Friday, January 13, 2012

Driver Runs Off the Road

I've just read on young Will Scobie's weblog the surprise news that Ian Driver has resigned from the Thanet Labour Group and gone into the wilderness to join  the growing 'Popular Front.' This now leaves the Conservatives as the majority political  party on the island but Labour in control.

Whether Cllr Driver has actually resigned, in the true sense of registering it with the council is a moot point, as readers may recall this happened once before when he fell out with 'Reg' and the Judean People's Party - see clip - over plans for world supremacy, whether they really hated the Romans and were radical enough for Thanet. However, politics makes for strange bedfellows and  this begs the question of whether he and our new council diversity champion,  John Worrow, will be establishing their own populist splinter faction and what this might be called is anyone's guess.

This now puts Clive or was that 'Reg' in an awkward position because there's the constant risk of Ian Driver simply abstaining over critical votes and I for one think he's more likely fallen out with the Labour group over their budget plans, rather than being disappointed that John Worrow, instead of he was, given a Mr Men badge with 'Diversity Champion' written on it.

Local politics is now really and truly hung and that's not good for Thanet. All political parties enjoy their own eccentric if not lunatic fringe and the LibDems more than most. However, we now we have two well-known 'Loose canon' careering around with their own unique ideas of what it means to be a district councillor and this is somewhat at odds with the majority view of what the role is supposed to involve.



So now, in Thanet, we have Conservative, Labour, three Independents under Tom King and  now Driver and Worrow, two members of a rather bizarre 'Popular Front,' one which is temperamentally aligned towards Labour but may vote tactically to achieve their own animal diversity parking agenda objectives.

All rather worrying and I suspect readers may feel the same.

18 comments:

Tom Clarke said...

The Diversity and Animal Liberation Party perhaps?

Anonymous said...

What is even more worrying is the on-going and childish attempt to score political points off each other instead of getting on with actually doing something and making decisions. This sniping isn't big and it isn't clever and you are not even very good at it.
Until recently I figured that you, Dr.M were a saner and more in touch member of the clan. It appears not. Please grow up! PLEASE!

DrM. said...

That' politics for you I'm sorry to say but without blogs like this you would know very little of what goes on, tongue in cheek or not!

Tim Clark said...

It's entirely coincidental but Cllr Driver is a self-admitted bisexual so he should benefit enormously from snuggling up to the rest of the Popular Front

Tim Clark said...

In case you're concerned about the veracity of my previous, check out http://www.whatnextjournal.co.uk/Pages/back/Wnext6/Slp.html (sorry can't do the clever link stuff). The reference is about two thirds of the way down, in the paragraph referring to a final solution. The whole article reads like a page from the Grauniad, circa 1980ish!

Anonymous said...

party politics (small p intentional) forms no part of Local Poltics. The sooner people wake up to this fact the sooner local issues will be sensibley decided.

Tom Clarke said...

If only you were right, Anon, but Labour introduced politics into local government over fifty years ago, thus causing other candidates to nail their colours to a mast. It has been downhill since and council meetings frequently deteriorate to the base level we have seen in Thanet as a result.

Sadly, there is no going back to the butcher, baker, candlestick maker, vicar and squire days now and politics, whether we like it or not, can dominate proceedings. Instead of debating dog poo in Margate High Street, members are reduced to shouting at it other about bankers causing our national deficit.

DrM. said...

I should add here that I exercise some restraint in regards to the publishing of comments in line with my acceptable use policy but I try not to censor. This particularly applies to reported fact or information that already freely exists in the public domain.

Ren Wood said...

Funny how John Worrow on his blog accuses you, Simon, of allowing offensive comments, but completed ignores possibly even more non-PC comments over on thanetonline. Obviously Michael is not in his arc of fire.

He is still rejecting anything that does not support him on his own blog and has now added a footnote that those who have previously made offensive comments will not be published again. Judge and censor now it would seem as well as diversity champion, how diverse is that?

See he has also presumed to speak for the Independent Group as well. My how important is this chap.

DrM. said...

Yes, Tom King appears somewhat amused or even bemused by John's comments, as we met for coffee earlier to discuss today's momentous events!

Anonymous said...

I see councilor fenner says councilor worrow volunteered for the diversity post, while councilor worrow says he was asked. So does that mean councilor worrow is a bragmeister or just a common old purveyor of porky pies, or both?

Tom Clarke said...

More someone clearly confused as his frequently published then deleted posts would suggest. One minute we have a Gay Pride event at Minnis Bay or a suggestion of equal opportunities in the secret service and then they are gone.

Evidently he is not sure what image he wishes to project. The Campaigner, the King of Parking, the Animal Liberator, the Diversity Champion or the offended homosexual all play a part in this complex character.

Luke Edwards said...

Cllr Moores, good sir, would you be kind enough to add Thanet Waves to your blog list on this website? I would be tremendously grateful. Half a shekel for an old ex-leper?

Sorry I posted this on another one of your blog posts, by the way. I meant to post on this one but posted on another by mistake.

Tim Clark said...

Ren, I suspect that it is because Simon is a high-profile Conservative local councillor and Michael is a book seller. Simon - according to Worrow - is implicated in the so-called smear campaign, whereas Michael isn't. Try dropping the Michael attitude. I don't think he is pro any one Party, as he frequently says. Focus on the real villains

Michael Child said...

I have just modified one comment, you have to appreciate I don’t have comment moderation set, so that the comments appear instantly and I have to go through and work out what is offensive, whereas Simon does have moderation set so allows them.

In terms of homophobic comment as opposed to generally offensive comment one has to consider that deleting something that would be ok if the person wasn’t an out gay is something that could be seen as homophobic.

So I think in this instance describing a politician as snuggling up to a particular group would be a fairly normal comment when describing any politician, say describing Clegg as snuggling up to Cameron, wouldn’t be seen as having any physical connotations, oh well I think I know what I mean….

Ren Wood said...

Tim, I was not getting at Michael, who is to be applauded on the lack of censorship on his blog, but more the selective nature of Worrow's spite. Mind you, I suppose it matches the equally selective nature of the 'love me' only comments he allows on his site.

Readit said...

Don.t Worrow Simon, you will soon be back in the Driver's seat,

D*mn sausage fingers on these ipads.

Tim Clark said...

Simon
Sorry, I seem to have got you in trouble. I've just been on the Diversity Champion's site and see that he's taken offence at my earlier comments. As I previously pointed out all the facts are in the public domain, and if The Campaigner is reading any personal sexual connotation into my comments then they were certainly not intended by me. Draw your own conclusions. Oh and a Google search for John Worrow pulls in an interesting Mark Nottingham blog from 2009 on the subject.