Local Election Campaign 2017

June 2022 Forums World Socialist Movement Local Election Campaign 2017

Viewing 15 posts - 106 through 120 (of 172 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #126224
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    A response may be required but  I was suggesting  that we stick to the issue at hand. Raising historical matters is unnecessary and would be devisive.    

    #126225
    Bijou Drains
    Participant
    gnome wrote:
    ALB wrote:
    are parish councils part of the machinery of government or more residents' committees?

    The position of Steve Colborn is not quite as clear cut as some members would have us believe.  OK, he joined and was elected as a member of another organisation, but is the Seaham Community Party "political" in the sense we in the Socialist Party understand that description?  More to the point; have his actions been "detrimental" to the interests of the Party?  At this stage I'm much more concerned about those members, and there have been a few, particularly on Facebook, who have openly expressed their preference, even support in one or two cases, for one of the main, and avowedly, capitalist parties.

    If any member is unsure as to whether this bunch are or are not a political party, they might want to follow the following link to their Party manifestohttps://business.facebook.com/1729444613994237/photos/pcb.1839622036309827/1839621816309849/?type=3&theaterA couple of points that might be of interest to those that consider that this is the equivilant of the allotment society, might be interested in the following:from 2nd papargraph page 3"Support that army, navy and air cadets"further down the same page"Work with the British Legion to protect our war memorials and make provision to remember our fallen heroes"2nd papragraph from the bottom of the same page:"Investment to improve Church Street shopping facilities/shop frontage and the Friday market, to support local businesses and tourist attractions to bring in revenue and attract investment"This is the manifesto Steve Colborn was elected on. If this was the equivilent of the residents' association, why did the same party stand candidates for the County Council as well as the Town Council.Remember there is a world of difference between a Parish Council, as has been mentioned and a Town Council representing 21,500 people and holding a budget of nearly £1.1 Million This is not the Village Green Preservation Society!

    #126226
    steve colborn
    Participant

    Adam, you say;I, too, emailed you, in February (the 5th to be precise) asking if you were prepared to stand again for the Party  in the Durham County Council elections as you had done on many previous occasions (with my help in getting your manifestos printed at Head Office and sent to you) but got no reply. I am afraid that I can only conclude that your priority was to get elected as a local councillor but that you felt you had a better chance as a candidate of the Seaham Community Party than as a Socialist Party one. Sad, very sad, after 36 years as a staunch Socialist."I can only conclude that your priority was to get elected as a local councillor but that you felt you had a better chance as a candidate of the Seaham Community Party than as a Socialist Party one"So I changed the habit of my adult lifetime, to get "elected"!!! I think that you know that is totally untrue. Who in their right mind would take over 25 years of contesting elections (knowing the likelyhood of getting elected is virtually zero) then all of a sudden change to another platform just to get elected, not least an organisation that has existed for just over a year, and was challenging a Party (Labour), who have a 50+ years of unchallenged rule! Doesn't take a Marx to see the flaw in the "jumped ship for electoral success" accusation, does it?Alan Johnstone."But it seems even your new colleagues have difficulty in understanding your political stance, describing you as a "national socialist" "Alan, the quote you provide, is not from an SCP member, it was from someone I went to school with, who considers himself quite the smart arse! But nice try at inventing unsourced bollocks.Post 96 , I cannot get my head around at all. I never intentionally or otherwise "misled" anyone. You say "If you had resigned and stood as you claim as a spokes-person for your community, there would have been a healthy and fruitful debate and discussion of the situation. I, for one, may well have been one of your advocates. After all, i had already raised the issue of activity in parish councils on this forum before knowing of your participation in such.But now, i find myself one of your accusers of betraying the trust we place in all of our fellow members. Knowing my participation in Parish Councils Alan? Where, or when was this? Its never happened! My first Parish involvement was this one, so once again, where has this fabriction come from. You go on to say;But members were deprived of the opportunity in this particular instance by the unilateral actions of SC that demonstrated a lack of respect for his fellow members.  I see no defence that deserves special consideration. I think it gives credence to those members who opposed approving his re-membership being sceptical of pledges of good behaviour in the future could be relied upon. Why are you once again trawling over past events? WTF does that have to do with the present? I got re-instated as a member because, if you care to remember, I did nothing to merit not being allowed membership!So where does that leave us? A couple of members stating untruths, one of them even trawling up past events and holding it in their fist like the lightning of Zeus. Yet another member revealing a "Dog Shite Fetish"The truth is, that decisions have already been made as to "innocence" or "guilt", all the hand wringing is so much effluvia!One final word, those who "know" me, know I am and always will be a Socialist. Members of the Party who disagree. have their right to this opinion but they are wrong. Yes, I have had issues with members over the years but no one has ever doubted my Socialist credentials, until now!As I always say, life isn't a popularity contest, I'm not, nor ever have courted popularity, just as well, as I'd have been on a bust in The Socialist Party. I am happy in my own skin and if I even thought for a second I had done anything against my life long principles, I would hold my hand up, but I do not!Stevie C 

    #126227
    Anonymous
    Inactive
    Young Master Smeet wrote:
    gnome wrote:
    The position of Steve Colborn is not quite as clear cut as some members would have us believe.  OK, he joined and was elected as a member of another organisation, but is the Seaham Community Party "political" in the sense we in the Socialist Party understand that description?  More to the point; have his actions been "detrimental" to the interests of the Party?  At this stage I'm much more concerned about those members, and there have been a few, particularly on Facebook, who have openly expressed their preference, even support in one or two cases, for one of the main, and avowedly, capitalist parties.

    Standing for public office without putting the party case is a misuse of the opportuniy the ballot box presents to us, and harms the party.

    Of course, neither you nor I yet know that he won't be putting the party case at every opportunity.

    Quote:
    A member expressing an opinon down the pub, or on Facebook is a much lesser matter.

    There's literally a world of difference between a member expressing an opinion down the pub to a handful of other members and broadcasting it to thousands on Facebook.  The latter couldn't be further from a "lesser matter".

    #126228
    alanjjohnstone
    Keymaster

     I refer readers of this thread to my reply to Vin in Message #105

    #126229
    steve colborn
    Participant

    Refering to #105, I did not in fact "it was SC himself who belatedly came on the forum to justify his position", come on the Forum to "justify" anything! Justifying something would tend to suggest that there is something I felt needed "justifying"! Nothing could be further from the truth, and the post from AJ, is as loaded as it gets!!!

    #126230
    alanjjohnstone
    Keymaster

    I refer readers to my reply to Vin in #105

    #126231
    steve colborn
    Participant

    You are merely helpng to prove a point, that anything outside of your/their paradigm is wrong/questionable!

    #126232
    alanjjohnstone
    Keymaster

    Once again i refer visitors to this forum to my reply at message #105

    #126233
    robbo203
    Participant

    Steve, Could you possibly address the question I raised in post 102 and amplified by Tim  in post 107? How have you disassociated yourself from such sentiments expressed by the SCP?

    #126234
    Anonymous
    Inactive
    steve colborn wrote:
    Why are you once again trawling over past events? WTF does that have to do with the present? I got re-instated as a member because, if you care to remember, I did nothing to merit not being allowed membership

    I for one have pointed this out to AlanThis situation has nothing to do with the past conflicts. Comrade Colborn's contribution of many years will not be wiped off the slate by petty mindedness and knee jerk reactions and dragging other members into the conflict. I will respectfully request yet again, please leave the past conflicts in the past and continue with our 'positive socialist activity'A  positive discussion on this situation could do nothing but good.

    #126235
    Young Master Smeet
    Participant
    gnome wrote:
    Of course, neither you nor I yet know that he won't be putting the party case at every opportunity.

    If he were to put the party case, he'd have to resign and stand on the party platform first. And I don't recall you taking this position over Jim Laurie.

    Gnome wrote:
    There's literally a world of difference between a member expressing an opinion down the pub to a handful of other members and broadcasting it to thousands on Facebook.  The latter couldn't be further from a "lesser matter".

    No, there's not.  Social media is just a big pub.

    #126236
    Anonymous
    Inactive
    gnome wrote:
    There's literally a world of difference between a member expressing an opinion down the pub to a handful of other members and broadcasting it to thousands on Facebook.  The latter couldn't be further from a "lesser matter".

    I can bear witness to this but I did not say anything out of fear of being removed from Facebook but I was very concerned about the the message we were giving out.As we are talking about Facebook. I remember –  a couple of years ago? –  a parish councillor on Facebook requested membership and his Form A was accepted by the EC and he was not asked to give up his seat. Anyone bring us up to date?  

    #126237
    Bijou Drains
    Participant
    robbo203 wrote:
    Steve, Could you possibly address the question I raised in post 102 and amplified by Tim  in post 107? How have you disassociated yourself from such sentiments expressed by the SCP?

    I will reiterate, there is a world of difference between a Parish Council and a Town Council, anyone with any experience in Local Government will confirm this. Seaham town Council has a budget for £1.1milionSteve Colborn was elected on a POLITICAL MANIFESTOThat Manifesto included support for children to join the Army, Navy and Air Cadets, It also supported the maintenance of war Memorials to "our fallen heroes".Now either Steve Colborn did not support those aims and was unaware of them, Or he did know of them and eithera) supported them, a position which is INCOMPATIBLE with the SPGB,orb) he deliberately mislead the voters in Seaham that he did support these proposals, where in fact he didn't.In this case Steve Colborn should either:a) Resign from the SPGB as he CLEARLY holds views that are incompatible with the party case on war.orb) Resign his seat on the Town Council, in which case, I for one would put this whole situation down to experience and welcome a committed and passionate Cde back into the fold and forget the whole thing happened.The ball is in your court, Steve.

    #126238
    Young Master Smeet
    Participant
    Vin wrote:
    This situation has nothing to do with the past conflicts. Comrade Colborn's contribution of many years will not be wiped off the slate by petty mindedness and knee jerk reactions and dragging other members into the conflict. 

    But those long years are irrelevent to the question at hand, and provide no mitigation.

Viewing 15 posts - 106 through 120 (of 172 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.