Today's most viewed
| LATEST NEWS | | |  | | | STAR ALIVE | | | | | DEAR STAR | | | | | TIP OF THE DAY | |
|
|
|
VOTE 2008: Deal or no deal?
BRIAN Spencer and his Liberal Democrats look set to maintain their grip on the reins of power with the help of their Tory allies. But speaking after her party captured more seats than any other individual party, Labour leader Marie Rimmer believes the results show the public wants Labour to run St Helens Council.
The Liberal Democrat party now trail Labour by 19 to 23 in the 48-seat St Helens Council, but council leader Brian Spencer will be expected to remain at the helm if he retains the backing of the Tories, who hold six seats.
For the past two years the Lib Dems and Conservatives have shared control and that could now remain in place until 2010.
Rimmer though said the results were evidence that townsfolk want her party to run the council and, that as biggest party in the town, Labour should be in charge of the Town Hall.
Rimmer, who refuses to strike any power sharing deal with rival parties, told the St Helens Star: "The public have decided we are the largest party. We are the party that the public of St Helens has most faith in and the only party with vision."
Despite results in St Helens which saw Labour bucking the national trend by making gains, Spencer, insisted his party was moving forwards and the outcome in wards where the majority grew had been a vindication of local policies.
He continues to deny that an alliance was running St Helens Council, saying "No deal has been done (with the Conservatives). (Two years ago) I was moved as leader, seconded and supported by the Conservatives.
"Nothing has been discussed. Marie Rimmer has said she will not share power and when offered the opportunity, turned it down flat. She refused four places on the executive because she wanted outright control.
"Two years ago when we won (When Labour lost overall control), it was on local issues and policies, not national ones."
Rimmer, however, accused the Lib Dems and Tories of simply "not wanting to show the public they are in business together".
She added the constitution model for St Helens Council is for a strong leader who selects a cabinet and that she would not enter into an agreement whereby a minority party would dictate who should take places on that committee.
Meanwhile, Dave Watts, the MP for St Helens North, was sceptical about Lib Dem denials of an alliance. He said: "There has been discussions between the parties.
"I don't know if the Tories will support the Lib Dems, but if they do, then it speaks for itself. After these results they will continue to run the council."
Watts also raised concerns over the future of a proposed Parkside rail freight terminal in Newton-le-Willows, plans for which have been opposed by the deputy council leader Suzanne Knight who was re-elected in Newton with a 1,423 majority.
He said: "I believe that the majority of people want new jobs and they understand the importance of providing them. I do hope both parties consider the importance of this development."
Spencer, however, added: "The future of Parkside will not be decided by the council. The planning committee will return a view, but it will be the government minister that will make the final decision."
Despite the Lib Dems losing ground, Spencer - who along with Knight recorded resounding victories in Sutton and Newton respectively - remained positive.
He said: "We have held all our seats but one and Labour have not regained control." They did in fact lose two seats as Labour regained Billinge and Seneley Green, which during mid term became a Lib Dem seat after Bessie Griffin changed allegencies.
Spencer continued: "We were very close in Haydock, but we were up against a strong candidate in Jim Caunce.
"We have been vindicated in terms of an increased majority in the seats we have held onto. As far as we are concerned we are moving forward."
7:00am Saturday 3rd May 2008
Print 
Email this 
CommentPosted by: donkeykonger on 6:15pm Fri 2 May 08
We came close in Haydock says Brian Spencer? The Lib Dems had an 800 vote majority in Haydock last year, this year that turned into a 300 vote Labour majority.If that's close then I'm a banana .I also notice that results in seats like Eccleston and Newton are being held up as an exapmle of Lib Dem 'progress' .Correct me if I'm wrong but these are safe lib dem seats that more or less returned the same vote as last year? I see parliament is the only place where spin takes place.
We came close in Haydock says Brian Spencer? The Lib Dems had an 800 vote majority in Haydock last year, this year that turned into a 300 vote Labour majority.If that's close then I'm a banana .I also notice that results in seats like Eccleston and Newton are being held up as an exapmle of Lib Dem 'progress' .Correct me if I'm wrong but these are safe lib dem seats that more or less returned the same vote as last year? I see parliament is the only place where spin takes place.
Posted by: Big Doug on 8:03pm Fri 2 May 08
"Spencer, however, added: "The future of Parkside will not be decided by the council. The planning committee will return a view, but it will be the government minister that will make the final decision."
absolute cop out.It is likely the Saints Stadium will also be called in from what I understand.That hasn't stopped Cllr Spencer having a very vocal opinion about the issue.The support or otherwise of the council MATTERS- government call in or not.This is not leadership.
"Spencer, however, added: "The future of Parkside will not be decided by the council. The planning committee will return a view, but it will be the government minister that will make the final decision."
absolute cop out.It is likely the Saints Stadium will also be called in from what I understand.That hasn't stopped Cllr Spencer having a very vocal opinion about the issue.The support or otherwise of the council MATTERS- government call in or not.This is not leadership.
Posted by: PW on 8:31am Sat 3 May 08
given that it will likely be a future Tory minister making the final call on Parkside - therefore our locals MPs views will carry far less weight- it is absolutely crucial that the Council also supports the Parkside plans.Sitting on the fence is not an option for the council .
given that it will likely be a future Tory minister making the final call on Parkside - therefore our locals MPs views will carry far less weight- it is absolutely crucial that the Council also supports the Parkside plans.Sitting on the fence is not an option for the council .
Posted by: Jim Rockford, haydock on 11:30am Sat 3 May 08
[quote][bold]PW[/bold] wrote:
given that it will likely be a future Tory minister making the final call on Parkside - therefore our locals MPs views will carry far less weight- it is absolutely crucial that the Council also supports the Parkside plans.Sitting on the fence is not an option for the council .[/quote] [bold]bold[/bold] well that's the lib dems all over ! always sitting on the fence, never want to upset anyone that's in parliament and st helens !!!
James Rockford [bold]bold[/bold]
PW wrote:
given that it will likely be a future Tory minister making the final call on Parkside - therefore our locals MPs views will carry far less weight- it is absolutely crucial that the Council also supports the Parkside plans.Sitting on the fence is not an option for the council .
well that's the lib dems all over ! always sitting on the fence, never want to upset anyone that's in parliament and st helens !!!
James Rockford
Posted by: Jim Rockford, haydock on 11:57am Sat 3 May 08
Spencer continued: "We were very close in Haydock, but we were up against a strong candidate in Jim Caunce.
The lib dems came close to winning Haydock? You are joking! I think he meant to say bold as the lib dems came close by 10 votes and Spencer ordered 3 recounts
The Lib dems thought they had already won in Haydock! And from what I heard and seen the Lib dem candidate already thought that he had won it! More fool him,
Also how is it resounding victories in Newton and Sutton when they are Lib Dem safe seats? Spencer must have been tired when he said that to the press! [bold]bold[/bold]
Regards
James Rockford
Spencer continued: "We were very close in Haydock, but we were up against a strong candidate in Jim Caunce.
The lib dems came close to winning Haydock? You are joking! I think he meant to say bold as the lib dems came close by 10 votes and Spencer ordered 3 recounts
The Lib dems thought they had already won in Haydock! And from what I heard and seen the Lib dem candidate already thought that he had won it! More fool him,
Also how is it resounding victories in Newton and Sutton when they are Lib Dem safe seats? Spencer must have been tired when he said that to the press!
Regards
James Rockford
Posted by: alfiesays, St Helens on 12:41pm Sat 3 May 08
Marie Rimmer thinks that the latest elections mean a return to a labour countil ---she wishes!
Obviously still not learned that the labour council made one bad decision after another for years. I prefer the current the current set-up. Without the Rimmer influence
Marie Rimmer thinks that the latest elections mean a return to a labour countil ---she wishes!
Obviously still not learned that the labour council made one bad decision after another for years. I prefer the current the current set-up. Without the Rimmer influence
Posted by: big doug on 4:01pm Sat 3 May 08
[quote][bold]alfiesays[/bold] wrote:
Marie Rimmer thinks that the latest elections mean a return to a labour countil ---she wishes!
Obviously still not learned that the labour council made one bad decision after another for years. I prefer the current the current set-up. Without the Rimmer influence[/quote] yeah, and you prefer saints not to have a new stadium and not to have the parkside jobs...what alfiesays is wrong as ever, and contrary to the wishes of the majority in st helens.I'm not completely convinced about labour on the whole, but i've seen enough of this tory/lib dem alliance on a number of development issues to know they are a serious danger to development and jobs in this town.
alfiesays wrote:
Marie Rimmer thinks that the latest elections mean a return to a labour countil ---she wishes!
Obviously still not learned that the labour council made one bad decision after another for years. I prefer the current the current set-up. Without the Rimmer influence
yeah, and you prefer saints not to have a new stadium and not to have the parkside jobs...what alfiesays is wrong as ever, and contrary to the wishes of the majority in st helens.I'm not completely convinced about labour on the whole, but i've seen enough of this tory/lib dem alliance on a number of development issues to know they are a serious danger to development and jobs in this town.
Posted by: Jim Rockford, Haydock on 3:10pm Wed 7 May 08
[quote][bold]big doug[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]alfiesays[/bold] wrote: Marie Rimmer thinks that the latest elections mean a return to a labour countil ---she wishes! Obviously still not learned that the labour council made one bad decision after another for years. I prefer the current the current set-up. Without the Rimmer influence[/quote] yeah, and you prefer saints not to have a new stadium and not to have the parkside jobs...what alfiesays is wrong as ever, and contrary to the wishes of the majority in st helens.I\'m not completely convinced about labour on the whole, but i\'ve seen enough of this tory/lib dem alliance on a number of development issues to know they are a serious danger to development and jobs in this town.[/quote] [bold]bold[/bold] So what your trying to say alfie is, you would vote labour if Marie rimmer weren’t leader! Hhhmmm I’ve heard that before, just wondering why so many people don’t like her! Also talking about decision making, the libs dems and the Tory have agree on nearly everything what has been brought up in council when it was a labour council so don’t just blame labour, I also agree with big Doug I’m also fed up with this lib dem/tory alliance, they've cut the youth service's, which the youth are the future, just think when we are old, they will be running the place! Just remember alfie, it was Labour who got the 4 -Star Council status! And I also remember when the lib dems were crying (crocodile tear’s) about spending all that money on the bus stop rocket and nick name it rimmer’s rocket! But the year after and the lib dems got in, the rocket got a art award, joint with other projects in St Helens, the lib dems were all smiles, Spencer’s face was in the paper then! Ooowww look at us, more good things done by a labour council but we’ll claim them as were in power but if anything goes wrong ‘‘oh the decision was made when it was labour council, just like there leaflets @ election time !!!
Regards
James Rockford
[bold]bold[/bold]
big doug wrote:
alfiesays wrote: Marie Rimmer thinks that the latest elections mean a return to a labour countil ---she wishes! Obviously still not learned that the labour council made one bad decision after another for years. I prefer the current the current set-up. Without the Rimmer influence
yeah, and you prefer saints not to have a new stadium and not to have the parkside jobs...what alfiesays is wrong as ever, and contrary to the wishes of the majority in st helens.I\'m not completely convinced about labour on the whole, but i\'ve seen enough of this tory/lib dem alliance on a number of development issues to know they are a serious danger to development and jobs in this town.
So what your trying to say alfie is, you would vote labour if Marie rimmer weren’t leader! Hhhmmm I’ve heard that before, just wondering why so many people don’t like her! Also talking about decision making, the libs dems and the Tory have agree on nearly everything what has been brought up in council when it was a labour council so don’t just blame labour, I also agree with big Doug I’m also fed up with this lib dem/tory alliance, they've cut the youth service's, which the youth are the future, just think when we are old, they will be running the place! Just remember alfie, it was Labour who got the 4 -Star Council status! And I also remember when the lib dems were crying (crocodile tear’s) about spending all that money on the bus stop rocket and nick name it rimmer’s rocket! But the year after and the lib dems got in, the rocket got a art award, joint with other projects in St Helens, the lib dems were all smiles, Spencer’s face was in the paper then! Ooowww look at us, more good things done by a labour council but we’ll claim them as were in power but if anything goes wrong ‘‘oh the decision was made when it was labour council, just like there leaflets @ election time !!!
Regards
James Rockford
Posted by: David, Haydock on 7:01pm Wed 7 May 08
Labour are not the largest party in St Helens. Not only did they get fewer votes across the borough than the Lib Dems, both their share of the vote and the absolute number of votes cast for them declined this time.
What are the Conservatives and the Lib Dems meant to do? They can't leave the borough ungoverned just because Labour irresponsibly refuse to cooperate with any other party. Neither the Conservatives no the Lib Dems have any choic but to run the Council without Labour.
This latest clap-trap from Marie Rimmer is just another example of hypocracy and down right dishonesty from the Labour Party.
Labour are not the largest party in St Helens. Not only did they get fewer votes across the borough than the Lib Dems, both their share of the vote and the absolute number of votes cast for them declined this time.
What are the Conservatives and the Lib Dems meant to do? They can't leave the borough ungoverned just because Labour irresponsibly refuse to cooperate with any other party. Neither the Conservatives no the Lib Dems have any choic but to run the Council without Labour.
This latest clap-trap from Marie Rimmer is just another example of hypocracy and down right dishonesty from the Labour Party.
Posted by: SMoore on 9:09pm Wed 7 May 08
"Labour are not the largest party in St Helens"
that's funny because the Star says Labour has 4 more seats than the Lib Dems and the Tories only have 6 seats, and the only party to gain seats were Labour.I think by any electoral test that is 'the largest party'.
"Labour are not the largest party in St Helens"
that's funny because the Star says Labour has 4 more seats than the Lib Dems and the Tories only have 6 seats, and the only party to gain seats were Labour.I think by any electoral test that is 'the largest party'.
Posted by: Jim Rockford, Haydock on 10:45pm Wed 7 May 08
[quote][bold]David[/bold] wrote:
Labour are not the largest party in St Helens. Not only did they get fewer votes across the borough than the Lib Dems, both their share of the vote and the absolute number of votes cast for them declined this time. What are the Conservatives and the Lib Dems meant to do? They can\'t leave the borough ungoverned just because Labour irresponsibly refuse to cooperate with any other party. Neither the Conservatives no the Lib Dems have any choic but to run the Council without Labour. This latest clap-trap from Marie Rimmer is just another example of hypocracy and down right dishonesty from the Labour Party. [/quote] [bold]bold[/bold]
Labour are not the largest party? If the Labour party has 23 seats, the Lib Dems have 19 seats and the Tories have 6 seats, then that makes Labour the largest party on the council!!! If that is wrong, then correct me but I will check again just incase there is a type error or cllr’s changing party’s to gain control like in Liverpool but I very much doubt it ! But if you’re on about support and votes and backers or the Libs and the Tories joining forces that might be different kettle of fish, but we will see how many cllr’s go on holiday for the next two years (for voting on committees/full council) as I think there will be some games played
Regards
James Rockford
[bold]bold[/bold]
David wrote:
Labour are not the largest party in St Helens. Not only did they get fewer votes across the borough than the Lib Dems, both their share of the vote and the absolute number of votes cast for them declined this time. What are the Conservatives and the Lib Dems meant to do? They can\'t leave the borough ungoverned just because Labour irresponsibly refuse to cooperate with any other party. Neither the Conservatives no the Lib Dems have any choic but to run the Council without Labour. This latest clap-trap from Marie Rimmer is just another example of hypocracy and down right dishonesty from the Labour Party.
Labour are not the largest party? If the Labour party has 23 seats, the Lib Dems have 19 seats and the Tories have 6 seats, then that makes Labour the largest party on the council!!! If that is wrong, then correct me but I will check again just incase there is a type error or cllr’s changing party’s to gain control like in Liverpool but I very much doubt it ! But if you’re on about support and votes and backers or the Libs and the Tories joining forces that might be different kettle of fish, but we will see how many cllr’s go on holiday for the next two years (for voting on committees/full council) as I think there will be some games played
Regards
James Rockford
Posted by: David, Haydock on 9:17am Thu 8 May 08
The total votes cast across the borough were:
Lib Dem - 17,052
Labour - 16,731
Conservative - 8,908
BNP - 2,528
The point I was trying to make is that Labour have no right to claim that they have an electoral mandate to run the Council as Marie Rimmer is doing.
Further, given that Labour have made it clear that they won't cooperate with the other parties, what else can the other parties do than to try to run the Council as best they can without Labour?
The total votes cast across the borough were:
Lib Dem - 17,052
Labour - 16,731
Conservative - 8,908
BNP - 2,528
The point I was trying to make is that Labour have no right to claim that they have an electoral mandate to run the Council as Marie Rimmer is doing.
Further, given that Labour have made it clear that they won't cooperate with the other parties, what else can the other parties do than to try to run the Council as best they can without Labour?
Posted by: smoore on 8:50pm Sat 10 May 08
a ludicrous argument.Local elections are not fought on the basis of proportional representation and if they were it would be the Lib Dems who would lose out.At least half their vote are Tories voting tactically as the Lib Dems are well aware.If Tory voters voted Tory in St Helens it would probably cost the LDs most of their seats.The lib dems should thank their lucky stars the largest party is decided by the number of seats won...
a ludicrous argument.Local elections are not fought on the basis of proportional representation and if they were it would be the Lib Dems who would lose out.At least half their vote are Tories voting tactically as the Lib Dems are well aware.If Tory voters voted Tory in St Helens it would probably cost the LDs most of their seats.The lib dems should thank their lucky stars the largest party is decided by the number of seats won...
Posted by: David, Haydock on 9:13pm Sun 11 May 08
[quote][bold]smoore[/bold] wrote:
a ludicrous argument.Local elections are not fought on the basis of proportional representation and if they were it would be the Lib Dems who would lose out.At least half their vote are Tories voting tactically as the Lib Dems are well aware.If Tory voters voted Tory in St Helens it would probably cost the LDs most of their seats.The lib dems should thank their lucky stars the largest party is decided by the number of seats won... [/quote] How on Earth is this comment meant to justify Marie Rimmer's claim that Labour have the sole right to run the Council - which is what I've objected to?
Labour came second in this election with 37% of the vote. They came second in 2007 as well.
I've never suggested that the Lib Dems should have sole control of the Council either. However, as far as I'm aware, unlike Labour, they've never claimed that they should.
smoore wrote:
a ludicrous argument.Local elections are not fought on the basis of proportional representation and if they were it would be the Lib Dems who would lose out.At least half their vote are Tories voting tactically as the Lib Dems are well aware.If Tory voters voted Tory in St Helens it would probably cost the LDs most of their seats.The lib dems should thank their lucky stars the largest party is decided by the number of seats won...
How on Earth is this comment meant to justify Marie Rimmer's claim that Labour have the sole right to run the Council - which is what I've objected to?
Labour came second in this election with 37% of the vote. They came second in 2007 as well.
I've never suggested that the Lib Dems should have sole control of the Council either. However, as far as I'm aware, unlike Labour, they've never claimed that they should.
What are these links for?
If you liked this article and would like to share it with others on the web who might be searching for good content we've made it easy for you to do it.
At the bottom of all articles, you'll see links to six sites. These sites - commonly called 'social bookmark' or 'social news' sites - have large communities of web users who share and rate interesting, useful and fun things on the web.
Clicking the links will automatically add the address of the story you are reading to one of these sites, letting you share it with others. Each site will ask you to register to share stories. Registration is free and once a member, you can store, recommend and search for stories that interest you.
More on Digg
More on del.icio.us
More on Furl
More on reddit
More on NowPublic/
More on Yahoo!
