Jump to content

Recommended Posts

It may be worth remembering that a reasonable proportion of James' former constituents 'lost' him as a function of the boundary changes, rather than the election itself. It may be that this loss of personal vote (see a comment above about a 'natural' labour voter voting for him) did not assist his chances. As it wouldn't any previous 'incumbent' in a significantly changed ward. This does not make the ward changes thus a bad thing, but it may show how performance of individuals transcends natural voting patterns. That he got people who wouldn't have voted for his party to vote for him is a fine testament to his even-handed (and frequently non-partisan) approach to local government. And his diligence and hard work.

Abe_froeman Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Good morning James.

>

> I am so sorry to read the results of the local

> elections this morning. You have done a huge

> amount for East Dulwich over the years and it will

> be a huge loss for the community without you

> fighting our corner.

>

> I only hope your succesor will put in a fraction

> of the effort you have over the years. Thanks for

> all you have achieved and best wishes for the

> future


Totally agree with this. Thank you James for the support and work you have put in.

I just don't understand.


Have lived in ED since 1980 and we've never, ever had a councillor that has worked as hard, as passionately and engaged as much with the local community as you, James.


Am sad, shocked, angry and confused in equal measure,


I call for a recount!


I'd also like to thank you for all you have done and can't begin to count the number of improvements you've directly been involved in the local area.

Thanks James for all your hard work and input in the good , bad and indifferent changes to the area . Always found you willing to engage in conversation even if some of the topics were challenging. Wishing you all the best and hope your successor is similarly proactive, only time will tell.
I am so gutted by this news. I never even really understood what a councillor did or could do until I moved to East Dulwich in 2010 and encountered James and his passion for this area and for making it better. He's always replied to my emails and messages on here so quickly and with genuine interest and enthusiasm. A real loss, whichever party you support at national level. Thanks so much, James, and I wish you well!

Dear James, I too am very sad that you were not re-elected. Well - shocked, actually. I come from a background where we voted for the person with the best attributes, not the party. I hold you in very high regards - you have always behaved ethically, promptly and effectively with your constituents. As said above, you have set the highest bar and tbh I look forward to you being welcomed back at the next election.


Thank you for your work on my behalf - I have never experienced such a rapid and effective resolution to a problem with Southwark Council.


Kind regards


Trish Cummings

Just to remind everyone, many of the constituents that James worked for are no longer in the ward for which he was standing. Many of the constituents in that ward had not had James as an elected representative - to them he was an unknown quantity, so they voted for the party (and their policies), not the man. James' result is not necessarily any reflection of an ungrateful electorate, and he should not (and I'm sure won't) take it in that way.

How dispiriting. I've never been unhappier with the contents of a .pdf than the results announcement I downloaded this morning.


Thank you for your commitment to the grinding drudge work of local government, James. You will be much missed.


Your successors were invisible round my way until the last week of canvassing, and I've just made the mistake of looking them up on twitter. Selfie after inane selfie, glassy-eyed with intersectional zeal. One of them is about twelve.


I'm off to the allotment.

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

    • I edited my post because I couldn't be sure we were talking about politicians and I couldn't be bothered to read it all back. But it was off the back of a thread discussing labour councillors, so it went without saying really and I should have left it.  What I said was 'There's something very aggressive about language like that - it's not big and it's not clever. Some of the angry energy that comes from the far left is pretty self-defeating.' (In relation to a labour councillor rather immaturely, in my view, wearing a jumper that read 'fuck the Tories').  But I don't recall saying that "violent rhetoric" is exclusively the domain of the left wing. So I do think you're taking a bit of a bit of leap here. 
    • You literally just edited your earlier reply to remove the point you made about it being “politicians”.  Then you call me pathetic.    I’m  not trying to say you approve any of the ugly right wing nonsense.  But I AM Saying your earlier post suggesting  violent rhetoric being “left wing” was one-sided and incorrect 
    • I never said that. Saying I don’t like some of the rhetoric coming from the left doesn’t mean I approve of Farage et al saying that Afghans being brought here to protect their lives and thank them for their service means there is an incalculable threat to women.    Anything to score a cheap point. It’s pretty pathetic. 
    • To be fair we are as hosed as the majority of other countries post-Covid. The problem is Labour promised way too much and leant in on the we need change and we will deliver it and it was clear to anyone with a modicum of sense that no change was going to happen quickly and actually taking the reigns may have been a massive poison- chalice. As Labour are finding to their cost - there are no easy answers.  A wealth tax seems straightforward but look how Labour have U-turned on elements of non-dom - why? Because the super rich started leaving the country in their droves and whilst we all may want them to pay more tax they already pay a big chunk already and the government saw there was a problem.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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