eastlondonseagull
Well-known member
Yet again, this shows what utter liars LDC and the Liberal Democrats are. Time and time again 
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Lewes District Council deceive the people - Episode 94
- Thread starter Lord Bracknell
- Start date
Pavilionaire
Well-known member
- Jul 7, 2003
- 31,278
Do you really think that the Lib Dems are on their own on this one? Or that the Tories would have acted any differently if they were in control of LDC?
I don't understand why some people see it as a party political issue, it's all about country folk not wanting the urban unwashed football fans within 5 miles of their beloved town. It ticks all their boxes - Countryside vs Town, urban encroachment, class warfare, football hooligans.
I don't understand why some people see it as a party political issue, it's all about country folk not wanting the urban unwashed football fans within 5 miles of their beloved town. It ticks all their boxes - Countryside vs Town, urban encroachment, class warfare, football hooligans.
eastlondonseagull
Well-known member
Pavilionaire said:
I don't know how the Tories, Labour or even the Greens would have reacted. Perhaps you're right. You are definitely right on the Countryside v Town argument - suppose it's that LDC has become the 'embodiment' (as such) of the enemy.
Lord Bracknell
On fire
- Thread starter
- #45
But it's not as though Lewes District is a rural area.Pavilionaire said:
It's got a population of 92,000.
Three-quarters of them live in Seaford, Lewes, Peacehaven, Newhaven, Telscombe Cliffs and East Saltdean - all of which are as urban as Bevendean or Coldean.
Last edited:
how many wards are there up for election next year on the Lewes council?
how many "seagulls party" candidates do we need to stand in all of them?
or are we best off targeting a handful of marginal seats so that we hold the balance of power?!?
or just standing against all Lib Dem councillors only - sounds best to me?
seem to remember Charlton formed their own party years ago when having problems getting back to The Valley re planning permission etc
how many "seagulls party" candidates do we need to stand in all of them?
or are we best off targeting a handful of marginal seats so that we hold the balance of power?!?
or just standing against all Lib Dem councillors only - sounds best to me?
seem to remember Charlton formed their own party years ago when having problems getting back to The Valley re planning permission etc
Lord Bracknell
On fire
- Thread starter
- #47
ac gull said:
From LDC's website:-
Councillors and wards
There are 21 wards in the Lewes District, each of which returns one, two or three councillors. There are 41 councillors in total.
The political composition of the Council is as follows:
Liberal Democrat Group 26
Conservative Group 11
Independent Group 3
Independent 1
Tom Hark Preston Park
Will Post For Cash
- Jul 6, 2003
- 72,392
ac gull said:
To use just about the most discredited Albion cllche ever used, that's 'one for the future'. To use another cliche 'a week is a long time in politics'. The political landscape may well change LONG before next year's local elections if Albion fans stage a massive and peaceful march on the Lib Dem conference in brighton in September. Reckon Baker, De Vacuous and the rest will bottle it bigtime after that and start resigning and back-peddling furiously to save their political skins. cos you can't continue being a politician if you misjudge the mood of the people that badly.
33057 Seagull
New member
Pavilionaire said:
so how about a petition to present to the Lib Dem conference - ONLY signed by people within the LDC area who are eligible to vote who are in favour of Falmer
wouldn't do any harm having a flyer to put through letter boxes about a week before asking for signatures re TRUTH about where stadium would be; why can't be else where etc
getting over 50% of LDC electorate to sign the petition would surely start to tell them they might have mis-judged public opinion on this
think may be some significance to fact that DK said we don't expect Ruth Kelly decision until October - i.e. AFTER the Lib Dem conference
if they went for another judicial review after we hopefully get another yes decision then surely they will lose some seats at next years elections?
from what Lord B has posted they only need to lose SIX councillors to be down to 20 and lose control as are 41 seats in total council
wouldn't do any harm having a flyer to put through letter boxes about a week before asking for signatures re TRUTH about where stadium would be; why can't be else where etc
getting over 50% of LDC electorate to sign the petition would surely start to tell them they might have mis-judged public opinion on this
think may be some significance to fact that DK said we don't expect Ruth Kelly decision until October - i.e. AFTER the Lib Dem conference
if they went for another judicial review after we hopefully get another yes decision then surely they will lose some seats at next years elections?
from what Lord B has posted they only need to lose SIX councillors to be down to 20 and lose control as are 41 seats in total council
33057 Seagull
New member
Too true. The only other party with a remote chance of defeating the Lib Dems in Lewes are the Tories & guess what they supported the Lib Dems on this one. Okay the Green Party - well they are against any new building unless environmentally sustainable. They are hardly going to back Falmer are they ? They have already stated this. Back to the Tories guess what at the local elections last year they deselected at least one candidate in Woodingdean as he was pro Falmer. Interestingly the Tory candidate at the general election took out a half page advert in the Argus along the lines of vote for me , vote for Falmer - really!!! Labour - well we will see - on the face of it they are pro Falmer & it is of course a vote winner. fundamentally all politicians are the same, at least when they are in power.Pavilionaire said:
If you talk to anyone who works in local government they will tell you the same thing that district councillors believe they have decision making power but the real decision makers are the Council Officers & Chief Executive, backed with legal advisors paid by you & me. The councillors, whichever the party, have very little say so indeed & as we have seen invariably take their Officers advice. This in my opinion is what has happened in Lewes & the same process appears to be happening elsewhere. Take a look at Adur where the Tories now have total control of the council but their Chief Executive & officers it seems are in bed with Worthing & driving all the decisions forward.
End of rant.
Mellor 3 Ward 4
Well-known member
A petition signed by those living in the LDC area sounds like a good idea - wasn't the one done just before they went for the JR over 5000 in a week?
I believe that althogh the majority of Lewes residents don't really care one way or the other towards the stadium (the VAST majority are certainly not anti it) the best way to get names on petitions is to push the waste of money by LDC when so many other priorites are being overlooked.
Having a specific number of 'signatures' to quote , say 20,000 on placards (when compared to a couple of dozen Falmer residents)walking up towards the Brighton Centre might actually get somebody within the LibDems to sort their Party in Lewes out.
On the subject of a March, are FFA organising this, as the last I heard the club seemed fairly quiet - perhaps they believe they think events will run their course before then?
IMO we should assume the worst, and start making plans for the March.
I believe that althogh the majority of Lewes residents don't really care one way or the other towards the stadium (the VAST majority are certainly not anti it) the best way to get names on petitions is to push the waste of money by LDC when so many other priorites are being overlooked.
Having a specific number of 'signatures' to quote , say 20,000 on placards (when compared to a couple of dozen Falmer residents)walking up towards the Brighton Centre might actually get somebody within the LibDems to sort their Party in Lewes out.
On the subject of a March, are FFA organising this, as the last I heard the club seemed fairly quiet - perhaps they believe they think events will run their course before then?
IMO we should assume the worst, and start making plans for the March.
Skint Gull
New member
BarrelofFun said:
If it's relevant the cost of a full page ad in the Argus is around £1200 unless you get a discount from your rep, which you'd hope the Argus would be giving to LDC!
Lord Bracknell
On fire
- Thread starter
- #55
There's an FFA meeting coming up soon.Mellor 3 Ward 4 said:
for a bit of light hearted publicity etc ...
why not hold a "5th birthday party" for the Falmer planning application at the end of the march
as planning application was made in October 2001 from memory - same week that Micky Adams ledt
thought Taylor was way off when he left in spring 2002 when he said - Falmer could still be 4 or 5 years away - how wrong he was - should have said about 7 or 8 years away!!!
anyway at the birthday party we can invite fans from all other clubs; placards re messages of support from other clubs etc etc
the leaflet for Lewes residents for signing the petition can invite them to the birthday party - get Fatboy Slim to hold the party in Preston Park or somewhere and there will be loads of publicity!!!
why not hold a "5th birthday party" for the Falmer planning application at the end of the march
as planning application was made in October 2001 from memory - same week that Micky Adams ledt
thought Taylor was way off when he left in spring 2002 when he said - Falmer could still be 4 or 5 years away - how wrong he was - should have said about 7 or 8 years away!!!
anyway at the birthday party we can invite fans from all other clubs; placards re messages of support from other clubs etc etc
the leaflet for Lewes residents for signing the petition can invite them to the birthday party - get Fatboy Slim to hold the party in Preston Park or somewhere and there will be loads of publicity!!!
It may be worth further annoying the Chief Exec of LDC by writing to him asking a few pertinent questions. I'm sending the following:
Mr J Crawford
Chief Executive
Lewes District Council
Lewes House
32 High Street
Lewes
East Sussex BN7 2LX
20 May 2006
Dear Mr Crawford,
I read with interest the article in Friday’s Evening Argus concerning the Falmer Stadium piece in the Spring edition of “districtlink”. The article highlights that two illustrations in the piece appear to have been either doctored, or used, to give a mis-leading impression of the Falmer site.
In the main illustration, the image of two walkers has been super-imposed, obscuring the university buildings in the background. This (a) erroneously implies that the Stadium site is used by walkers; and (b) gives a false impression of the countryside surrounding the Stadium site.
Page 8 of the newsletter is headed “the proposed site”, and contains a photo towards the foot of the page which was actually taken at Ditchling Beacon! Most casual readers of the article would assume (and who could blame them) that the photograph actually depicted the Stadium site. This impression is probably enhanced by the wording immediately above the picture, which states “Illustration of the proposed site”. This wording is no doubt intended to refer to the aerial photograph of the site which is above the wording. However, it is interesting to note that no other illustration in the newsletter is treated in the same way….in all other cases where a description of an image is provided, the wording clearly indicates it’s relationship to the image.
Given the interest which this potential deception has generated, I should be grateful if you could let me know whether Lewes District Council will be conducting an investigation into who was responsible for the production of the article, and who approved the article prior to publication.
Having read the Council’s Code of Conduct, I believe that if members were in any way involved in the production of the article, that this could constitute a breach of that code. In particular, the following wording would appear to be relevant:
"Members should not place themselves in situations where their honesty and integrity may be questioned, should not behave improperly and should on all occasions avoid the appearance of such behaviour."
I look forward to your early response.
Yours sincerely,
Mr J Crawford
Chief Executive
Lewes District Council
Lewes House
32 High Street
Lewes
East Sussex BN7 2LX
20 May 2006
Dear Mr Crawford,
I read with interest the article in Friday’s Evening Argus concerning the Falmer Stadium piece in the Spring edition of “districtlink”. The article highlights that two illustrations in the piece appear to have been either doctored, or used, to give a mis-leading impression of the Falmer site.
In the main illustration, the image of two walkers has been super-imposed, obscuring the university buildings in the background. This (a) erroneously implies that the Stadium site is used by walkers; and (b) gives a false impression of the countryside surrounding the Stadium site.
Page 8 of the newsletter is headed “the proposed site”, and contains a photo towards the foot of the page which was actually taken at Ditchling Beacon! Most casual readers of the article would assume (and who could blame them) that the photograph actually depicted the Stadium site. This impression is probably enhanced by the wording immediately above the picture, which states “Illustration of the proposed site”. This wording is no doubt intended to refer to the aerial photograph of the site which is above the wording. However, it is interesting to note that no other illustration in the newsletter is treated in the same way….in all other cases where a description of an image is provided, the wording clearly indicates it’s relationship to the image.
Given the interest which this potential deception has generated, I should be grateful if you could let me know whether Lewes District Council will be conducting an investigation into who was responsible for the production of the article, and who approved the article prior to publication.
Having read the Council’s Code of Conduct, I believe that if members were in any way involved in the production of the article, that this could constitute a breach of that code. In particular, the following wording would appear to be relevant:
"Members should not place themselves in situations where their honesty and integrity may be questioned, should not behave improperly and should on all occasions avoid the appearance of such behaviour."
I look forward to your early response.
Yours sincerely,
dougdeep
New member
Good letter sir. Send it by recorded post. 
The march on the Lib Dems conference HAS to happen. It would be really interesting to see where this particular story leads. Let's hope one of the top names at the council has their name on an official document approving the doctoring and use of misleading information. Come on Argus, keep digging......