Norman Baker asks some Questions in Parliament

[Lord Bracknell]

This one went to John Prescott, but was answered by the Junior Minister, Angela E Smith, on 11 May 2006:-

Communities and Local Government

Brighton and Hove Albion

Norman Baker: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister if he will list the dates of contacts between (a) Ministers and (b) officials in his Department and representatives of (i) Brighton and Hove council and (ii) Brighton and Hove Albion football club since 25 October 2005; and whether in each case the contact was by (A) telephone, fax or e-mail, (B) written correspondence and (C) meeting. [65222]

Angela E. Smith: I have been asked to reply.

Given the hon. Gentleman's interest in the Falmer planning decision, I have restricted my answer to contact regarding that matter.

I am unable to provide details of telephone calls, faxes or emails as these records are not held centrally.

The letter setting out the Secretary of State's decision regarding the applications at Falmer was issued to all main parties on 27 October 2005.

No Ministers or officials in the Department for Communities and Local Government have had any meetings or written correspondence relevant to the planning decision with either the Council or the Football Club since the decision was issued.



Oviously not satisfied with this answer, he's put down another question to Ruth Kelly:-

Norman Baker (Lewes): To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, pursuant to the Answer of 11th May 2006, Official Report, column 492W, on Brighton and Hove Albion, if she will list all other contacts with (a) Brighton and Hove Council and (b) Brighton and Hove Albion Football Club since 25th October 2005 which she classifies as not relevant to the planning decision to which she refers.







I think our Norm is going to find out that Ruth Kelly might get annoyed if he starts to pester her.

 

[Garry Nelson's Left Foot]

I'd like a ferret to crawl up his arse and eat him from the inside outwards.

 

[3gulls]

I'd like a ferret to crawl up his arse and eat him from the inside outwards.

It looks like he smells a rat!

 

[bob monkhouse]

I'd like a ferret to crawl up his arse and eat him from the inside outwards.

 

[dcseagull]

I am unable to provide details of telephone calls, faxes or emails as these records are not held centrally.

To be fair, that response is wholly pathetic.

 

[Everest]

Re: Re: Norman Baker asks some Questions in Parliament

To be fair, that response is wholly pathetic.

Seems apt for an answer to a question from Baker then.

 

[Superseagull]

He really is a big fat slimey slug of a politician

 

[Lord Bracknell]

Re: Re: Norman Baker asks some Questions in Parliament

To be fair, that response is wholly pathetic.

Does the organisation that you work for keep a record of EVERY telephone call that all members of staff make?






I thought not.

Baker is a master of asking stupid questions and then whinging that he hasn't been given a full answer.

 

[dcseagull]

Re: Re: Re: Norman Baker asks some Questions in Parliament

Does the organisation that you work for keep a record of EVERY telephone call that all members of staff make?






I thought not.

Baker is a master of asking stupid questions and then whinging that he hasn't been given a full answer.

Without wishing to be a smarta7se, we do try and make a note of every telephone call, e-mail and fax when the discussion relates to a topic that is likely to end up in litigation. The Falmer is such an issue. I for one am concerned if government haven't kept correspondance with parties in one central place. If nothing else it's going to make responding to any allegations from LDC / Baker more onerous and time consuming.

I'm not trying to defend Baker, and leaving the issue of Falmer to one side, parliamentary questions are an important tool that MPs can use to scrutinize the executive. Whilst the government might be the goodies on this issue, on many cases they are not and responses such as "we do not keep faxes and e-mails in one central place" is a patronizing message to both MPs and the people that elect them.

 

[bigc]

executive scrutiny?

baker simply wants personal fame and popularity.

he is misusing his power. shame on him.

 

[BensGrandad]

If you phone any company these days the call is nearly always preceeded by the message' Your call may be recorded and monitored to improve training and performance in the future.' Why should the government be any different. That is not to say I agree that Baker should even ask the question.

 

[mona]

Does Baker sound like a man who will accept a verdict in favour of the stadium? He and his cronies are determined to smash our hopes. If Ruth Kelly says yes, there will certainly be a judicial review afterwards.

Baker will never compromise with the Albion despite his former colleague Bellotti's role in making us homeless. The only way we can beat him is to destroy his political career. I suspect that 80% of the people who vote for him don't know what the main Lib Dem policies are. That is something that could help in future.

 

[Wardy]

In fairness she does not say that they are not held just that they are not held centrally.

 

[Jim in the West]

Does Baker sound like a man who will accept a verdict in favour of the stadium? He and his cronies are determined to smash our hopes. If Ruth Kelly says yes, there will certainly be a judicial review afterwards.

Baker will never compromise with the Albion despite his former colleague Bellotti's role in making us homeless. The only way we can beat him is to destroy his political career. I suspect that 80% of the people who vote for him don't know what the main Lib Dem policies are. That is something that could help in future.

On the face of it, it's depressing reading....the man still seems hell bent on unearthing something which could be held against the club/the council/the ODPM, etc. However, could it in fact be a sign of desperation? Namely, that LDC will have no-where to go, assuming the govt gets it's wording right. Or is he seeking to find something which deflects criticism away from the mounting pressure on LDC?

 

[simonsimon]

Never trust a LIBDEM!

 

[mona]

On the face of it, it's depressing reading....the man still seems hell bent on unearthing something which could be held against the club/the council/the ODPM, etc. However, could it in fact be a sign of desperation? Namely, that LDC will have no-where to go, assuming the govt gets it's wording right. Or is he seeking to find something which deflects criticism away from the mounting pressure on LDC?

Perhaps we should learn from him and try and unearth something on Baker that could weaken his anti-Albion crusade. Baker must have something in his past. Despite his university education it sounds as if he was something of a drifter, doing various things like running an off licence before his political ascent.

 

[Screaming J]

Oviously not satisfied with this answer, he's put down another question to Ruth Kelly:-

Norman Baker (Lewes): To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, pursuant to the Answer of 11th May 2006, Official Report, column 492W, on Brighton and Hove Albion, if she will list all other contacts with (a) Brighton and Hove Council and (b) Brighton and Hove Albion Football Club since 25th October 2005 which she classifies as not relevant to the planning decision to which she refers.

I think our Norm is going to find out that Ruth Kelly might get annoyed if he starts to pester her.

Presumably part of the answer to this is something along the lines of "Prezza filled his mush with a steak and kidney pie & a glass of water whilst attending the Brighton v Hull match on whenever it was".

I suppose the conniving old bastard is trying to fish about any correspondance to do with the judicial review. Surely ODPM/DCLG will have contacted the Council and Club about this in which case the first answer was wrong and ther is more egg on the Govt's face? Or was that all done by Treasury Solicitors?

 

[bigc]

Well under the leadership of the OAP the party seem to be ailing fast, which is nice.

 

[The Oldman]

Whilst this all shows that Norman Baker is still out to get us, despite orginally saying he would accept Prescott's decision and work with all parties to ensure a satisfactory outcome, may I remind everyone that this board is read by both Lewes DC folk and Baker's office. So, let's keep private any suggestions about how we deal with them. They are the enemy and should be treated as such. I am not advocating anything illegal or violent but we should leave these matters to the club and "Falmer for all" to deal with.

However, Lord B should be commended as ever for sharing this info with us so we are aware of what these Lib Dems are upto. How any Albion supporter can continue to support that party is beyond me.

 

[smudge]

Question from Norman Baker:

"Mr Speaker, can the house please explain why the fuckwits in Lewes voted for such a lily livered, slimy shit as myself? I'd also like to ask the house what the f*** is the purpose of the Lib Dems?"