Shooting yourself in both feet

Extraordinary news reaches me that Northampton South Constituency Labour Party has been suspended, Lock Stock and Smoking Barrel.

In addition four of their most loyal members Geoff Howes, Anjona Roy, Kathy Smith and Alan Scott are under further investigation.

So what have they done? Called for a return of Clause 4? or for total Renationalisation of the Public Utilities and Coal Mines?

Maybe they have upset the next door neighbour Sally Porter? or embezzled party funds to spend on a Vodka Frenzy?

But it seems it is none of the above, There crime is that they simply tried to win an election.

When Geoff Howes stood in the Borough Council By Election in Duston earlier this year he phoned me and asked me if I would give him an endorsement for his leaflet. He also asked fellow Independent "Fitzy" from Northampton's Market and the late John Gardner BEM for similar endorsements.

I was happy to oblige. Despite my expulsion from the Party and the way they have treated me, individuals within the Party remain my friends. Geoff was a very good Councillor, he is a very able man, and would run rings around a large number of the current incumbents at the Guildhall.

The endorsement simply said that the Council could well do with people of Geoffs calibre, and who could argue with that at present. Fitzy and John Gardner god rest his soul also gave endorsements. All three were published in an election leaflet at the time. I sought nothing from the endorsement other than helping a decent man get elected despite the way I was personally treated by the Labour Party. Geoff, his agent Anjona and Kathy Smith who printed the document sought nothing other than getting their candidate elected. What possible Machiavellian intent was detected by the Labour Party higher offices reveals more about their own insecurity than it does the intentions of those accused. If I wanted to put a leaflet together in Duston I could do so, without using it to support a Labour Party candidate!

Anyhow it seems the national party were not happy, what were local members thinking about, getting endorsements from people who were not party members? Heavens above, its never been done before has it? Alan Scott I hear is up on a different charge of swearing at a party meeting. Well there for the grace of god go half of the f*cking cabinet!.

But yes in fact getting external endorsements has been done before, all the time, and when I was in the party, I was told an endorsement from outside is worth a hundred from a Party member.

But they couldn't possibly have a quote from Tony Clarke on their leaflet could they, so the very slow wheels of Labour Party injustice churned ever onwards towards the inevitable suspension of the whole party, and since the suspension of individual members.

Very helpful with a general election around the corner I here you say. Their Parliamentary Candidate Clyde Loakes (remember him, still twittering away telling us of his leafleting in Northampton at the same time he was at meetings in London, and they say men can't multi task!) seems to be fully supportive of the NEC's actions and happy that at a time that the membership should be preparing for battle that they are spending all their time and energy fighting each other. The national party will now pretend there are "other reasons" for their actions and try to make themselves look conscientious by inventing non existant reasons for their concerns, but it wont wash with anyone in Northampton who knows what is going on.

And of course the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats will be beside themselves with glee

I though am very saddened, I hold no torch now for the modern day Labour Party, and as I have said on numerous occasions the top down, London controlled administration of all three of the main party's make it impossible for local democracy to remain meaningful, but the thought of good people being trodden down by cowards and traitors for simply trying their best to get local representatives elected makes me very angry.

If the Labour Party are unable to challenge the Tories and Liberal Democrats next May at a general election then I am more than prepared to fill that void and in doing so stand up for decent independently minded centre left voters across Northampton, but I can't help but think that any chance of the open wounds within Northampton Labour Party ever being healed will now have to wait until Clyde Loakes and Sally Keeble are back home in London as defeated candidates, both victims of their own stupidity and inability to see and respect loyalty when it is staring them straight in the face.

Its a rat trap NBC and you've been caught

Following yesterdays post on NBC,s astonishing dereliction of duty in respect of local pest control I looked deeper into what was and was not agreed by the Council when it set its budget in February 2009.

In appendix 7 of the budget report which identified cuts (sorry, service reductions) it identifies the following £10,000 saving "Introduce full pest control charges except for rat treatment. Subsidised fees for those in receipt of benefits will stop for treatment of mice and insects"

So we voted for a service, albeit with some charges? and my constituent with a rat infestation irrespective of him being on benefit should have recieved a free service, right?

Well wrong according to the Council, you see another saving was identified below the above which read as follows "saving £29,980 - cease pest control provision by direct contract when current contract ends in 2009/10 - additional savings to above"

Which means what exactly? Cease provision by direct contract? does that mean we will provide by non direct contract? which means what?

And when you look at the list of agreed charges for 2009/10 also set in the budget and voted on by Councillors in February it lists all the various charges for pest control including "Rats - Free" and tell us that "Prices for 2009/10 are "subject to tender July 2010."

Any sensible person would suggest that all the above means that we may go out to tender and the service may not be directly provided in the future. But not that the service is to be scrapped altogether and that residents will simply be told to use the yellow pages!

This is dishonest budgeting and it is disreputable for the council to scrap the service without proper authority by Council or proper explanation to councillors.

Someone therefore has some explaining to do.

One bit of good news though. I spoke to Ray Weaver, Managing Director of Pest Express in Corby who up until July was the Councils contractor, to ask him what he would charge me to pay my constituent a visit to help him. (I don't make a habit of doing this, but it did seem a good use of my council expenses) Ray said, he would do it for free for me. So 5 stars to them (there phone number if you ever need them is 0800 542 67271)

Pest Express offer a service to a number of local authorities and are a "preferred supplier" to many others including North Norfolk District Council who had also closed their in house service, and they offer discounts to benefit recipients.

I still hold out that rat infestations should be treated for free by the council in order to prevent a wider habitation, and I will fight for the service to be reinstated, But why can't NBC at least give a direction to people when they phone them up instead of effectively saying "phone around a dozen companies yourself until you find a company willing to give you a reduction?" phoning around is not cheap either when you are on benefits.

So top marks to Pest Express, and no marks at all for NBC, and a huge row brewing as to what exactly we did vote for in full council at the budget meeting in February.

But one resident in Semilong at least can hopefully get a bit more sleep knowing his house will eventually be rat free.

The real rats are at the Guildhall

An ex sailor contacted me today from St Andrews Road in Northampton, desperate for help because his house has been overrun with rats!

Several mild winters, his proximity to the river via Millers Meadow and refuse sacks being placed on the street days before collection have made him and his family a target for hordes of rattus norvegicus, and his is rightly concerned of the damage this could have on the health of his two young children (10 months and 2 yrs) and his disabled partner. Being an ex sailor he understands very well the dangers of Weil's disease and his weekly shopping bill has also increased by the need for him to disinfect all the surfaces in the kitchen prior to cooking.

The trouble for my constituent though is that he is living on benefit because his wife is disabled, and he is the main carer for their two young children, so money is tight. So he phoned the council in a cry for help to reduce the infestation. He has also tried domestic rat poison but to no avail. So in desperation he rung the council.

"Can't help you" came the reply, "budget cuts"

As of April 1st 2009 the Liberal Democrat council has withdrawn its free service to those on benefits to save a few bob. But as many of us predicted would happen, it is not those who can afford to call out a pest control operative at £65 a time that would suffer, it is those who can't afford a private service that are being placed in the front line.

What sort of false economy is this? I can understand to a degree reductions in any subsidised service for those who can afford to pay, but by the council not dealing with infestations in houses where the option of a paid service is not a realistic expectation then all they will do is make the problem harder to deal with in the general area and spread the colony.

Local Authorities have a duty under section 2 of the "Prevention of Damage by pests act 1949" to take action to ensure any infestation is avoided and dealt with, but it seems that our friendly Liberal Democrats at the Guildhall believe that their duty ends at serving notices and fines to householders irrespective as to whether or not they can afford to take action themselves. How about some action being taken against Network Rail? or the Environment Agency? or Anglian Water? or even themselves for cutting back on treatment on their own land?

Surely it is in the whole community's interest for them to take collective action as a local authority in such circumstances? They must act NOW!

Day by day, week by week the real problems facing people everyday as a result of the massive cuts implemented by the Liberal DemocRATS at the Town Hall are being revealed, supplys of black bins are in very scarse supply and not being delivered to residents on time, street sweeping has been reduced, flytipping out of control, grass not being cut as regular as it was turning the roadside into the new "wildlife areas" so trumpeted by the portfolio holder at the time the cuts were sold to us as service improvements.

So how will they sell this one? Free Pets for hard up families with under fives?

So today I am calling on them to get real for once, and accept that this crazy, ill thought out policy needs badly reviewing and changing immediately before the problem escalates into a real infestation, with real health consequences for local residents. I don't think the rats mind one bit whose house they infest? and once they are in one house they can breed far more easily in the warm, and then move in next door, and so on.

What would the cost be of reinstating a free service for those on benefits? or even a subsidised service at an affordable level? And what will be the cost of them not doing so?

Through The Keyhole

Having suffered aurally during the 1980's under Lloyd Grossman's irritating plum in mouth accent asking us all "Who would live in a house like this" I thought I would refurbish the genre and ask all of you politico's:

WHO WOULD CAMPAIGN UNDER A BANNER LIKE THIS?

"So..................Lets look at the clues:"

The patriotic yet slightly disturbing prominent use of the union flag (it's only a jack when it is on a ship) shows us that this party is serious about it's BRIT appeal whilst the absence of a party logo makes us suspicious of their intent. More right wing than right on.

"This should tell us something about the person who sent out this literature"

But let our journey through the leaflet continue and look beyond the picture on the wall

So...................Lets look inside the clues are there as we go through the content of the leaflet

Quote

"I continue to be in touch with a number of ********* and SPADS to arrange visits"

(I have removed the word in asterisks to make it more difficult for you, but SPADS? what in god's name is a spad? and do we want them visiting?

Obviously this party is down with the eusystolistatists and likes us to LOL and made me LMAO

The leaflet printed locally in er.................. Newcastle Upon Tyne, goes on to tell us of the "much welcome news for council tenants" of substantial PFI credits and promises personal involvement in potential spend and benefits to tenants

So an advocate of all things borrowed and bought by the market then? no social conscience for these folk.

and who can resist the temptation of joining the groups local Facebook site which now has "132 members"? which is only 3200 less than Northampton infamous but now sadly deceased lady of the streets 50p Lil

So who would send out a leaflet like this? Pro PFI, wrapped up in the union flag, down with the kids on Facebook (and the oldies) printing by local workers on Tyneside and tempting us with visits from SPADS (I won't spoil it by telling you what they are I will let you research that yourself.

So whose candidate is hiding behind the electoral door wrapped up in the clothes of all their neighbours

The BNP? Cameron's New Tories?, PFI crazy Local Liberal Democrats?, Nude Labour?

The clues are all there............................. Its over to you our internet audience......................................

Whose candidate? whose party can live with an image like this?

Answer in comments below please.

Astragate, the fallout.

I have just read my colleague John Dickies last post on the troubles besetting local Council Leader Tony Woods following the 'Astragate' affair http://johndickienorthampton.blogspot.com and must agree to disagree with my friend and elder statesman on an important point of description

John, understandably annoyed at Woodsy's reference to him in the report as not a 'Bona Fide' member of the public has now compared the local leader of the Lib Dems in Northampton to Uncle Joe Stalin, suggesting that anyone disagreeing with the leader would find themselves sent to the gulag never to be seen again.

This is a disgraceful slur on the Leader of the Council and totally inaccurate. You see I have it on very good grounds that after witnessing Cllr Woods strutting around Northampton Market arms behind his back, nose in the air, king of all he purveys, indifferent to any opinion other than his own, that market Trader 'Fitzy' has likened Woodsie to another more self effacing member of the dictators club...............................

IL DUC'E, himself!

And judge for yourself below the resemblance is quite striking. It seems as if this tag has now caught on across the square and cries of "IL DUC'E, IL DUC'E" are now to be heard from traders whenever he sets foot on the Market.

And that should trouble Cllr Woods more than his local difficulties with the standards board. You see in my view the issue of where he parked his untaxed car pails into insignificance when placed beside the comments contained within the report from Tony Woods when interviewed by local investigator Phillip Mears.

It is the air of arrogance and indifference when questioned that condemns him, not his actions alone. See http://www.northamptonboroughcouncil.com/councillors/Published/C00000651/M00006288/AI00029532/PMearsrpt.pdf

According to 'IL WOODSY' The two complainants are not even "Bona Fide" members of the public and their interest was 'Political' It reminds me of the time he refused to attend a public meeting in the Guildhall in January because that was also 'Political'

Press interest he tells us was puerile and his whole manner of suggesting that he was far too busy to abide by the law of land smacks of self importance and lack of understanding of how others will judge his indifference. He was busy every day and every night we are told? but going to the theatre or watching the Arsenal were far more important than abiding by the law.

He also reveals that he told the Chief Executive in October 2008 that he would move his car in November when he could afford to do so, when and after he had received his backdated increase in his Cllr Allowances!

And this was before we had even discussed the matter of increased allowances in Full Council. Shouldn't he have declared an interest? after all his judgement and the decision he took to vote himself a huge pay raise in the middle of a reccession was obviously clouded by his need to get his hands on a quick back payment to ensure his car was legal again!

The report also reveals that despite alluding to the Chief Executive that he had registered the car as off road with a SORN certificate in January that no such registration had taken place and that as a result he was issued with a fixed penalty notice thereafter.

I said to Cllr Woods earlier this year at a full council meeting, when I accused the Lib Dems of not listening to the public view that it is the little things that do for you in the end, and I can't help but think that if he had been a lot less cocky, a little less arrogant, and a little less triumphant then in ridding the town of dangerous Alderman, (Like John Dickie) then the public and John would have been perhaps a bit less eager to have exposed him to a taste of his own medicine.

The local standards board committee will of course have the final say, and thats how it should be, but the damage to his reputation and the Lib Dem group on the Council not to mention his standing within his own group are probably damaged far beyond the level they need to be.

Sometimes saying Sorry at the outset not at the end is a far better policy. Sometimes remembering that whatever the title says on your post that you are no more important now than you were first achieved office and supposed greatness is also very good practice.

It's humility, and genuine remorse that will save you Tony not belittling your detractors and undervaluing their opinion.

Here is the news, or not, parts three, four, five etc

By now you will have got the general drift, white supremacists bought before the courts after threatening or carrying out terrorist attacks, their trials not covered by the mainstream media and their sentences not equitable when compared with other cases over the years be they young muslims or old Irish

So heres a few more recent cases for you to be concerned and amazed at...................................

Lets start with Neil Lewington, Mr Lewington has just been on trial at the Old Bailey charged with the preparation of terrorist attacks using home made bombs made from tennis balls and weedkiller. He made the bombs at his parents home in Reading and aimed to target those who he thought of as 'non British' searches of Mr Lewington's home revealed a notebook entitled "Waffen SS UK members' handbook" which contained drawings of electronics and chemical mixtures. He had once told a woman that "the only good Paki was a dead Paki." Mr Lewington has been found guilty and will be sentenced in September. Press Coverage has to say the least been sparce.

Or how about the case of Robert Cottage? a former 3 times BNP candidate jailed in July 2007 for possessing explosive chemicals in his home. Police comments at the time informed us that following his arrest they found the largest amount of chemical explosive of its type ever found in this country. The national coverage of Cottage’s arrest in October 2006 amounted to exactly 56 words in a single “news in brief” item in the Sunday Times. Cottage was charged under the obscure Explosive Substances Act 1883, not the panoply of modern anti-terror laws now at the disposal of the police which probably explains his lenient 2 and a half year sentence! Cottage told the court that "the evils of uncontrolled immigration' would lead to civil war which would be imminent and inevitable."

And then there is Martyn Gilleard, another Nazi fantasist and a pedophile who in June 2008 was arrested after police found nail bombs, bullets, swords, axes and knives in his flat, together with more than 39,000 indecent images of children on his computer.

In addition he left a note in which he had written, “I am so sick and tired of hearing nationalists talk of killing Muslims, of blowing up mosques, of fighting back. Only to see these acts of resistance fail to appear. The time has come to stop the talk and start to act.” In another note, he wrote that he wanted to see "reds" - left-wing activists - attacked with "lightning strikes" and "home-made grenades". Gilliard was jailed for 16 years and there was only sporadic and not surprisingly limited media coverage.

And then there is Nathan Worrell? This neo-Nazi, described by police as a “dangerous individual”, who hoarded bomb-making materials in his home, and was found guilty in December 2008 of possessing material for terrorist purposes and for racially aggravated harassment. He was jailed for 7 years. Worrell admitted to police that he was a white nationalist. He signed his texts off as "88" - a code for Hitler. The trial heard Worrell left racist stickers at the home of Susan Crofts and Mohammed Chowdhery and on a lamppost. One sticker read: "Only inferior white women date outside their race. Be proud of your heritage. Don't be a race-mixing slut", while another from the Combat 18 group said: "It's our country. Let's win it back. Repatriation now." His trial attracted just two passing references in the popular national press, in the Daily Star and the Sun.

Medhi Hussein highlights the above cases in the New Statesman and helpfully informs us that Europol, the European police agency, suggest that the threat of Islamist terrorism is minimal compared with that carried out by separatists and nationlist groups. Across Europe in 2006, one out of 498 documented terrorist attacks across Europe could be classed as “Islamist”; in 2007, the figure rose to just four out of 583 – that’s less than 1 per cent of the total. By contrast, 517 attacks across the continent were claimed by or attributed to nationalist or separatist terrorist groups, such as ETA in Spain.

Now to me a terrorist is a terrorist, the taking of innocent life or the threat to do so is abhorant to us all. But why do the British Media reserve their press inches for the minority of Muslim offenders whilst conveniently missing or skirting over stories such as those outlined above?

It is no wonder that the country is becoming paranoid and Islamaphobic when it is being fed such an unbalanced view from the press as to the real nature of the threat that surrounds us all. It is also no wonder that Britain's Muslim youth feel so alienated and stigmatised.

The threat to our security and community is most definitely out our there, it is very very real, but it isn't necessarily always dressed up in dark skins and beards and the sooner the media realise this and start to present a more balanced view of what is happening the better we will all be for it.

Here is the news, or not, part two

Following on from the post below about the biggest terrorist arms raid since the 1960's being curiously missing from the mainstream news, I thought you would welcome this similar scarcely covered story (which did at least make it to the BBC) about how the far right are dealt with (or not) when they are finally bought before the beak.

A Derbyshire man, Neil Macgregor 36 was recently up before a Scottish Court where Sheriff Andrew Mackie heard his plea.

Mr Macregor threatened to blow up Glasgow Central Mosque, in fact he went a little bit further than that, let him explain in his own words in an email he sent to Strathclyde Police which was given to the court as evidence. He said:

"I’m a proud racist and National Front member. We as an organisation have decided to deal with the current threat from Muslims in our own British way like our proud ancestors.

“Our demands are very small. Close all the Mosques in Scotland, we see this is very easy – even you guys can handle that.”

He then issued a barrage of sickening threats, centering on the internet killing of Ken Bigley.

He wrote: “If our demands aren’t met by next Friday we’ll kidnap one Muslim and execute him or her on the internet, just like they did to our Ken Bigley.

“Those monster evil Muslims cut off his head with a kitchen knife, so we would like to repay the compliment. Every week we’ll kidnap and behead a Muslim if our demands aren’t met.”

... “We will also detonate a box of nails in the Central Mosque on Friday night.”

MacGregor then followed up the e-mail with a call threatening to blow up the Central Mosque.

Threats to kill a Muslim a week, and blow up a Mosque? what's the tariff on that then under the Prevention of Terrorism Act?

15 years? 5 years? maybe being held indefinitely at her Majesty's pleasure? (a bit like Phil the Greek)

No Mr Mackie decided that he needed medical treatment not punishment and dished out a tough sentence of 3 years probation.

3 years probation! you couldn't make it up, Neil Macgregor is, as we speak is free as a bird walking around Derbyshire a man at full liberty.

The trial didn't even make it to Scotland High Court system and serious questions are now being asked as to why the matter was allowed to be dealt with by the junior Sheriffs court system?

I can but wonder what would happen if a member of the Muslim community was bought before a court having admitted to threats to kill a Christian a day and blow up Glasgow Cathedral, on demands that all churches in Scotland be closed?

Judgements like this do little to promote any sense of equity within our legal system and the failure of most of the press again to report the trial or its outcome will not help to convince the Muslim community that the media doesn't operate a wicked policy of double standards when reporting such matters. It also adds to the concerns of many that the dangers of far right extremism in our country are being underplayed and under reported

Well done the BBC at least, and believe it not The Scottish Sun, but if you wanted to read the news elsewhere you would have to subscribe to newspaper titles and websites well outside of the UK.

Or of course read this blog...........................................................

And so it begins...........................................

From yesterdays Northampton Chronicle and Echo:

http://www.northamptonchron.co.uk/news/Dog-owners-facing-tough-line.5554023.jp

http://www.northamptonchron.co.uk/news/Fines-issued-for-people-littering.5554024.jp

As predicted the easy and probably deserving targets come first, but Black Sack Offenders and Barbecue fans everywhere be on your guard, the Council fixed penalty notice is coming to a street near you very soon.....................................

Stealth Tax fear is very real

I cannot say that I have ever been a fan of the Daily Express, it always seemed to me to be the polite Tory voters version of the Daily Mail. In other words another racist, bigoted free market loving rantsheet but one which chooses its words more carefully.

But yesterday it's headline struck a chord with me. I had posted below about the dangers of 'FREE' and I shared my concerns as to the future of tiered local Council Services where the basic service remains free (but paid for in your council tax) whilst enhanced services will be charged out at a premium. And It seems now that the Daily Express agree, particularly in respect of how future refuse collection services are to be delivered and charged all in the name of 'efficiency' and 'recycling'

So with the revelation by the Local Government Association that there is already a £4bn black hole in local councils accounts ( £2.7bn loss on development deals and £1.3bn in lost interest on bank deposits) and tough government settlements expected for at least the next 4-5 years where will local councils find the ways and means to squeeze that extra cash from us?

Well, first of all expect more parking fines (if that is possible in Northampton!) Figures reveal that last year that Westminster Council bought in more cash from Parking and parking fines than it did in Council Tax! and overall £10bn was collected by local authorities in the name of keeping our streets clear of inconsiderate drivers.

And expect more fixed penalty notices for a wider range of misdemeanors, dog foulers and litter louts probably deserve a good dose of fiscal punishment, but how long before we all risk getting an £80 fixed penalty notice for accidentally putting the rubbish out on the wrong day or dropping apple cores for the birds?

Perhaps schools will issue fixed penalty notices to parents for late or non delivered homework or how about a letterbox tax for non compliant letterboxes? (you know the ones they are either the silly sort side on where you have to twist your whole body to deliver anything, or even worse the bottom feeder where you bend to deliver and drop everything you are holding.

Maybe they will introduce a local Barbecue Tax or fixed penalty notices for invasive cooking odours, or an annual limit on visits to the Park with top up vouchers available for frequent visitors.

I of course have my tongue firmly in my cheek when suggesting some of the above measures, but not all of them.

On the issue refuse collection charges I would hazard a guess that the truth is coming to a wheelie bin or black sack near you very soon. Already Northampton Borough Council has started limiting who does and does not get a black sack delivery (to save money spent on sacks) and thier recycling services are dependent on your post code and wealth (believe it or not only those with drives and large gardens can receive garden waste and glass collections whilst residents in terraced streets get neither)

What all this will inevitably lead to is the creation of multi tiered services with fixed penalties introduced for any who then fall foul of the new regimes and service conditions, with less Council staff delivering services and more delivering tickets and summonses. Our Councils will go from their past incarnation of being providers to all become enablers and then on a step further to becoming enforcers

You have been warned!

Free the Castle Ward Two - Update

Well, thankfully myself and John are still at liberty, still awaiting the careful consideration from the Crown Prosecution Services finest minds in their York Based electoral Fraud Office, (See post below, Labour tough on Crime Soft in the head) But the stupidity of our foes it seems knows no limits or bounds.

First of all let me apologise to one or two members of Northampton South Constituency Labour Party who were upset at my general swipe at the party in the last post, it is clear to me now that they or the collective local party, had no hand in "grassing us up" or the decision to do so!

The real snitch and defender of the public good against malicious imprint crime it seems was Tess Scott's agent Les Marriot who we are told acted alone as an individual, although when questioned by unhappy members as to his actions and also for effectively shooting the party in the foot he said that if he "hadn't have done it then, someone else would have" The mind boggles.

Anyhow to my delight I was recently given a copy of Labours latest leaflet that is doing the rounds in Castle and Ecton Brook Wards. It is a shiny little number from 'Clyde and Tess' or 'Clyde and Keith' with scripted text telling us that they called round today (they perhaps would have done better if they called around during the election)

The leaflet is pretty inoffensive, the usual knocking copy and grumble sheet, but it wasn't that which caught my eye. It was not surprisingly the imprint.

The all important legally necessary imprint on the leaflet tells us that it was "Promoted by David Brede. On behalf of Clyde Loakes and Tess Scott all at 97 Charles Street, Northampton NN1 3BG and printed at The Labour Club, 97 Charles Street, Northampton NN1 3BG"

All fine apart from the fact that the Labour Club is a separate business to the Labour Party and has no print facility. The print facility is NLPP (Northampton Labour Print and Press?) and is situated upstairs at 97 Charles Street in the "Labour Halls" office Their printer an aging but well used risograpth doesn't print on glossy card and cannot produce any colours apart from black red and yellow.

So where was this glossy blue, black and white card printed then? it certainly wasn't printed at 97 Charles Street that's for sure? It seems Clyde is unhappy with the quality of their output? And if it wasn't printed at Charles Street why say it was? At least my heinous crime was committed by omission (i.e. I forgot to put an imprint on it) instead of like theirs being an outright deception to hide its true origin, and as a result any expenditure on it.

It was suggested to me that I report this scandalous breach of the imprint law to the boys in blue, as an act of revenge, but of course I won't as I can't be bothered and mores the point I wouldn't waste the time and resources of the Police or the CPS on such a petty misdemeanour. Perhaps Les Marriot will dob em in? Or one of the other caped crusaders of the peoples print police he refers to.

But whatever happens I do hope that someone will learn the lesson relating to stones and greenhouses and I also believe that Clyde and Tess they should concentrate their minds on explaining their actions to NLPP and why they feel it is OK to use their name and company address on a leaflet that was clearly not produced by them. After all the Tax man just might ask NLPP where the invoice is?

In the meantime myself and John are plotting an escape to Dubrovnik in the event that the news from York isn't good