Page Views on Northern Voices' Blog

THIS month the post 'Protester's target Ashton Jobscentre for sanctioning claimants'  overtook 'SEXUAL ABUSE: Cyril Smith's Family v's Private Eye...' (Date: 19th, Sept. 2010).    The latter had dominated our page-viewings since 2012.  The post on the 'Protester's target Ashton Jobcentre...' was posted on the 28th, Aug. 2014.  Other postings about the campaign at the job centre in Ashton-under-Lyne in Greater Manchester have also attracted significant interest in recent weeks.  It may represent the nervous concern of some folk about the repressive nature of sanctions and the benefit system at the present time.  There is a strange interest another very old post on the NV Blog 'WOOLAS SUSPENDED BY LABOUR PARTY! (Date: 6TH, Nov. 2010) .   


Posts

Entry	Pageviews
Protesters target Ashton Jobcentre for sanctioning... 28 Aug 2014, 2 comments	2416
SEXUAL ABUSE: Cyril Smith's Family vs Private Eye... 19 Sep 2010	2225
WOOLAS SUSPENDED BY LABOUR PARTY! 6 Nov 2010, 1 comment	967
Julie Hesmondhalgh in Blindside at Manchester Roya... 24 Dec 2013	794
Tory twit wants national service for young people!... 2 Sep 2013	701
Jim Savile & Cyril Smith: Dead Men Tell No Lies! 10 Oct 2012, 1 comment	579
The Coalition: Return of Maggie Thatcher? by Laure... 24 Sep 2010	452

This Month's Northern Voices' Top 5 pageviews:

158 pageviews:  New Charter takes over Tameside Reporter. Is this ...

3 Sep 2012
____________________________________________

112 pageviews:  Bolton Council say 'Bye-Bye' to Gary Neville's Tel...

25 Jun 2010
____________________________________________
56 pageviews:  WOOLAS SUSPENDED BY LABOUR PARTY!

6 Nov 2010, 1 comment
____________________________________________

51 pageviews:  BLACK ROSES: The Killing of Sophie Lancaster

16 Aug 2012
____________________________________________
48 pageviews:  Blacklisted worker Colin Trousdale calls on Unite ...

31 Jan 2011
____________________________________________
Edirorial comment:  It's not surprising that the 'New Charter' takeover of the Tameside Reporter is the top performer in the last month on the Northern Voices Blog.  The Garry Neville story has been the best all time performer and one Sophie Lancaster posting, last April, has had 453 pageviews in all.  More curious in the last month, are the 56 pageviews for the 6th, November 2010 posting on the suspension of Phil Woolas from the Labour Party and the 48 pageviews for the 31st, January posting on the blacklisted electrician Colin Trousdale.

This Week's Top 5 Northern Voices' Pageviews

No.1:   New Charter takes over Tameside Reporter. Is this ...

3 Sep 2012  103 views
_______________________________________________
No. 2:  WOOLAS SUSPENDED BY LABOUR PARTY!

6 Nov 2010, 1 comment  49 views
_______________________________________________
No.3:  Bolton Council say 'Bye-Bye' to Gary Neville's Tel...

25 Jun 2010  34 views 
_______________________________________________
No.4:  Scottish MP's Threat to Blacklisters

5 Sep 2012  32 views
_______________________________________________
No.5:  Blacklisting is still going on in 2012.

6 Sep 2012  31 views
_________________________________________________________
The printed version of NORTHERN VOICES 13, now on sale with all sorts of stuff others won't touch and may be obtained as follows: Postal subscription: £5 for the next two issues (post included). Cheques payable to ‘NORTHERN VOICES’ at c/o 52, Todmorden Road, Burnley, Lancashire BB10 4AH.

Tel.: 0161 793 5122.  Email: northernvoices@hotmail.com

BREAKING NEWS - WOOLAS LOSES HIGH COURT APPEAL!

At noon today it was announced on the BBC2 news programme Daily Politics that Phil Woolas the disgraced former MP for Oldham East and Saddleworth, has lost his appeal in the High Court against the decision of the Election Court (the first of its type in 99 years) which sat earlier this year in Uppermill, Saddleworth, to remove him from office for 'illegal practices' i.e.making false statements and deliberately telling lies against his Liberal Democrat opponent Elwyn Watkins,during the general election campaign this year.

According to today's Independent, the three High Court judges dismissed the least serious charge on which Woolas was convicted that he'd claimed that Watkins had broken a pledge to live in the constituency. They nevertheless upheld the two most serious charges against Woolas that he`d falsely claimed that his opponent had sought to win the votes of 'Asian extremists' who had advocated violence and that Watkins had refused to condemn the threats of violence.

As the NV blog has previously reported, Woolas's legal position appears hopeless. Although he said he had 'no regrets' about his conduct, he has been banned from standing for public office for 3 years and now faces the prospects of a criminal investigation which could result in a jail sentence. During the general election campaign, Woolas, a former immigration minister, tried to win votes in his constituency by getting "white folk angry." After the High Court judgement Woolas said: "It is the end of the road - I am out."

'White Folk': just another clan or ethnic category?

LAST week, three High Court judges reserved judgement when considering Labour MP Phil Woolas's bid to seek a judicial review to challenge an earlier decision of an election court on the 5th November to declare void his election to the Seat of Oldham East & Saddleworth at last May's General Election. A judgement may be expected this week. An earlier Court had said he could not seek a judicial review in the High Court and ought to go the the Court of Appeal. Mr Woolas's legal team have argued that the election court is an inferior court and that its decisions could be subject to judicial review in the High Court.

Since November 5th, 2010 Phil Woolas is no longer the MP for Oldham East & Saddleworth. This weekend Northern Voices spoke to some of Mr Woolas's white constituents in an area called Derker in Oldham, that has suffered from a scheme called the Pathfinder under the previous Labour Government: the controversial Housing Market Renewal Initiative Pathfinder has left massive areas of dereliction in our northern heartlands. Surprisingly, considering what the Labour Government did to them, one woman told me that she thought it was 'disgusting' what Elwyn Watkins the Liberal Democrat had done in taking the case to Court to seek redress.

What are we to make of this? After all, Joe Fitzpatrick, the Labour Party agent for Mr Woolas, in the run up to the general Election had said in an email to a colleague that 'If we don't get the white folk angry, he's gone' and 'We need to do an article ... to explain to the white community how the Asians will take him (Phil Woolas) out.'

Why should the 'white folk' readily tolerate being treated thus? Why should the 'white folk' accept being treated as an ethnic category to be cynically stirred up?

Perhaps the 'white folk' despise a bad loser more than a dirty campaigner. One possibility is that folk just don't like being exposed as being fools, but my source suggested that while there may have been lies in the leaflets of Phil Woolas she told me there were lies in the literature of the Lib Dems. Yet there is just a possibility that my contact believes or wants to believe in what Woolas said about 'Watkins being in the pocket of Islamic extremists' or words to that effect. What perhaps rests behind this is suggested by what the Labour Agent, Mr Fitzpatrick, also said in his email: '... and Musad ( a Lib Dem councillor) his stitched up his clan and the Bengalis'. This suggests something of the wheeling and dealing that goes on in the marketing of clans in these northern towns and in this fixing process 'the white folk' or the white working classes become yet another ethnic category to be traduced, deceived or just 'stitched up'.

WE`RE ALL IN IT TOGETHER!

George Osborne the Con-Dem Chancellor of the Exchequer repeatedly tells us that 'we`re all in it together'. But when it comes to Britain`s MP`s it seems to be a case of don`t do as we do, but do as we say.

Osborne is one of eighteen multi-millionaires in the Con-Dem cabinet. Despite the so-called financial crisis, last month, the Daily Telegraph revealed how 40 party activists including David Cameron attended an 'election thank you' dinner hosted by the outgoing party treasurer, Michael Spencer. According to the Telegraph, the dinner guests 'quaffed heroic quantities' of Chateau Petrus costing £1,000 per bottle. As Spencer is estimated to be worth £630 million, the costs incurred are like spare change in his back pocket. Spencer has donated £3.8 million to the Conservative Party. According to the Daily Mirror('FATCATS UNITED' 22/12/10), the "tycoon controversially sold £45 million of shares in his broking firm ICAP, weeks before they fell in value."

This week it was reported in the press that the (dis)honourable MP for Oldham East and Saddleworth, Phil Woolas, who was recently stripped of his seat and banned from holding office for three years by an election court, is to receive a £40,000 'winding-up allowance' and an annual pension of £30,000 after being an MP for just thirteen years. Parliament's lavish pension scheme, is regarded as one of the most generous in Britain.

Following his suspension by the Labour Party, a number of MP`s have rallied around Woolas and have suggested that he`s been treated harshly. They have branded deputy Labour leader, Harriet Harman, a disgrace for saying that Woolas had no future in the Labour Party. Many seem to think that he`s been 'hung out to dry' and that making false statements and telling lies about a political opponent is par for the course and the stuff of politics.

David Winnick, the Labour MP for Walsall North, said:

"It`s not acceptable to most of us to say that Phil`s time in the Labour Party is finished forever. We see a colleague who fought a very tight marginal, he may have gone over the top, but that`s no reason to say his political career is over for good."

Although Woolas`s legal position appears hopeless, he`s nonetheless pursuing all sorts of legal avenues to try and restore his battered reputation. His appeal for a judicial review was recently thrown out and he faces Labour Party disciplinary action.

Despite the feelings of some Labour MP`s, public opinion appears to be against Woolas. A recent Yougov poll showed that 71% of respondents felt that the courts were right to rule against Woolas whereas only 7% felt it was the wrong decision.

Woolas recently stated that his supporters and financial backers included Gordon Brown and Cherie Blair. One serious criticism levelled against Woolas, is that during his election campaign he inflamed racial tensions in Oldham in the run-up to the General Election in a desperate bid to discredit his opponent in order to retain his seat.

Thick as thieves these MPs

OLDHAM MP MICHAEL MEACHER STICKS UP FOR WOOLAS:

(Northern Voices understands Michael Meacher - here seen cavorting with bikini-clad young women and a shark (below), Labour MP for Oldham West and Royton, shares an office with Phil Woolas, the disqualified Oldham East Labour MP found guilty last Friday of lying about his Lib Dem opponent, Elwyn Watkins, at the General Election in May. Hence, it may well be that the current dodgy predicament of Mr Woolas may have a knock-on effect on the office running costs for Mr Meacher and that his concern for the plight of the staff may not be totally disinterested. Our readers must judge for themselves on the wisdom of Mr Meacher's remarks [extracted from Meacher's blog] below on behalf of his colleague Mr Woolas.)

'Of course MPs should tell the truth. It is not for me to determine whether or not my colleague Phil Woolas did so now that the court has reached its decision. I do however believe that he has been treated harshly, and that some of his traducers should take a wider look at this whole question of truth-telling because it could open up other embarrassing revelations. It has always been a good principle: let him who is innocent cast the first stone. I don’t of course have details of any other specific case, but it would certainly be surprising if among the other 649 MPs there was not a single instance where a Member had not strayed beyond the limits of truth and honesty in portraying a political opponent in an election.

'This is unlikely to be an isolated case – indeed the only reason why this case came to light in the first place is that Elwyn Watkins, the LibDem candidate, had the resources to bring it. He works for an Arab sheikh in the Middle East, so money was no object. Indeed, in the course of the one-week election court proceedings it appears that Watkins himself admitted that he had spent some £200,000 on the election, which is 7 times above the maximum permitted limit.

'Nor have Phil Woolas’ employees been treated fairly when they themselves cannot in any way be held responsible. They have been told by IPSA that their employment contracts terminated at 11am on Friday when the court gave its judgement. That would seem illegal by excluding the statutory period of notice, and it also means they will no longer be available for completing the constituency caseload even up till the judicial review in a fortnight, let alone till the by-election. Worse still, IPSA are now demanding that Phil Woolas pay back all his office expenses and staff expenses since the election in May, which could amount to some £70,000. This is gratuitously punitive and unfair when the money was used in good faith and for the benefit of the constituency, not the MP himself.

'But there are deeper questions about truth-telling raised by this episode. What about those MPs, including some on the Front-Bench of all three parties, who flipped the designation of their homes saying that first one house and then another was their second home when they knew that one or other statement wasn’t true? The cost the taxpayer in some cases tens of thousands of pounds, yet have never been brought to book. What about Nick Clegg (and he’s far from the only one) who solemnly declared he would abolish tuition fees and then voted to treble them? Or is it all right to lie to the electorate to win votes so long as you don’t lie about your political opponent to win votes? How about a right of recall for those MPs who deceive the electorate by their dishonesty?'

WOOLAS SUSPENDED BY LABOUR PARTY!

THE disgraced Oldham East and Saddleworth MP, Phil Woolas,(pictured left above) has been suspended by the Labour Party following damning criticism by two High Court judges that he had made false statements and was 'guilty of illegal practices' under election law.

Yesterday at the Uppermill Civic Hall, Saddleworth, the election court declared the election result void and ordered a by-election. Woolas won the seat at the last General Election by the narrowest of majorities(103). Elwyn Watkins, his Lib Dem rival, accused Woolas of mud slinging and of telling deliberate lies in his election material in order to win the election. He then took legal action against Woolas which led to the historic election court being set up in Uppermill earlier this year.

In his election material Woolas had alleged that Elwyn Watkins (LIbDem) had tried to win the votes of Muslims who advocated violence and had refused to condemn the extremists in his own constituency who had threatened him with violence.  The two High Court judges, Mr. Justice Nigel Teare and Mr. Justice Griffith Williams, said that this clearly amounted to an attack on his opponents 'personal character or conduct' and they added that Woolas had: 'no reasonable grounds for believing them to be true and did not believe them to be true.'

Another allegation made by Woolas, which was also found to be untrue by the election court, was the false claim that Watkins had broken a pledge to live in the constituency. Woolas was nevertheless cleared of knowingly making a false statement that Mr. Watkins' election campaign costs were likely to be in excess of £200,000, the legal limit.

After the judge`s ruling yesterday, Woolas, was ordered to pay Mr. Watkins the sum of £5,000 and was also ordered to pay his rival`s legal costs. He was also barred from holding public office for three years.  Speaking to the Manchester Evening News (M.E.N.) Mr. Watkins said that people who deliberately lie about their opponents: 'have no part to play in democracy' and he added:

"What Mr. Woolas decided was that he would do anything to keep his seat and his position of power. To my mind in a democracy that is just not acceptable."

After the ruling Woolas announced that he would be seeking a judicial review and would be making no further comment.  The Labour deputy leader Harriet Harman responded by condemning Woolas and stated that the Labour Party would not be supporting his appeal. Effectively his political career is now finished.

During the expenses scandal, Woolas came under a barrage of criticism for his expenses claims.  One of his claims for MP`s expenses included items of women`s clothing, women`s shoes, nail varnish, tampons and nappies.  As MP`s expenses claims are supposedly for personal use it is unclear why these claims were made.

When Woolas was asked whether his claim for precisely £210.31 indicated that he had put the shoes and nail varnish on expenses, he replied: 'I take your point and I understand the extrapolation.'

When challenged by the press about these outrageous claims, Woolas, responded by threatening legal action (see N.V. mag issue 11).