NORMAN BAKER! Good or bad MP?

[countrygull]

What about his consituents who were in favour of the stadium? (He doesn't just represent Falmer village) What about the lies he told such as the hotel the club were planning to build? What about the fact he DIDN'T say 'enough is enough' in anything like a concilatory manner and he and remains an opponent of the project (and the club) to this day?

He's scum. End of.

I don't want to be a Norman Baker apologist: but an MP's job is to represent the democratically stated views of his electorate: and those electorate speak through their local representatives, all of whom came out against the stadium (Falmer and Lewes councils). As for the hotel: he was told a rumour and got his shot in first - it's a common troubleshooting tactic. His `enough is enough` is below from his original press release. Frankly, I don't give a stuff whether he opposes the project. I would be concerned if he opposed the club, which I don't believe he does. Don't get me wrong: I'm not a great fan but I don't bear a grudge because all he was doing was his job.

"I am disappointed, but not surprised by today's decision and think that the time has come to accept the final whistle on this issue. While I do not agree with their position or look forward to the stadium being built at Falmer, there is no doubt that the club and particularly its fans have fought a hard and effective campaign and are to be congratulated.

"If this can be done I am confident that all sides will be able to now look to the future and co-operate to deal with the next stages as constructively and sensibly as possible."[/I]

 

[Dick Knights Mumm]

As for the hotel: he was told a rumour and got his shot in first - it's a common troubleshooting tactic.

Blimey - so that is how politics works. He does sound a good MP.

 

[Silent Bob]

Norman Baker is a wanker. And you can print that.

 

[Lord Bracknell]

I don't want to be a Norman Baker apologist: but an MP's job is to represent the democratically stated views of his electorate: and those electorate speak through their local representatives, all of whom came out against the stadium (Falmer and Lewes councils).

"ALL of whom came out against the stadium" ?

Not so.

Mind you, those who supported the stadium were threatened with all sorts of repercussions by the fragrant leader of LDC.

 

[Man of Harveys]

n MP's job is to represent the democratically stated views of his electorate: and those electorate speak through their local representatives, all of whom came out against the stadium (Falmer and Lewes councils). [/I][/I]

Wow. So, as well as its own currency, Lewes now has its own constitution, where local councils force the hapless local MP what to do? That's entirely unprecedented, as far as I'm aware.

Because it's either that or the truth is that that repulsive hateful creep of a man very easily made his own mind up loudly to do everything to undermine the future of the Albion when he had the chance, something for which he should be judged accordingly. I guess it's one or the other.

 

[Brovion]

I don't want to be a Norman Baker apologist: but an MP's job is to represent the democratically stated views of his electorate: and those electorate speak through their local representatives, all of whom came out against the stadium (Falmer and Lewes councils). As for the hotel: he was told a rumour and got his shot in first - it's a common troubleshooting tactic. His `enough is enough` is below from his original press release. Frankly, I don't give a stuff whether he opposes the project. I would be concerned if he opposed the club, which I don't believe he does. Don't get me wrong: I'm not a great fan but I don't bear a grudge because all he was doing was his job.

"I am disappointed, but not surprised by today's decision and think that the time has come to accept the final whistle on this issue. While I do not agree with their position or look forward to the stadium being built at Falmer, there is no doubt that the club and particularly its fans have fought a hard and effective campaign and are to be congratulated.

"If this can be done I am confident that all sides will be able to now look to the future and co-operate to deal with the next stages as constructively and sensibly as possible."[/i]

For someone who claims not to be a Baker apologist you've done a pretty good job of apologising for him. I refer you to the posts above this one which I think have rebutted most of your arguments. I DO like your take on the hotel claim though; don't you think an MPs job (especially someone who claims to be a campaigning MP) should be to find out the truth rather than just 'getting their shot in first'?

 

[countrygull]

For someone who claims not to be a Baker apologist you've done a pretty good job of apologising for him. I refer you to the posts above this one which I think have rebutted most of your arguments. I DO like your take on the hotel claim though; don't you think an MPs job (especially someone who claims to be a campaigning MP) should be to find out the truth rather than just 'getting their shot in first'?

It's not what I think: it's what happens. Don't fall into the trap, which you have, of assuming that because I write something about how the world operates, that I therefore agree with it. I do think an MP should find out the truth: but in the real world, time and again, they don't - and they don't because, as I stated, they want to get in the first shot. So don't get personal, because I write this not as a fan in any way of Norman Baker but as someone who understands a little bit about the way politicians work.

 

[countrygull]

Wow. So, as well as its own currency, Lewes now has its own constitution, where local councils force the hapless local MP what to do?

I'm not sure where you got that from, I don't recall writing that or anything like it. Sorry because I generally like the bonhomie of your writings on this board, but I don't appreciate my words being twisted.


Because it's either that or the truth is that that repulsive hateful creep of a man very easily made his own mind up loudly to do everything to undermine the future of the Albion when he had the chance, something for which he should be judged accordingly. I guess it's one or the other.

The MP's job is to take into account the feelings of his constituents. If he doesn't he risks losing his job. Those views are most commonly expressed through council elections. He will have seen Lewes council come out against the stadium, so too Falmer parish council. I would suspect he felt it was his job to oppose the stadium. Perhaps if greater numbers of his constituents had rallied in favour of the stadium he would have supported it, I don't know. But he's a politician who wants to keep his seat.

 

[countrygull]

"ALL of whom came out against the stadium" ?

Not so.

Mind you, those who supported the stadium were threatened with all sorts of repercussions by the fragrant leader of LDC.

If you know of a council within his constituency which came out in favour, I apologise and bow to your greater knowledge? Of interest, which was it?

 

[Storer68]

What about his consituents who were in favour of the stadium? (He doesn't just represent Falmer village) What about the lies he told such as the hotel the club were planning to build? What about the fact he DIDN'T say 'enough is enough' in anything like a concilatory manner and he and remains an opponent of the project (and the club) to this day?

He's scum. End of.

but elected by the pople.
"I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it." (Voltaire)

 

[CheeseRolls]

Norman Baker was hanging around Victoria Station this morning. almost certainly catching a train back down South, but striking a fine look at me pose. Saw him ignored him and walked on and that just about sums up my attitude to the man.

A hard working MP, an attention seeker and a right friggin oddball, rolled into one.

 

[Dick Knights Mumm]

I do think an MP should find out the truth: but in the real world, time and again, they don't - and they don't because, as I stated, they want to get in the first shot.

Which is bollocks in this case. There was no urgency to get a cheap first shot in when he heard "a rumour".

Whatever spin you try to put on it (for whatever reason) he was as good as making stuff up. And the old everyone does it tosh.

 

[Dick Knights Mumm]

Norman Baker was hanging around Victoria Station this morning. almost certainly catching a train back down South, but striking a fine look at me pose.

Probably just stocked up on food (charged on expenses when in London).

 

[Brovion]

It's not what I think: it's what happens. Don't fall into the trap, which you have, of assuming that because I write something about how the world operates, that I therefore agree with it. I do think an MP should find out the truth: but in the real world, time and again, they don't - and they don't because, as I stated, they want to get in the first shot. So don't get personal, because I write this not as a fan in any way of Norman Baker but as someone who understands a little bit about the way politicians work.

Don't patronise me, I too understand a bit about how politicians work - I used to deal with them (right up to Cabinet level) when I was head of an NGO. So we agree that Baker used underhand tactics to oppose the stadium. We also agree that he did it despite not having an anti-stadium mandate from his constituents. So why did he oppose us? If it wasn't on behalf of his constituents then it was his own personal choice; basically he abused his position and used underhand tactics to orchestrate an effective anti-stadium campaign that came within a whisker of winning simply because he hated football. I'm sorry, but that is not 'reasonable work'.

 

[Deleted User X18H]

I looked through his David Kelly book once. Didn't some Tory MP say Baker's speeches were like having your teeth filled without anesthetic or something similar.

I'm not bothered really I am more interested in what that Lepper is up to.

 

[Lord Bracknell]

If you know of a council within his constituency which came out in favour, I apologise and bow to your greater knowledge? Of interest, which was it?

I was referring to Lewes District councillors, several of whom were threatened with the end of their political career if they expressed any dissent from the leadership's line.

But having said that, the parish council where I live (which I am a member of) was written to by Falmer Parish Council, inviting us to support their anti-stadium campaign. We voted not to.

 

[willingdon_seagull]

I was referring to Lewes District councillors, several of whom were threatened with the end of their political career if they expressed any dissent from the leadership's line.

But having said that, the parish council where I live (which I am a member of) was written to by Falmer Parish Council, inviting us to support their anti-stadium campaign. We voted not to.

He seems to go on about improving public transport, mainly the trains from Lewes which obviously is to win over his constituents but isnt it about time he looked further into the fact that the roads of east sussex need improving? Its a joke that there is not one single yard of motorway in east sussex and a shocking road system from Eastbourne to London. Wasnt he one of the ones against making the A27 a dual carriageway from Polegate to Lewes? I think Mr Baker it is the roads that need improving significantly and not so much the public transport!

 

[Danny-Boy]

Don't patronise me, I too understand a bit about how politicians work - I used to deal with them (right up to Cabinet level) when I was head of an NGO. So we agree that Baker used underhand tactics to oppose the stadium. We also agree that he did it despite not having an anti-stadium mandate from his constituents. So why did he oppose us? If it wasn't on behalf of his constituents then it was his own personal choice; basically he abused his position and used underhand tactics to orchestrate an effective anti-stadium campaign that came within a whisker of winning simply because he hated football. I'm sorry, but that is not 'reasonable work'.

Just reading this thread again, what a load of vicious inaccurate codswallop this is.

Norman Baker spent a great deal of time - with LDC incidentally - in trying to keep Lewes Football Club afloat over the last couple of years or so.

I wonder why it was, when I saw a BBC report where two "Lewes FC supporters" were interviewd on camera who virtually said Lewes FC were finished, it was those well-known football enthusiasts Councillr Ruth O'Keefe (implacable enemy of Norman and the LibDems) and a local bigwig from the Lewes Labour Party....

It's about time someone on here 'fessed up to how much those in charge of albion had avested interest inseeing Lewes FC go down the tubes, once they got into the Confrence or whatever it's called now, potentially only a couple of levels from Albion.

 

[Dick Knights Mumm]

Yes - if only we had kept our eye on our own affairs we would have got Falmer much quicker - rather than spending all that time plotting the downfall of Lewes FC.

Sit around children. Jackanory - Jackanory ..........

 

[Lord Bracknell]

I wonder why it was, when I saw a BBC report where two "Lewes FC supporters" were interviewd on camera who virtually said Lewes FC were finished, it was those well-known football enthusiasts Councillr Ruth O'Keefe (implacable enemy of Norman and the LibDems) and a local bigwig from the Lewes Labour Party....

I'm not sure what your point is.

Are you saying that Ruth O'Keeffe and Steve Watts are anti-Lewes FC and did nothing to help the Club through the crisis?

That is preposterous! Ruth chaired the Rooks Supporters Trust and Steve was very involved in the hard work that went into to saving Lewes FC from oblivion.

Ruth and Steve both actively co-operated with the Seagulls Party during our campaigning for Falmer.