Jump to content

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, Rockets said:

https://southwarknews.co.uk/area/southwark/exclusive-southwark-council-leader-expected-to-face-leadership-challenge/

 

This might be fun to watch especially if there is any political collateral damage in East Dulwich as a result.

Good for James McCash.

He seems to be  a proactive and responsive councillor.

Pity some people saw fit to give him such a hard time on this forum when he had only just taken up post.

  • Like 1
18 hours ago, Sue said:

Pity some people saw fit to give him such a hard time on this forum when he had only just taken up post.

Actually, I think first thing he was welcomed on the forum - it was only later that things got tougher for him. Some at least of it self inflicted.

19 hours ago, jazzer said:

Needs keeping on a tight leash from what I've read on here about his antics, <removed>

Absolutely wild that people are bantering about capturing and shooting local councillors. No wonder people are put off going into local government or politics by the amount of online trolling and abuse.

Edited by Administrator
Removed quoted comment as per above
  • Agree 4
2 minutes ago, CPR Dave said:

Describes himself as a Socialist now, and has abandoned Marxism

To be fair, we have to rely on his own statements I believe that he has abandoned Marxism. Certainly we can see in his actions that he hasn't reached a 'withering away of the state' position, since he's still sold on untramelled state action, as regards the state he apparently wants to control. 

There was a mass exodus from the local Labour Party meetings  soon after Keir Starmer took over (including me).

I believe all or most of those who stopped going to the meetings also gave up their  Labour Party membership  (including me).

I'm not sure how relevant this is to the thread (I'm sure admin will act accordingly) but Starmer has moved Labour so far to the right, amongst other things, I am not sure that I can bring myself to vote Labour at a general election.

So (coming back to the topic of the thread) I am pleased to see someone active in local politics who still seems to stand for what I have always naively thought the Labour Party was supposed to stand for.

  • Agree 2

I cannot stand him - and I am old school labour. His behaviour and demeanour at the CPZ consultations spoke volumes. He has wasted £k’s on consultations - the results of which were then ignored. The postage costs of materials that arrived after the shut off dates ( plus loads that were never received at all). His utter disregard for people who are disabled or do not have ready access to public transport, plus the numerous caregivers who get no more pay for sitting in gridlock. 
 

 

  • Agree 1

Ha ha...Starmer is trying to make Labour electable (he is winning me back) and you can't do that from the far-left and this is why Labour HQ may have an issue with McAsh taking the helm of Southwark - a throw back to the dark, dark days of Corbyn!

 

To be honest I thought McAsh's bigger political aspirations died after his call to action to get people to block the police doing an immigration raid in Peckham was plastered all over the Mail - that stuff can come back to haunt you when you progress to the big leagues and causes problems with party HQs who want to present a more acceptable face to the masses!

Edited by Rockets
  • Like 1
1 hour ago, tiddles said:

I cannot stand him - and I am old school labour. His behaviour and demeanour at the CPZ consultations spoke volumes. He has wasted £k’s on consultations - the results of which were then ignored. The postage costs of materials that arrived after the shut off dates ( plus loads that were never received at all). His utter disregard for people who are disabled or do not have ready access to public transport, plus the numerous caregivers who get no more pay for sitting in gridlock. 
 

 

Is all this solely down to James McCash?

And do you have evidence that he has "utterly disregarded" the needs of the groups of people you name? That seems very harsh.

Or has he balanced those needs (or tried to) against other needs? 

To be clear, I know very little about his recent  behaviour, so I am not taking sides here. He just impressed me when he first became a councillor.

Edited by Sue

I have had extensive dealings with him in recent months, advocating for the rights of elderly and disabled residents which have been wholly ignored in the Streets for People policy and proposed CPZs. I support his aspirations to tackle climate change but not by ignoring the Equality Act of 2010 and airbrushing the needs of vulnerable residents from the future of the borough. I find him dogmatic and his attitude towards less able residents is despicable.

  • Agree 1

Reported by Southwark News today:-

"Southwark’s Council Leader, Cllr Kieron Williams, has seen off an internal Labour challenge within his group – winning 28 votes to 23 from challenger Cllr James McAsh.

Southwark News exclusively revealed the challenge earlier this month, coming from the Cabinet Member for Climate Emergency, Streets and Clean Air, McAsh. The vote was held today, Saturday March 23rd, at Southwark Labour’s Annual General Meeting.

The close call of the vote means Cllr Williams now faces a tricky decision whether to keep Cllr McAsh in the fold, given his support, or remove him from the Cabinet."

  • Thanks 1

I think he is aligned with the left, but has allowed his own career to get in the way of what are supposedly his fundamental beliefs. I don't trust any 'politician' who changes their commentary to advance their own career, I can see why he has taken this journey, I like the person, but not someone I would vote for now.

1 hour ago, heartblock said:

I think he is aligned with the left,

I think the hard or far left would be more accurate, Marxism per se isn't a Labour Party or socialist requirement, and that allegiance he has only recently - well dropped, I think, rather than repudiated.

1 hour ago, heartblock said:

I think he is aligned with the left,

I think the hard or far left would be more accurate, Marxism per se isn't a Labour Party or socialist requirement, and that allegiance he has only recently - well dropped, I think, rather than repudiated.

Not sure why this posted itself twice in one box. Apologies - it wasn't that good!

  • Haha 1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Hi - I posted a request for some help with a stuck door and possible leaky roof. I had responses from Lukasz at Look_as.com and Pawel at Sublime Builders. I don't see any/many reviews - has anyone used either person?  Could use a recommendation rather then just being contact by the tradespeople... Many Thanks 
    • I'm a bit worried by your sudden involvement on this Forum.  The former Prince Andrew is now Andrew Mountbatten Windsor Mountbatten in an anglicisation of Von Battenburg adopted by that branch of our Royal Family in 1917 due to anti-German sentiment. Another anglicisation could be simply Battenburg as in the checker board cake.  So I surmise that your are Andrew Battenburg, aka Andrew Mountbatten Windsor and that you have infiltrated social media so that the country can put the emphasis on Mandelson rather than yourself.  Bit of a failure. I don't expect an answer from police custody.  
    • We had John fit our PLYKEA kitchen (IKEA cabinets with custom doors) and would happily recommend him and Gabi to anyone. Gabi handled all communication and was brilliant throughout — responsive and happy to answer questions however detailed. John is meticulous, cares about the small details, and was a pleasure to have in the house. The carpentry required for the custom doors was done to a high standard, and he even refinished the plumbing under the sink to sit better with the new cabinets — a small touch that made a real difference. They were happy to return and tie up a few things that couldn't be finished in the time, which we appreciated. No hesitations recommending them.
    • Not sure about that. Rockets seems to have (rightly in my view) identified two key motivating elements in Mcash's defection: anger at his previous (arguably shabby) treatment and a (linked) desire to trash the Labour party, nationally and locally. The defection, timed for maximum damage, combined with the invective and moral exhibitionism of his statement counts as rather more than a "hissy fit".  I would add a third motivation of political ambition: it's not inconceivable that he has his eye on the Dulwich & West Norwood seat which is predicted to go Green.  James Barber was indulging in typical LibDem sleight of hand, claiming that Blair introduced austerity to *councils* before the coalition. This is a kind of sixth form debating point. From 1997-1999 Labour broadly stuck to Tory spending totals, meaning there was limited growth in departmental spending, including local govt grants. However local government funding rose substantially in the Noughties, especially in education and social care. It is a matter of record that real-terms local authority spending increased in the Blair / Brown years overall. So he's manifestly wrong (or only right if the focus is on 1997-1999, which would be a bizarre focus and one he didn't include in his claim) but he wasn't claiming Blair introduced austerity more widely. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...