Wednesday, 2 June 2010

BNP try to sneak back into Barking

After losing every seat that they held in the borough, the BNP are now trying to sneak back into Barking and Dagenham.

Defeated candidate Richard Barnbrook has forced his successor's resignation after discovering that she was working for the Council during the elections.

The BNP will now attempt to usher Richard back into his old seat on a low turnout.

So what great conflict of interest and public corruption was Ms Couling involved in?

And what evil deed has Richard Barnbrook bravely revealed?

Oh yes that's right, she was a lollipop lady.

Great work there Richard. Your former constituents must really miss you.

20 comments:

Daniel Hoffmann-Gill said...

Barnbrook is a twat isn't he?

Hopefully the monster will still fail in his efforts to sneak into a position of power and do utterly nothing with it.

AdamB said...

Yes I'd like to see him explaining on the doorstep to the people of Goresbrook Ward why they have lost the councillor they elected just four weeks ago.

Hopefully they'll tell him where to stuff it.

Sean Ellis said...

Did anyone notice the misprint on the sign behind him? They printed "for" instead of "is".

AdamB said...

It's an easy mistake to make!

Anonymous said...

Of course, it is an offence under electoral law to stand for election to an authority for which you are also an employee. Common sense dictates that this is a massive conflict of interest, and was undoubtedly kept quiet from those who elected her. Electoral law also dictates that any election where the successful candidate broke election law is void - thus it was Ms Couling who unseated herself by unlawfully standing for election.

Anonymous said...

While I do agree with the usual bashing of Dicky, and as much as it chokes this time round the labour party in Barking have no one to blame for this but theirselves.

They knew that the candidate was inelligible to stand, but they thought they would get away with it. and blaming Dicky for jumping at the chance, when if labour had been honest and less arrogant there would not now be a nasty taste left in the mouth on the elections held in Barking.

Word is this is just the start of what could be a disaster as there are a number of investigations going on.

anon

AdamB said...

I'm not sure how helping kids across the road was a "massive conflict of interest" anonymous.

Yes it was against the rules but she resigned as a lollipop lady as soon as she was elected so where's the harm? Forcing voters back to the polls at great public cost over something as trivial as this leaves a much nastier taste in the mouth than her lollipop ever did.

Peter said...

The electoral law is wrong when it comes to council workers. I can understand not allowing someone to be a councillor and work for the council but its unfair not to allow council employess to stand for the council. How many people are brave enough to give up their jobs when there is a possiblity they own't win a seat on the council after doing so. I think its undemocratic

Anonymous said...

Dickhead!

Anonymous said...

I wonder what Tricky Dicky thinks of the "Sentinel" publication that was sent around Barking and Dagenham that claimed to be an independent publication but was slandering Margaret Hodge and the Labour Party (Which is still illegal under the Representation of People Act 1983) and the ongoing investigation into that.

Labour might have been a bit sneaky but the BNP have been just as bad during the election. Barnbrook letting a couple of his friends temporarily bunking in his house while they were standing for election for example. Plus, I wonder how he is going to explain to the general Barking public why they are forcing a costly bye-election over a lollipop lady. Hopefully the media gives him a well deserved reaming over this one.

AdamB said...

Yes I think that's a good point Peter. Why should a roadsweeper be forced to make themselves unemployed before running to be a councillor, whereas somebody who runs a business that is affected by the council doesn't for example?

Anonymous said...

Funny you should say that AdamB because it is said that several of the newly elected labour councillors in Barking work in companies that are commissioned by the council, so ergo one could say that they are also employed by the council, and to be honest their monthly salary is far far higher than a lollipop lady, but there you go greed will out.

anon

AdamB said...

"It is said..."

By you.

Anonymous said...

In response to AdamB, no it is not just said by me, it is a researchable fact. Easily discovered if you wish to look.

AdamB said...

So where's *your* research then Anon? You're the one claiming greed as a motive.

Daniel Hoffmann-Gill said...

Oh I can't wait to see this "evidence"...

Anonymous said...

Cant wait to see the evidence, well lets steer you in the right direction, have a look at the DABD website and list of employees, pretty sure you will match names there.

Have a look HnHorganisers will find a match there.

and thats just for starters, still should keep you busy for a little while.

anon

AdamB said...

So you haven't got any basically.

Green Gordon said...

That, and the fact that sub-contractors are not civil servants. Anon is an idiot. And a BNP supporter. Who thinks he's Deep Throat. But it probably Lee Barnes LLB.

Tom said...

"so ergo one could say that they are also employed by the council,"

But they aren't, though, ergo anyone arguing this is a fucking moron.

Agree that the law is wrong, Barnbrook is sadly within his rights to complain, though, even though his own misdemeanours in office are of a far worse nature.