Thursday, March 23, 2006

Labour Councillors vote with the Tories...oops!

The senior Labour councillors made a mistake and pressed the wrong button was the claim. Let us hope and pray that Sunderland never has its own nuclear deterrent with these two in charge.

Councillors apologise after voting with Tories over budget plans
Sunderland Echo
Thursday March 23, 2006
by Jeremy Wicking

Sunderland's Mayor has been given a warning by party political bosses after "accidently" voting for the wrong side.
The Mayor Bill Stephenson and Councillor Peter Gibson, who held the ceremonial post a year ago, both plumped for Tory spending plans instead of Labour's at the recent big budget vote.
They've now been disciplined by the party's chief whip Coun. Les Scott, who manages 60 Labour politicians on the 75-strong city council.
Coun Scott said: "We realises that the opposition had more votes than they should have had, so checked the voting record print-out and two Labour councillors, Coun Stephenson and Coun Gibson, had inadvertently pressed the wrong button."
The final voting came in at 43 in favour of the budget and 11 against.
Coun Scott said: "They have both apologised, been told to be more careful and, after determining that there was no intent, that's the end of the matter."
Coun Stephenson, who has said it was his opposition to Conservative Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher that had inspired him to enter politics, said the pro-Tory vote was totally unintentional.
He said: I thought I was doing quite well as chairman of the meeting up until that last and final vote when my concentration slipped.
"It's the first time that I've ever had to be spoken to by the whips, who were very understanding, and I can advise the Tories that it will never, ever happen again."
It is not the forst time that there has been confusion among councillors on who and what to vote for as last year's budget saw cries of "shambles" as councillors trooped in and out of the chamber. A re-organisation of the system saw the number of votes cut this year.
Coun Scott added that he had now laid down the law to the Labour group after questions were raised on whether the smoking ban applied to the council's underground civic car park.
Labour and Conservative groups had allowed smoking in their group rooms up until last year. A ban in council committee rooms and offices has been in place since the mid 1990s and anyone wanting to feed their nicotine habit must leave council property.
Coun Scott said: "Any smokers need to step completely off council premises. A number of councillors had raised the issue of whether the ban applied to the underground car park and it does."

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

So if these errant votes had swung the vote to the Tories, would there have been a new vote? Knowing this lot, the answer's probably YES

Anonymous said...

Anyone can make a mistake - the problem in Sunderland is that this Labour Council make them every now and again and again and again and...........

Anonymous said...

BURGLAR WRECKS HOME 14 JUNE 2010 GAZETTE,a year of 10 court cases,18/20 witnesses named in court transcripts but did not turn up at court,
sg4 radiator blood (only evidence)found at the scene of damage
trainers found at 155 marshal ave,used as evidence against the convicted person on 13may2010
convicted person lived at 155 palister ave ,
green forensics stated he sent the forensics blood sg4 to northormesby,
22march09,pacey stated she deleivered the sg4/sg3/sg5 blood samples to hq ladgate lane,at 1445 on 23march09,
crawford dc that stated he never went into damaged scene of crime,stated he had the sg4 blood sample on 23march09 between 1739-1817,and that he sent it off to forensics,he also stated at the same time that it was the blood of the convicted person found on the radiator on the 23 march at 1817,23march before forensics received the sample sg4,
sg3/sg5 dissapeared
sg4 was the only sample against the convicted which found him guilty on 13may2010,
why did dc chaytor not give any statements in court as the officer involved with the case,
why does dc crawfords statements contradict greens statemants asto who sent sg4 to forensics
why didnt the forensics turn up at court to give evidence
why didnt the prosecution give the defence requested information to the defence when judge told them to do so on 15 feb2010
why did only 4 witnesses turn up at court,
why wasnt my solicitor freers allowed to give evidence of corruption in cleveland police force

Blog Archive


only search Neil Herron Blog