published and promoted by Andrew Boff, 67 Halliford Street, London. N1 3HF."

8:14 pm, December 10, 2007

Anonymous lord london fields lido said...

Spot the difference! Mr Akehurst has changed his imprint on the old posts - to exactly like the libdem one on the previous post!

Learning from the libs, eh?

8:46 pm, December 10, 2007

Anonymous Anonymous said...

I prefer the spoof Luke Akehurst blog. Why can't you be as funny as him/her/them?

4:00 pm, December 11, 2007

Anonymous Fitzwilliam Ponsonby-Archer said...

Interesting that Hackney Conservatives now give their official address as that of Islington Conservative Association. I wonder whether that's simply because, in the words of the real Luke Akehurst, the "trounced top Tory teacher has timorously tottered to Tattie Town" thereby leaving the local association without a registered address to meet legal requirements, or whether perhaps life in Hackney has become so wonderful under New Labour that even the opposition feels the need to live across the border?

9:18 am, December 12, 2007


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Free Hit Counters
OfficeDepot Discount