Mr Benyon (Toffs) 33,057 David Rendel (Sandal Wearers) 20,089 Hannah Cooper (New Tory) 2,505 David Black (The-end-is-nigh) 1,475 Adrian Hollister (Tree-huggers) 490 Brian Burgess (Town Centre Mafia) 158 David Yates (Beer-head) 95
The total number of votes cast 58,806
I'm sorry Brian, I tried my best to get your deposit back, but alas, Newbury is full of glory supporters.
The people of Newbury have spoken. 43,000+ people voted for the parties that support the Newbury Vision 158 voted against.
158 voted against what? If you think this election is an endorsement for the Newbury Vision (in truth, I'm sure you don't) then you are dafter than I thought. Indeed, I'm not even sure if Brian Burgess is even actually against the V2025, only maybe some elements in it.
Indeed, I'm not even sure if Brian Burgess is even actually against the V2025, only maybe some elements in it.
I think it's a shame that Brian didn't have more of a solid manifesto. It seems that his main promise was to represent the interests of Newbury residents at parliament level (even though it doesn't really work like that for local issues). The issues that he feels strongly about are better fought locally.
This has nothing to do with local politics. The Newbury Vision has nothing to with national politics.
Brian Burgess, who also sits as the Chair of the Retailers Association here, says he is so fed up with how Newbury is changing and growing, he's going to run as an independent candidate for MP to put a stop to it: "In the old days, people used to come in and enjoy Newbury for the pleasant market town that it was.
"But it is no longer a pleasant market town.
"It really is a task to get into Newbury, get parked. We've got a dreadful reputation for traffic jams. The ongoing roadworks which seem to go on forever and ever.
"Projects like the Pavilion in the park which no one seems to want. The whole thing has been getting totally out of hand".
Only 157 people agreed with him, whereas 43,000 people voted for pro-Vision parties.
He shouldn't let this crushing and embarrassing defeat stop him standing again though.
Only 157 people agreed with him, whereas 43,000 people voted for pro-Vision parties. He shouldn't let this crushing and embarrassing defeat stop him standing again though.
Are you suggesting that Newbury has 157 ant-NV2025 and 43,000 pro-vision voters? I don't think that is true. I don't believe that everyone against the changes to Newbury, would have only voted for Brian Burgess. For starters, my parents are against the NV2025, but have voted Tory because that's who they want in Government. What has happened in Newbury wouldn't affect their voting decision one bit.
The only real way to say that there is an endorsement for NV2025 is to take politics out of the equation and hold a referendum. Otherwise, arguments like yours are utter speculation and in my opinion, cobblers.
Only 157 people agreed with him, whereas 43,000 people voted for pro-Vision parties.
He shouldn't let this crushing and embarrassing defeat stop him standing again though.
I can't believe I'm engaging with you on this....but you're spinning yourself silly.
For the record, the Lib Dems want a thorough review of the Cartergrad 20 year plan, obviously picking up on the significant local concern. The Tories agreed to review it, but it's already a year late. It must go out for consultation, and when it does, Brian will have a bigger profile to make sure local views are taken into account. It's not as black and white as you make out.
And now Newbury is a safe Tory seat, the balance has changed. We need more of us to stop WBC building over our park and giving away car parks to their mates. The Lib Dems will now fade away, so perhaps it's time for an elected mayor at WBC. I reckon Brian would get many more votes, especially if he pledges to sack you on his first day
That's what's happened here, 158 anti Vision votes, 43,000 pro-vision. I hope this puts an end to any talk of the people of Newbury not being in favour if it.
Were they 'pro-' and 'anti-' NV2025 votes? How do you deduce this, or are you just being a hypocrite and indulging in a bit of winding up? I think you are wrong to say that this is proof that the majority of people are 'pro' or 'anti' NV2025.
That's what's happened here, 158 anti Vision votes, 43,000 pro-vision.
I hope this puts an end to any talk of the people of Newbury not being in favour if it.
This is the most absurd conclusion I've come across! There is no correlation between your base data and the conclusion. This was a national election not a local election and the result shows national views.
This is the most absurd conclusion I've come across! There is no correlation between your base data and the conclusion. This was a national election not a local election and the result shows national views.
Brian Burgess, who also sits as the Chair of the Retailers Association here, says he is so fed up with how Newbury is changing and growing, he's going to run as an independent candidate for MP to put a stop to it.
It seems that only 157 other people want to put a stop to it.
If it was a local election, I may have voted BB as he stood on local issues. I voted for who would be best on taxes, education, NHS, Trident. Couldn't vote for Brian on any these issues unless central government is now being run from Newbury.
If it was a local election, I may have voted BB as he stood on local issues. I voted for who would be best on taxes, education, NHS, Trident. Couldn't vote for Brian on any these issues unless central government is now being run from Newbury.
Brian was pro-Trident. Not sure about his stance on the other points but I'm sure he could have told you if you'd asked.
What you're essentially saying here is that it was a waste of time him standing on local issues. I don't agree with you and applaud him for standing (as I do David Yates) despite this almost complete rejection of everything he stood for, by the people of Newbury,
Brian was pro-Trident. Not sure about his stance on the other points but I'm sure he could have told you if you'd asked. What you're essentially saying here is that it was a waste of time him standing on local issues. I don't agree with you and applaud him for standing (as I do David Yates) despite this almost complete rejection of everything he stood for, by the people of Newbury,
Why don't you agree it was a waste of his time - when clearly it was? You have come up with no rational, legitimate argument to justify your opinions, therefore I can only assume you are a just a hypocritical troll, a WUM.
I voted for BB, because, unlike you, I truly appreciated an independent local person, standing for election. If there were no independents, I would have voted Tory, does that mean I'm a backer for the NV2010, of course not.
Do you think Newbury voting for Tory was a complete rejection for all other parties policies? Of course not.
Not really a convincing counter argument to the fact that only 158 people voted against how Newbury is changing and growing,
I know how you feel. I've posted several challenges to your assertion about the outcome of the election of our MP. I have yet to see any counter argument from you either, but then I don't expect any from a WUM like you.
I suppose this means that using your argument, you believe that as David Yates came last, this is an utter rejection of his opinions regards the perilous state our economy?
As the Greens won few votes, people in Newbury have rejected the environmental issues raised by the Greens? ...actually, you might have a point, with people like you living in Newbury!
Brian Burgess, who also sits as the Chair of the Retailers Association here, says he is so fed up with how Newbury is changing and growing, he's going to run as an independent candidate for MP to put a stop to it.
It seems that only 157 other people want to put a stop to it.
Good counterargument. Always works when you repeat the same phrases several times.
It might explain some of the ignorance and small mindedness that resides there. Notwithstanding that user23.3's behaviour is entirely consistent and predictable.
No idea what 'bohemian friends' means, care to explain?
I suspect you have an idea, but in any case, regard it an an euphemism as I am trying to be a little discrete and am using it in a slightly distorted manner.
"...Bohemia meant any place where one could live and work cheaply, and behave unconventionally; a community of free souls beyond the pale of respectable society"
You seem to be saying that it's pointless standing in a national election on local issues, and that's why he did so poorly. This simply isn't true, as George Galloway, Dr David Taylor or Martin Bell would no doubt contest.
I'm not convinced that your examples were victories based on local issues, but three examples against hundreds that failed to get their deposits back, isn't a convincing argument either!
The truth is that all but 158 people who voted in Newbury are largely happy with how Newbury is changing and growing, The "glory supporters" have spoken; there's no need to be sore losers about it.
You seem very confused as you keep ignoring the fact that this was a general election, not a local referendum. It is nothing about being sore losers, it is about you spinning a specious argument (let alone, churlish).
This simply isn't true, as George Galloway, Dr David Taylor or Martin Bell would no doubt contest.
Which one of those gentlemen stood for parliament on local issues. They all had a national agenda although Martin Bell was standing to keep out Hamilton and cobbled up a deal, he had no real interest in the local policys of his constituency.
You seem very confused as you keep ignoring the fact that this was a general election, not a local referendum. It is nothing about being sore losers, it is about you spinning a specious argument.
Do you think Brian was wrong to stand on local issues. You've said
I'd vote for Brian Burgess, the Lib Dems and the Tories have let me down.
in the past. You seemed to think it was right in the past and until this crushing defeat you seemed to be talking up that he was standing on local issues. I think despite his failure he was right to do it as it puts to bed the question of whether people want progress in Newbury.
You've also mentioned 'bohemian establishments' in the past. To what are you referring?
Which one of those gentlemen stood for parliament on local issues. They all had a national agenda although Martin Bell was standing to keep out Hamilton and cobbled up a deal, he had no real interest in the local policys of his constituency.
Was Brian wrong to stand for MP? I say no, and am glad he did.
Do you think Brian was wrong to stand on local issues. You've saidin the past.
He is wrong to stand in the expectation of becoming an MP, while being able to make the changes to things he would protest about. I voted for him rather than not vote, although I am in agreement with some of his sentiments. If this election was five years ago, then there was no-way that I wouldn't have voted Tory such that I was so desperate that we should try and remove the impeachable Prime Minister we had back then.
Was Brian wrong to stand for MP? I say no, and am glad he did.
I say yes, if the ambition was to promote an anti-NV2025 movement, as I suspect the electorate couldn't really care either way about this topic at this point in time.
An establishment almost is somewhere specific, the Glade Festival is an event that has been held in a number of different locations. To where were you referring?
As you say, almost, but not always. The Glade held a 5 year residence at Wasing, and would still now if it weren't for the council insisting on conditions that made the site untenable for the organisers. However, use the Glade Festival* simply as a guide to what I mean, I would rather not be more candid, besides, I cannot remember the post, albeit one that I can quite easily accept I made.
*In broad terms, the Glade Festival is an electronic dance music festival. This type of event will attract a large audience with eclectic backgrounds and behaviour.
PS - this is wandering off topic, so I will leave this here and for you all to draw your own conclusions.
I say yes, if the ambition was to promote an anti-NV2025 movement, as I suspect the electorate couldn't really care either way about this topic at this point in time.
Why did you vote for someone you think was wrong to stand for election?
Standing for paliament by BB was, in my opinion, a means of making his profile a little more public which would assist if and when he stands for a place in local government as he surely will. Those elections of course come round next year.
Why did you vote for someone you think was wrong to stand for election?
I have become so disillusioned with the choice of the main three, that it made it easy for me to decide. Had Brain Burgess not done so, I would have voted for David Yates. If not him, then the Greens, if not them, then UKIP, if not them, then Tory...probably. If not them then I would have, with deep regret, spoiled my vote.
It was essentially a protest vote about the whole system, or lack of tangible options, but I see it as a kick in the face of people that have died for their suffrage, for me not to vote at all, which would have been another choice.
As you say, almost, but not always. The Glade held a 5 year residence at Wasing, and would still now if it weren't for the council insisting on conditions that made the site untenable for the organisers. However, use the Glade Festival* simply as a guide to what I mean, I would rather not be more candid, besides, I cannot remember the post, albeit one that I can quite easily accept I made.
*In broad terms, the Glade Festival is an electronic dance music festival. This type of event will attract a large audience with eclectic backgrounds and behaviour.
PS - this is wandering off topic, so I will leave this here and for you all to draw your own conclusions.
This wriggling is not uncommon for you. The Glade Festival is not an establishment so what were you really referring to?
Standing for paliament by BB was, in my opinion, a means of making his profile a little more public which would assist if and when he stands for a place in local government as he surely will. Those elections of course come round next year.
I hope he does, though the "stop the vision" candidates finished 5th and 6th in their ward last election.
They did however both receive more votes than Brian did in the General Election from a far, far smaller electorate.
Which ward do you think gives him the best chance of a seat on the council?
I hope he does, though the "stop the vision" candidates finished 5th and 6th in their ward last election.
They did however both receive more votes than Brian did in the General Election from a far, far smaller electorate.
Which ward do you think gives him the best chance of a seat on the council?
Given that he stands on an independent platform he could do better. I still believe that party politics should not be part of local government. Voters I believe, may be swayed by voting for the party rather than the person and it is the major problem with current local government when one group gangs up on the other taking away the councillors opportunity to use a free vote rather than toeing a party line.
Given that he stands on an independent platform he could do better. I still believe that party politics should not be part of local government. Voters I believe, may be swayed by voting for the party rather than the person and it is the major problem with current local government when one group gangs up on the other taking away the councillors opportunity to use a free vote rather than toeing a party line.
Which ward do you think Brian should stand in? You avoided this question. Which ward would be best represent at local level?
Wouldn't his current role be a conflict of interests in some cases, supporting the views of the people and of local business?
Do you think people should vote for people and personalities at a local level, rather than parties and policies?
The Glade Festival is not an establishment so what were you really referring to?
Point me to the post and I'll let you know...if I can.
Don't forget I mentioned earlier, I miss-use the word slightly, but may I point you to this previously posted comment...
"...Bohemia meant any place where one could live and work cheaply, and behave unconventionally; a community of free souls beyond the pale of respectable society"
though the "stop the vision" candidates finished 5th and 6th in their ward last election.
Yes, but generally, and notwithstanding there is a large Tory vote here, people are more concerned about their mortgage and investments, than pavilions in the park, or £1,000,000.00 paving slabs in the town.
I've not mocked anyone and am perfectly within my rights to comment on our local politicians on what is supposed to be a community website for Newbury.
Of course...except, and you would be lying if you said you didn't, that you couldn't wait to come on here and post as you have.
Of course...except, and you would be lying if you said you didn't, that you couldn't wait to come on here and post as you have.
Except I did wait, didn't start this thread and couldn't have come to the conclusion I did if he'd received anything other than an embarrassing amount of votes.
I guess that most WBC councillors represent the ward they live in so that would be the most likely. (I have no idea what ward he stood for in 1998
I'm not quite sure if the rules for councillors would preclude his standing.
If I were him I would think about standing in a ward currently represented by Tories - on the basis that he would be standing against the actions of the current administration.
Brian Burgess has made his point - suspect he knew he didn't stand a chance of being elected. However, he's got his views being talked about and probably further up the agenda. Seems to me that his plaint is far wider than the 'Vision'. A simple single page is more a wet dream than a vision. Frankly, I suspect those who put it together are rather emabarrased about it and would rather it was just forgotten. If they are not, then they ought to be. The issue is the capability of WBC.
Except I did wait, didn't start this thread and couldn't have come to the conclusion I did if he'd received anything other than an embarrassing amount of votes.
If you pay rates to WBC then you probably need to be concerned how your money is spent. If you don't, then my point is lost.
Oh, I know. I was just trying to get User23 to admit it. He has a bit of a history of telling us out-of-towners that Newbury affairs are none of our business.
Brian Burgess has made his point - suspect he knew he didn't stand a chance of being elected. However, he's got his views being talked about and probably further up the agenda. Seems to me that his plaint is far wider than the 'Vision'. A simple single page is more a wet dream than a vision. Frankly, I suspect those who put it together are rather emabarrased about it and would rather it was just forgotten. If they are not, then they ought to be. The issue is the capability of WBC.
If you think the Vision is a single page then I'm afraid BB has failed with you. The Vision is considerably larger than one page. There is still more to come - not just the dreaded Pavillion. The biggest problem is that it is still as written (in the Lib Dem's time) - the action plan associated with it runs up to 2010 - and suggests everything will have started by then. Of course it is running years late and takes no account of the altered financial state of the country.
Male
Logged
Notwithstanding that user23.3's behaviour is entirely consistent and predictable.
