Councillor McAsh defects to the Greens

[Insuflo]

3 hours ago, Rockets said:

I think the moral of this story is: "hell hath no fury like a politician scorned"

How profound. You should post more often.

[malumbu]

@Insuflo NO, please no, please don't encourage him to post more often! 😒

[Dogkennelhillbilly]

On 17/02/2026 at 20:17, James Barber said:

Austerity for councils started in the early days of the Blair government with central grants to councils ot rising with inflation. 

This is a remarkable interpretation of history. Wikipedia (with more footnotes and citations than you could shake a shitty stick at sez:

The austerity programme was initiated in 2010 by the Conservative and Liberal Democrat coalition government. In his June 2010 budget speech, Osborne identified two goals. The first was that the structural current budget deficit would be eliminated to "achieve [a] cyclically-adjusted current balance by the end of the rolling, five-year forecast period". The second was that national debt as a percentage of GDP would fall. The government intended to achieve both of its goals through substantial reductions in public expenditure.[21] This was to be achieved by a combination of public spending cuts and tax increases amounting to £110 billion.[26] Between 2010 and 2013, the Coalition government said that it had reduced public spending by £14.3 billion compared with 2009–10.[27] Growth remained low, while unemployment rose.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_government_austerity_programme

14 hours ago, first mate said:

I would be interested to know the LibDem stance on CPZ, LTN, extending double yellow lines and what their approach to road and traffic management will be? If they cannot give a clear, straight answer then I think it will be more of what we have had from Labour. 

From memory, last time around they were against the LTNs and competing with the Tories to pick up backlash votes - both failed. They had no counterproposals or ideas about how to manage congestion or pollution.

This time around they're simply silent on the matter: https://www.southwark-libdems.org.uk/your-local-lib-dem-team/goosegreen

Also, as we have seen from Mr Barber's comments on the new development on the old Jewsons yard, "leading campaigns to protect the character of East Dulwich and Goose Green" is code for "blocking new housing".

[Sue]

22 hours ago, vladi said:

At last, I've found a good reason to not vote for the greens.

Why would you have to look for "a good reason to not vote for the greens"?

What a very strange thing to say.

Would you like to explain your logic?

[malumbu]

Green Party policy on driver behaviour:

• Default 20mph Speed Limits: The party supports making 20 mph the default speed limit in all residential areas.
• 40mph Speed Limits: Proposing a default 40 mph speed limit in non-residential areas, excluding major roads.
• Low Traffic Neighbourhoods (LTNs): Promoting the expansion of LTNs to reduce "rat-running" in residential areas.
• Ending Internal Combustion Engine Sales: A target to end the sale of new petrol and diesel vehicles by 2030.
• Environmental Charging: Implementing a Carbon Tax on fossil fuels to increase the cost of petrol and diesel, incentivizing a shift to electric vehicles or public transport.
• Prioritizing Active Travel: Shifting funding from road building to walking, cycling, and public transport infrastructure, aiming for 50% of trips in towns and cities to be made by these methods by 2030.
• Improved Driver Training: Supporting "eco-driving" techniques to reduce emissions and fuel usage. 

Some of which is good, some unrealistic, and on driver behaviour doesn't go far enough.

Difficult to summarise the Lib Dems position as it is a bit wishy washy wanting to appeal to both the eco warrior and the NIMBY.  Sadly I know people who are both!

Labour (nationally) said that local measures are a local issue, which was quite sensible, after Sunak;s we are going to end the war on motorists last stand, but don't like upsetting hard working motorists for example chickening out on fuel duty rises.

[Patatina]

59 minutes ago, Sue said:

Why would you have to look for "a good reason to not vote for the greens"?

What a very strange thing to say.

Would you like to explain your logic?

Agreed. You don’t have to look for reasons when they’re staring at you in the face. 

[vladi]

1 hour ago, Sue said:

Why would you have to look for "a good reason to not vote for the greens"?

What a very strange thing to say.

Would you like to explain your logic?

Before voting, do you not think it's logical to evaluate each party on its policies and make a tally of the reasons "For" and "Against" voting for each party.