Another busy week for Harlow Labour candidate around the town
Politics / Sat 11th Nov 2023 at 12:32pm
AS HAS been our tradition to catch up with Harlow MP Robert Halfon around and about the constituency, we are also meeting with the Labour candidate, Chris Vince.
He had just been visiting the Harlow Fields sixth form as part of Parliament Week.
So we asked him about that, about the on going problems at SFG College.
We also asked him to reflect upon a recent council meeting and whether he felt sone Conservative councillors intimidated him?
We also took this opportunity to ask him about the situation in Israel.
Finally, we asked councillor Vince about what issues are coming up on the doorstep?
We do apologise for the sound quality on the film. We have just purchased a new “hot mic” and have just learned that you don’t have it pointing away from the interviewee.
The film has subtitles.
We would also like to advise a small number of readers, that it may be perceived that, whether you are right or wrong, that you may want to think about tone and how your comments may reflect on you.
As far as local elections are concerned, Chris Vince did not explain his complete U turn. Last September, he himself proposed cancelling the May 2023 local elections. A reason he argued was: "...thereby saving tens of thousands of pounds of tax payers money on an election which will have no long term benefit." This was reported in YH https://www.yourharlow.com/2022/09/20/harlow-labour-call-for-next-years-local-elections-to-be-cancelled/?_ga=2.52352875.395417519.1699707435-477650017.1699707435&_gl=1*ov0bc2*_ga*NDc3NjUwMDE3LjE2OTk3MDc0MzU.*_ga_VG46TH43S2*MTY5OTcwNzQzNS4xLjEuMTY5OTcwNzU3My4wLjAuMA.. So now, without any coherent explanation, he rejects his own argument when presented with the opportunity to make permanent savings. Truly remarkable! Furthermore, he mentioned that the Administration had their views and the Labour opposition theirs. That is stretching the truth somewhat. The Administration believed this should have been a free vote. We also know for a fact, having spoken to them directly, that 4 Labour councillors supported the change - to bring Harlow in line with 70% of other English councils - and that they were coerced by Vince to oppose the motion. The accusation of Labour hypocrisy remains as per David Forman's Letter.
Once again James Leppard showing his constant negativity starting something for no reason the argance the man shows on these pages does him no favours with the people from harlow i have never met the man in my life but the way he comes across on this pages is snobbish
Snobbish? I am merely pointing out facts. I fail to see how that could be construed as 'snobbish'. Chris has consistently failed to answer the same question made by several people. I assure you that I am not in the least snobbish.
Actually, James Leppard is right. I believe Chris Vince backtracked because he didn't like the result of the consultation. He agreed with the Council starting the consultation, but probably thought that he would persuade people to keep the current system. Obviously, that plan failed and so Vince got the hump and resorted to diktat to get the result he wanted. So, thanks to councillor Chris Vince what point is there in participating in Consultations? Answer, absolutely none.
James, You aren't comparing like with like and you know it! You know full well that due to the forthcoming ward boundary re-organisation the 11 Councillors elected in May 2023 will only serve one year in office. And It was therefore practically and economically perfectly reasonable to have argued that if at all possible the 2023 elections should have been cancelled. Perhaps you might like to tell the electorate why you were not able to persuade all of the Tory Councillors to attend the Special Council meeting - and why as a Party you then didn't have the courage of your convictions and subsequently pulled the vote. Meaning that the substantive motion to change the voting cycle was not voted on!
Tony, Chris Vince's original proposal to cancel the elections was effectively void as it is not legally possible to simply cancel elections on a whim. We are not some authoritarian socialist state like Venezuela. Indeed, had Chris checked this beforehand, we could have been spared the drama. Nevertheless, you and he argued that it was vital the have yearly elections in order to have 'democratic accountability' . So how does cancelling an election stand with this concept, even if those elected are only in office for one year before another election? Also, why did Chris coerce 4 Labour councillors who supported the change to 4 year cycles? Hardly democratic, wouldn't you agree? This was never a party political matter; Chris Vince made it one for no apparent reason.
This argument is the equivalent of fiddling while Rome burns! The only important thing about local elections is addressing why there's such a low turn out. Reason the electorate doesn't trust politicians: reason, consultion currently is ineffective and inadequate. Nowhere near good enough or near adequate. It doesn't help that the "neighbourhood plan" planning system doesn't work. Get to the heart or root of the problem before wasting energy on frequency of elections.
Your Harlow is clearly an extension of the local Labour party
Clause IV Part 3 of the Labour Party Rule Book states that Labour is committed to co-operating in the United Nations and other international bodies to secure peace. António Guterres, Secretary-General of the United Nations, has called for a ceasefire in the Gaza Strip, as have many UN bodies, including the World Health Organisation, the United Nations Children’s Fund, and the World Food Programme, together with numerous international Non-Governmental Organisations including War on Want, Oxfam, and Amnesty International (of which Mr Vince is a member). Rather than urging the government of the UK to co-operate in the United Nations and other international bodies to secure peace, Chris Vince opposes a ceasefire in the Gaza Strip. He rejects the principles outlined in Clause IV Part 3 of the Labour Party Rule Book and instead supports the line taken by a Conservative government. How many homes will have to be destroyed, how many hospitals attacked, how many civilians killed, before Mr Vince decides that it is time for the slaughter to stop? Mr Vince is bringing the Labour Party into disrepute by opposing the call for a ceasefire in the Gaza Strip, contrary to Clause IV Part 3, and supporting the Conservative Party position.