On 8 May 2011 at 1:52pm Jana Edmunds wrote:
Kingston Ward
Liberal Democrat 421
Conservative Party 349
Labour Party 126
Green Party 121
MC,
By your calculations Kingston should not have re-elected the Liberal Democrat with only 421 voting for her, when 596 people voted against her.
In Barcombe, it's no good saying the Greens should have, could have, would have voted yellow â?? they didn't!. They voted for their own party as is their right to do. That's what makes FPTP a clear decisive way of voting. I think what you would like to say is that all the left of centre parties should have ganged up against the one Tory. But it's happened the other way round in some places with UKIP voters denying a Tory victory. We just don't go on about it but get out there and try to convince people that we are the better choice next time round.
And as for those of you in nice big houses in leafy villages and suburbs of Lewes, who think the evil, rich Tories are nasty and evil, try this for size: Live in a council flat, work full time and receive below average salary, care for an elderly parent who lives with you AND have the time to go out and make a positive change in the community, by running for council, doing voluntary work, setting up local projects and initiatives without relying on government handouts...
That is a true, modern, 21st century Tory in action!
Needless to say you will find something negative to say about all this, but... the country and the people of Lewes District have spoken. The No to AV has campaign was won by an overwhelming 69% and the Conservatives have gained control of Lewes District council and Seaford town council!
On 8 May 2011 at 2:23pm Clifford wrote:
Not quite sure what you're saying. But I do agree with one thing: an employer paying a full time worker a 'below average salary' is a sure sign of Toryism in action.
On 8 May 2011 at 2:51pm Hoodie Hugger wrote:
No it isn't. If there's an average salary, some people are going to be above it, and others below it. Did you not concentrate in maths class at school?
On 8 May 2011 at 4:33pm Clifford wrote:
I wondered who would be first to say that. You'll realise, of course, that I was implying 'low wage' and did not want to take up space by explaining that of course... etc etc?
On 8 May 2011 at 7:29pm jrsussex wrote:
Clifford - Given that there is legislation in place that sets a minimum wage, setting aside illegal immigrants that we are advised are made to work for ridiculously low wages, what are you saying and/or consider is a low wage?
On 8 May 2011 at 8:27pm Ping wrote:
Jana Edmunds: Tory Councillor for Kingston
Donna Edmunds: Jana's daughter
Hoodie Hugger: The title of a blog run by Donna Edmunds
Donna Edmunds:Tory District Councillor for Barcombe (absent)
On 8 May 2011 at 8:53pm OilBarron wrote:
Barcombe. St Pierre out. What a relief.
Not a trustworthy councillor. Barcombe know it and have voted
accordingly. Has also a habit of insulting people's intelligence. They have
spoken.
Sorry folks, Lib Dem is wasted vote. Should get back to pre 2010 highs
in another 50 years. All of course IMO
Tories are in cos that's what the public want !
On 8 May 2011 at 9:16pm Deelite wrote:
..and the Tories don't insult people's intelligence?
On 8 May 2011 at 9:29pm Brixtonbelle wrote:
I hope as a councillor you will focus all your energies on working for the community and give up your day job. I wouldn't like to think any of our councillors of any political persuasion put less than 100 per cent into the job of representing the people.
On 8 May 2011 at 9:47pm MC wrote:
Jana Edmunds wrote:
" That's what makes FPTP a clear decisive way of voting."
But it's not, it's what makes it unrepresentative. It's a voting system that does not take into account or allow for a wide spread of inclinations and is actively biased against the introduction of new parties into the political arena.
It supports the old parties and ensure that they continue. It maintains tactical voting, and encourages people to vote, not for the party they want to vote for but for the party they feel is most likely to gain power and that might, even in some small way, accommodate some of their political requirements... or at the very least (and this is the really important bit) not implement policies they don't want... which, under first past the post, is what the majority are stuck with and the best that most can hope for.
On 8 May 2011 at 10:22pm Freddie wrote:
Brixtonbelle your call is futile. Many Tory women live off inherited wealth and/or husbands earnings so they have no need to work (but if they feel the need to they open a nice little hobby shop in Lewes high street).
On 8 May 2011 at 10:53pm MC wrote:
Jana, to reply directly.
Kingston and Barcombe are quite different villages. I can only speak for Barcombe and I and am certain that having a Tory councilor to represent them would be their very last choice for a very large percentage of those that voted green. Saying that, we are lucky even to have been able to choose a Green councilor (as we only had a choice of three councilors).
On 9 May 2011 at 12:13am not from around here wrote:
Freddie you said "Many Tory women live off inherited wealth and/or husbands earnings".
That just shows how out-of-touch with reality you are and that you are only repeating a cartoonish stereotype of what a Tory is - something I have heard too much of in Lewes lately. In fact many Lewesians show themselves to be more narrow minded than average when it comes to politics - in my view.
I don't particularly want to defend Donna Edmunds or Jana Edmunds but one thing I'm certain of is that Donna Edmunds is not living off 'inherited wealth'. You will find that most tory voters and many activists are hard working types who don't have the luxury of large reserves of money at all but who vote for a party that they believe will give them and their families (and their country) the best chance of a good future.
On 9 May 2011 at 6:42am i dont live in lewes... wrote:
Dear N.F.A.H.
To clarify... Many "Lewesians" moved out years ago so please don't confuse your view of "lewesians" with true "Lewesians" who tend to be forward thinking types and are far from being narrow minded.
"Thinkers" worked out some time ago that petty party bickering is pointless and that councilors serve no purpose whatsoever for so long as the tail continues to wag the dog.
Regards,
PhilX
On 9 May 2011 at 6:56am Paul Newman wrote:
Jana`s point is self evidently right, and as far as the Green Party are concerned, the idea we should re-draw the constitution to accommodate irrelevant 1% of the popular vote ( At the last election) has ..shall we say ..flaws. Interestingly Caroline Lucas won her seat on a particularly small minority vote under FPP, whilst the truly popular Australian Green Party managed on the the same number with up to 10% of the vote, under AV.( La Lucas has reneged on her promise to live in Brighton spending much of her time in Brussels where her family live ..tsk tsk )
On the other hand amongst the tsunami of guff from the yes camp was a fair grievance, from the Liberal side. On 23% of the popular vote they achieved only 8% of the seats. AV is not a proportional system but it would have addressed that particular problem and were such results to be common legitimacy might leech from the HOP.
Contact with government has inevitably reduced the geographically Janus faced Lib Dems to the low teens so it is hardly an urgent problem but I still think reform the House of Lords to include a proportional element would be a wise and Conservative measure
What do you think Jana ?
On 9 May 2011 at 9:49am jrsussex wrote:
Some of the above posts once again do the idiotic thing of attacking the so-called "rich". Few things annoy me more than those who have that narrow mind thinking. I will not go into to it here as I have mentioned it previously, I do come from a very poor working class background but have done relatively well in life. WHY? Because I worked hard, many times 80 hour weeks and more, sometimes, when abroad, not seeing my wife and children for mnay months. I am not a rich man but am comfortable but have often had stupid people say "Oh, it's alright for you" in reference to my having a decent house and car.
Very rarely is anything given to you. If you want to get on in life then hard work is the only option you face. Yes we all need a little luck with it but essentially it is hard work that will help you to fulfil your dream. Two good examples of starting with little are Richard Branson and Alan Sugar. I'm not a great fan of either but do admire them for what they have achieved.
On 9 May 2011 at 11:16am Donna Edmunds wrote:
Hear hear, JRSussex! If only more people thought as you do, rather than letting jealousy rule their lives.
Brixtonbelle, I'd love to give up work and devote myself body and soul to my constituency, but unfortunately do not have that luxury in life. On the contrary, I work two jobs (one full time, one part), and live in a council flat in Lewes. Yet I found time to run my campaign almost singlehandedly, and I will certainly find time to be there for the residents of Barcombe, Cooksbridge and Hamsey.
Unlike most LibDems, I'm not interested in how big someone's house is, or what sort of car they drive. My only motivation is to see an efficiently run council, providing excellent services at the minimum cost to the hardworking taxpayer. That's why 408 people in Barcombe, Cooksbridge and Hamsey voted for me - giving me a mandate to work towards that goal to the best of my abilities. Which is exactly what I intend to do.
On 9 May 2011 at 2:15pm Plumpton Lad wrote:
The result in Barcombe, Hamsey and Cooksbridge shows the Lib Dems called it right when they said in the campaign that we would either get a Lib Dem Council or a Tory one.
On 9 May 2011 at 9:24pm Donna Edmunds wrote:
Funny, we Tories said that on our literature too. Clearly the people have spoken.
On 10 May 2011 at 10:53am Plumpton Lad wrote:
Actually not so clearly - a small number of votes in just two wards - including yours and there would have been a Lib Dem Council not a Tory one.
On 10 May 2011 at 1:52pm Donna Edmunds wrote:
Well if you're going to get into hypotheticals, all sorts of things could have happened. An independent could have got a clean sweep. The greens, had they put any leaflets out, could have stormed to success. A UKIP candidate could have revealed a hitherto untapped and unsuspected well of opposition to the EU.
Only none of those things DID happen, so what are you saying? Sounds like sour grapes to me.
Incidentally, my majority is 69. David Mitchell (the preceeding Lib Dem Councillor in the ward) had a majority of 37. So it's not like i *just* snuck over the line, is it?
On 10 May 2011 at 1:58pm Cooksbridge Dweller wrote:
But more people voted against you. Shame AV failed.
On 10 May 2011 at 2:19pm jrsussex wrote:
Cooksbridge Dweller - Ridiculous statement. In almost any election, from national down to local, if you add together the votes of all those who lost you will invariably get a greater total. That argument has even been used when the losers also count in the total of those that didn't vote at all in the vain and stupid hope that they can prove their point.
On 11 May 2011 at 11:26am PLUMPTON LAD wrote:
Donna - what I am saying is there was no huge and massive mandate for change in the district, it was just a small number of votes that changed hands in a small number of wards.
In particular I haven't picked up on much enthusiasm for the "smaller state" that you support so strongly.
On 12 May 2011 at 9:27am Brixtonbelle wrote:
Let's face it - the Tories got it cos people wanted to give the Lib Dems a kick in the teeth - they are carrying the can for the failures of the Coalition government and Clegg's betrayals. It's certainly not because anyone read Donna's manifesto and were persuaded by it !! Donna - you have got in because you benefited from a protest vote, enjoy your 4 years cos I think you'll be gone at the next election..
On 12 May 2011 at 11:35am MC wrote:
I'm certain that you are correct Brixtonbelle.
All the people I've chatted to recently in Barcombe are pretty surprised to realise they have a person representing the parish who is not from the village and appears to know little about it (oddly, even the good proportion who split the Lib Dem vote and voted Green!)