Fresh call for MP Buckland to give up top role

Robert Buckland

Robert Buckland

First published in News Swindon Advertiser: Photograph of the Author by , @Michael_Benke

THE political row surrounding South Swindon MP Robert Buckland rumbled on yesterday as a senior member of the Labour Party called for him to stand down.

It emerged over the weekend that Mr Buckland, a former barrister and part-time judge, had been found in breach of the Code of Conduct for the Bar of England and Wales in 2011.

He was a governor at Ridgeway School when pupil Henry Webster was severely assaulted by 13 Asian pupils.

While conducting an internal investigation for the school he asked for witness statements relating to the case of one of the culprits.

Last week, the MP was promoted to Solicitor General in David Cameron’s reshuffle but failed to disclose the breach of conduct.

Mr Buckland has maintained he only asked for the papers to conduct an internal investigation and there was no malicious intent.

Although he was found guilty, there was no fine and he was not prevented from practising.

However, it has led some to question whether Mr Buckland is suitable for the role and yesterday the Shadow Attorney General Emily Thornberry contacted the head of The Bar Council to make inquiries.

She said: “As you will be aware, it has emerged that Robert Buckland MP, the new Solicitor General, was found guilty by the Bar Council of professional misconduct in 2011.

“The Council of the Inns of Court considered that he had brought the profession into disrepute following his intervention in an inquiry into a racism-fuelled fight at the school at which he was governor.

“It was found that he had improperly accessed the case notes of one of the defendants. In particular the statements of children who had witnessed a horrible violent incident.

“My understanding is that Mr Buckland conducted his own ‘investigation’ into the incident, despite the fact that there was already a criminal investigation, and during the course of this demanded case papers from the defence and then distressed the mother of the victim by approaching her with his ‘findings’.

“The tribunal concluded that Mr Buckland ‘had no entitlement to those papers’ and so had engaged in activity ‘likely to bring the legal profession into disrepute’.

She also raised questions as to whether Mr Buckland’s conviction was spent, the reason given for not raising it with the Prime Minister.

The MP said once two years had passed it was spent but the Bar Standards Board said this was not the case.

A spokesman said: “Any disciplinary finding and sentence currently stays on a barrister’s disciplinary record indefinitely. As outlined on our website, a member of the public can obtain a barrister’s full disciplinary record by contacting our Professional Conduct Department during office hours.

“Findings and sentences are also published on our website for two years unless the finding of the Disciplinary Tribunal involves a suspension or disbarment: in these cases, the finding will be posted on the website indefinitely.”

Mr Buckland has made no comment since the revelations but a statement from the Attorney General’s office said: “It is a matter of public record that in May 2011, Robert Buckland was found to have committed a minor breach of the Code of Conduct of the Bar of England and Wales.

“He was not suspended or fined and continued to practice and sit as a Recorder.

“This finding was removed from the Bar records after two years and therefore Mr Buckland was not required to declare it upon appointment as Solicitor General.”

Yesterday, fellow Swindon MP Justin Tomlinson yesterday came out in support of his colleague and criticised the political attacks.

He said: “Robert has my absolute full support.

“He is an extremely hard working and dedicated MP and will be fantastic in the role as Solicitor General drawing on his wealth of experience.

“Labour’s personal, nasty and vindictive attacks smack of desperation and political posturing.”

Comments (28)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

9:04am Tue 22 Jul 14

nigelej says...

So mr Tomlinson says Labour are now being nasty . Please mr Tomlinson would you,put on record you would not be doing the same if it was a labour government in power and they selected some one who had done the same . Time and time again we see this and get these comments . Political posturing from all sides when it suits .
So mr Tomlinson says Labour are now being nasty . Please mr Tomlinson would you,put on record you would not be doing the same if it was a labour government in power and they selected some one who had done the same . Time and time again we see this and get these comments . Political posturing from all sides when it suits . nigelej
  • Score: 23

9:08am Tue 22 Jul 14

jonelway says...

Another politician who's acted like they were above the law. Where's the consequences? He shouldn't be in public office. What happened to cleaning up politics and improving the their image? Yes, another Tory lie.
Another politician who's acted like they were above the law. Where's the consequences? He shouldn't be in public office. What happened to cleaning up politics and improving the their image? Yes, another Tory lie. jonelway
  • Score: 32

9:52am Tue 22 Jul 14

Grimly Feendish says...

"Mr Buckland has maintained he only asked for the papers to conduct an internal investigation and there was no malicious intent."

Nobody has mentioned "malicious intent". So it makes me wonder why you have mentioned it. I suppose getting hold of witness statements that Mr Buckland ‘had no entitlement to those papers’ and so had engaged in activity ‘likely to bring the legal profession into disrepute’, would give him information that he could use against witnesses that stated that the Governers (he was one) had turned a blind eye to a certain named group intimidating other students. Talking of intimdation why did Buckland approach the mother of the victim by and cause her distress to her with his ‘findings’? Hmm...
"Mr Buckland has maintained he only asked for the papers to conduct an internal investigation and there was no malicious intent." Nobody has mentioned "malicious intent". So it makes me wonder why you have mentioned it. I suppose getting hold of witness statements that Mr Buckland ‘had no entitlement to those papers’ and so had engaged in activity ‘likely to bring the legal profession into disrepute’, would give him information that he could use against witnesses that stated that the Governers (he was one) had turned a blind eye to a certain named group intimidating other students. Talking of intimdation why did Buckland approach the mother of the victim by and cause her distress to her with his ‘findings’? Hmm... Grimly Feendish
  • Score: 36

11:08am Tue 22 Jul 14

messyits says...

This finding was removed from the Bar records after two years and therefore Mr Buckland was not required to declare it upon appointment as Solicitor General.”
Emily Thornbury and the article contradict the true facts.
This finding was removed from the Bar records after two years and therefore Mr Buckland was not required to declare it upon appointment as Solicitor General.” Emily Thornbury and the article contradict the true facts. messyits
  • Score: -41

11:27am Tue 22 Jul 14

LordAshOfTheBrake says...

jonelway wrote:
Another politician who's acted like they were above the law. Where's the consequences? He shouldn't be in public office. What happened to cleaning up politics and improving the their image? Yes, another Tory lie.
Because no other political party ever tells a lie or misleads through omission of the full facts and truth....?

They are all the same regardless of the rosette colour.
[quote][p][bold]jonelway[/bold] wrote: Another politician who's acted like they were above the law. Where's the consequences? He shouldn't be in public office. What happened to cleaning up politics and improving the their image? Yes, another Tory lie.[/p][/quote]Because no other political party ever tells a lie or misleads through omission of the full facts and truth....? They are all the same regardless of the rosette colour. LordAshOfTheBrake
  • Score: 11

11:38am Tue 22 Jul 14

RichardR1 says...

Of course those condemning Rob without the full facts, merely a version from his official opposition in the House could always vote for Ann Snelgrove next year.

However I suspect many of the comments on this ( which frankly is merely a repeat of the last in material fact.....wonder what Mike's politics are) have been made by those who don't vote at all.

If you want to influence the standards of political life and conduct you have to take part in the process.
Of course those condemning Rob without the full facts, merely a version from his official opposition in the House could always vote for Ann Snelgrove next year. However I suspect many of the comments on this ( which frankly is merely a repeat of the last in material fact.....wonder what Mike's politics are) have been made by those who don't vote at all. If you want to influence the standards of political life and conduct you have to take part in the process. RichardR1
  • Score: -49

12:18pm Tue 22 Jul 14

Grimly Feendish says...

messyits wrote:
This finding was removed from the Bar records after two years and therefore Mr Buckland was not required to declare it upon appointment as Solicitor General.”
Emily Thornbury and the article contradict the true facts.
Bar Standards Board said this was not the case.

A spokesman said: “Any disciplinary finding and sentence currently stays on a barrister’s disciplinary record indefinitely. As outlined on our website, a member of the public can obtain a barrister’s full disciplinary record by contacting our Professional Conduct Department during office hours.

The disciplinary findings are only archived from thr Bar Councils web site after 2 years. the infringement stays on his disciplinary INDEFINITELY and can be obtain by any member of the public. I imagine that would have been done in a "due diligence" check. Coulson, Butler-Sloss, Buckland. Does No.10 know what "due diligence" is???
[quote][p][bold]messyits[/bold] wrote: This finding was removed from the Bar records after two years and therefore Mr Buckland was not required to declare it upon appointment as Solicitor General.” Emily Thornbury and the article contradict the true facts.[/p][/quote]Bar Standards Board said this was not the case. A spokesman said: “Any disciplinary finding and sentence currently stays on a barrister’s disciplinary record indefinitely. As outlined on our website, a member of the public can obtain a barrister’s full disciplinary record by contacting our Professional Conduct Department during office hours. The disciplinary findings are only archived from thr Bar Councils web site after 2 years. the infringement stays on his disciplinary INDEFINITELY and can be obtain by any member of the public. I imagine that would have been done in a "due diligence" check. Coulson, Butler-Sloss, Buckland. Does No.10 know what "due diligence" is??? Grimly Feendish
  • Score: 37

12:50pm Tue 22 Jul 14

Spurs Fan says...

Richard R! what makes you think that the people on this site do not vote at all? That is one hell of an assumption. I asked yesterday and I'm going to ask again why was Rob Buckland running an internal investigation at the school? As governors you do not get involved in investigations, especially if a police investigation is being run as it could be prejudicial. Once the police finish an investigation and only if charges are not being made then it would be down to the LA's safeguarding board to run an investigation. Governors would never run any type of investigation where safeguarding or child protection issues are at stake.
Richard R! what makes you think that the people on this site do not vote at all? That is one hell of an assumption. I asked yesterday and I'm going to ask again why was Rob Buckland running an internal investigation at the school? As governors you do not get involved in investigations, especially if a police investigation is being run as it could be prejudicial. Once the police finish an investigation and only if charges are not being made then it would be down to the LA's safeguarding board to run an investigation. Governors would never run any type of investigation where safeguarding or child protection issues are at stake. Spurs Fan
  • Score: 26

12:57pm Tue 22 Jul 14

messyits says...

Perhaps you should check the terms of the decision--and the rules applied to such a decision in this particular case which as according to your claim the Bar Council would be guilty as a whole of gross misconduct.
The decision was very clear that after 2 years the records are removed.
Perhaps you should check the terms of the decision--and the rules applied to such a decision in this particular case which as according to your claim the Bar Council would be guilty as a whole of gross misconduct. The decision was very clear that after 2 years the records are removed. messyits
  • Score: -40

1:21pm Tue 22 Jul 14

Grimly Feendish says...

messyits wrote:
Perhaps you should check the terms of the decision--and the rules applied to such a decision in this particular case which as according to your claim the Bar Council would be guilty as a whole of gross misconduct.
The decision was very clear that after 2 years the records are removed.
"The decision was very clear that after 2 years the records are removed."

from the Bar Council web site.

The Bar Council says “Any disciplinary finding and sentence currently stays on a barrister’s disciplinary record indefinitely. As outlined on our website, a member of the public can obtain a barrister’s full disciplinary record by contacting our Professional Conduct Department during office hours. "
What part of the Bar Council's statement don't you understand?
[quote][p][bold]messyits[/bold] wrote: Perhaps you should check the terms of the decision--and the rules applied to such a decision in this particular case which as according to your claim the Bar Council would be guilty as a whole of gross misconduct. The decision was very clear that after 2 years the records are removed.[/p][/quote]"The decision was very clear that after 2 years the records are removed." from the Bar Council web site. The Bar Council says “Any disciplinary finding and sentence currently stays on a barrister’s disciplinary record indefinitely. As outlined on our website, a member of the public can obtain a barrister’s full disciplinary record by contacting our Professional Conduct Department during office hours. " What part of the Bar Council's statement don't you understand? Grimly Feendish
  • Score: 34

1:35pm Tue 22 Jul 14

Grimly Feendish says...

To get hold of Robert James Buckland's disciplinary record contact the Professional Conduct Department of the Bar Council on 020 7611 1444.
If I can do it why can't No. 10 do it in "due diligence" checks.
To get hold of Robert James Buckland's disciplinary record contact the Professional Conduct Department of the Bar Council on 020 7611 1444. If I can do it why can't No. 10 do it in "due diligence" checks. Grimly Feendish
  • Score: 26

2:15pm Tue 22 Jul 14

house on the hill says...

RichardR1 wrote:
Of course those condemning Rob without the full facts, merely a version from his official opposition in the House could always vote for Ann Snelgrove next year.

However I suspect many of the comments on this ( which frankly is merely a repeat of the last in material fact.....wonder what Mike's politics are) have been made by those who don't vote at all.

If you want to influence the standards of political life and conduct you have to take part in the process.
How is voting going to change anything?? It is actually by not voting and showing politicians of all colour we have no confidence or belief in them to do the job and be honest about it that will get changes. If everyone voted, nothing would change, if no one voted everything would change!

And as for commenting, are you saying that someone who has never been to a hospital shouldn't comment on the NHS or someone who doesn't drive shouldn't comment on the state of the roads? The negative thumbs reflect you comment.
[quote][p][bold]RichardR1[/bold] wrote: Of course those condemning Rob without the full facts, merely a version from his official opposition in the House could always vote for Ann Snelgrove next year. However I suspect many of the comments on this ( which frankly is merely a repeat of the last in material fact.....wonder what Mike's politics are) have been made by those who don't vote at all. If you want to influence the standards of political life and conduct you have to take part in the process.[/p][/quote]How is voting going to change anything?? It is actually by not voting and showing politicians of all colour we have no confidence or belief in them to do the job and be honest about it that will get changes. If everyone voted, nothing would change, if no one voted everything would change! And as for commenting, are you saying that someone who has never been to a hospital shouldn't comment on the NHS or someone who doesn't drive shouldn't comment on the state of the roads? The negative thumbs reflect you comment. house on the hill
  • Score: 12

2:28pm Tue 22 Jul 14

messyits says...

You seem to have missed the fact of the body which heard the case and the rules that applied--perhaps you should read--and understand the Bar standards Boards PDF which make the rules--as the matter was dealt with by a 'censure' and not referred to neither Bar Council or standards Board.
You seem to have missed the fact of the body which heard the case and the rules that applied--perhaps you should read--and understand the Bar standards Boards PDF which make the rules--as the matter was dealt with by a 'censure' and not referred to neither Bar Council or standards Board. messyits
  • Score: -29

2:50pm Tue 22 Jul 14

The Artist formally known as Grumpy Old Man says...

house on the hill wrote:
RichardR1 wrote:
Of course those condemning Rob without the full facts, merely a version from his official opposition in the House could always vote for Ann Snelgrove next year.

However I suspect many of the comments on this ( which frankly is merely a repeat of the last in material fact.....wonder what Mike's politics are) have been made by those who don't vote at all.

If you want to influence the standards of political life and conduct you have to take part in the process.
How is voting going to change anything?? It is actually by not voting and showing politicians of all colour we have no confidence or belief in them to do the job and be honest about it that will get changes. If everyone voted, nothing would change, if no one voted everything would change!

And as for commenting, are you saying that someone who has never been to a hospital shouldn't comment on the NHS or someone who doesn't drive shouldn't comment on the state of the roads? The negative thumbs reflect you comment.
But if you do not vote how do the statisticians and politicians differentiate your "I am choosing to not vote", with other peoples "I can't be bothered to vote"? By taking yourself out of the process completely there's no way of knowing. Who knows, but not voting you may be stating you're perfectly happy with the status quo...
[quote][p][bold]house on the hill[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]RichardR1[/bold] wrote: Of course those condemning Rob without the full facts, merely a version from his official opposition in the House could always vote for Ann Snelgrove next year. However I suspect many of the comments on this ( which frankly is merely a repeat of the last in material fact.....wonder what Mike's politics are) have been made by those who don't vote at all. If you want to influence the standards of political life and conduct you have to take part in the process.[/p][/quote]How is voting going to change anything?? It is actually by not voting and showing politicians of all colour we have no confidence or belief in them to do the job and be honest about it that will get changes. If everyone voted, nothing would change, if no one voted everything would change! And as for commenting, are you saying that someone who has never been to a hospital shouldn't comment on the NHS or someone who doesn't drive shouldn't comment on the state of the roads? The negative thumbs reflect you comment.[/p][/quote]But if you do not vote how do the statisticians and politicians differentiate your "I am choosing to not vote", with other peoples "I can't be bothered to vote"? By taking yourself out of the process completely there's no way of knowing. Who knows, but not voting you may be stating you're perfectly happy with the status quo... The Artist formally known as Grumpy Old Man
  • Score: 5

2:50pm Tue 22 Jul 14

Davey Gravey says...

Make sure you turn up and vote out both the failing Tory mps next May. A lot of rebuilding of their damage will need to be done just like after the last time their lot wrecked everything.
Make sure you turn up and vote out both the failing Tory mps next May. A lot of rebuilding of their damage will need to be done just like after the last time their lot wrecked everything. Davey Gravey
  • Score: -3

3:16pm Tue 22 Jul 14

RichardR1 says...

House thumbs up or down mean nothing on this as has been said before. There are serial abuses on both sides of the political spectrum who abuse the process of voting on here.
House thumbs up or down mean nothing on this as has been said before. There are serial abuses on both sides of the political spectrum who abuse the process of voting on here. RichardR1
  • Score: -20

3:25pm Tue 22 Jul 14

The Artist formally known as Grumpy Old Man says...

Davey Gravey wrote:
Make sure you turn up and vote out both the failing Tory mps next May. A lot of rebuilding of their damage will need to be done just like after the last time their lot wrecked everything.
What damage have our two MP's done then? They've both done a huge amount more for the town than the previous incumbents...
[quote][p][bold]Davey Gravey[/bold] wrote: Make sure you turn up and vote out both the failing Tory mps next May. A lot of rebuilding of their damage will need to be done just like after the last time their lot wrecked everything.[/p][/quote]What damage have our two MP's done then? They've both done a huge amount more for the town than the previous incumbents... The Artist formally known as Grumpy Old Man
  • Score: -8

10:04pm Tue 22 Jul 14

Ollie Dognacky says...

That picture makes him look like a karaoke singer or X Factor contestant.
Maybe even Paul Potts.
Seriously though, this topic has been debated and summarised on TalkSwindon and Mr Buckland comes out fairly well.
Considering the blinkered Tory Troll always accuses the site as being a lefty forum, it just goes to show that this is the abused site and not TalkSwindon.
Score + 256👍
That picture makes him look like a karaoke singer or X Factor contestant. Maybe even Paul Potts. Seriously though, this topic has been debated and summarised on TalkSwindon and Mr Buckland comes out fairly well. Considering the blinkered Tory Troll always accuses the site as being a lefty forum, it just goes to show that this is the abused site and not TalkSwindon. Score + 256👍 Ollie Dognacky
  • Score: -7

8:36am Wed 23 Jul 14

Sandor Clegane says...

There we have it, then. Talk Swindon's 9 regular members have decided that Mr Buckland's not quite as evil a Tory as all the other evil Tories.

No more need for any further debate anywhere else, the matter is now closed. Obviously.
There we have it, then. Talk Swindon's 9 regular members have decided that Mr Buckland's not quite as evil a Tory as all the other evil Tories. No more need for any further debate anywhere else, the matter is now closed. Obviously. Sandor Clegane
  • Score: 4

8:45am Wed 23 Jul 14

House with no name says...

Local Labour activists first ran a campaign to oust the Conservative Mayor of Swindon now this vexatious attack on our sitting MP - totally distracting from all the good work he does on our behalf.

The motivation is simple - Snelgrove wants his Parliamentary seat and (as I have heard at first hand) will use every opportunity to demean her opponents.

Fortunately, the views here are not truly representative of the town as a whole that is why Buckland is an MP and not Snelgrove.
Local Labour activists first ran a campaign to oust the Conservative Mayor of Swindon now this vexatious attack on our sitting MP - totally distracting from all the good work he does on our behalf. The motivation is simple - Snelgrove wants his Parliamentary seat and (as I have heard at first hand) will use every opportunity to demean her opponents. Fortunately, the views here are not truly representative of the town as a whole that is why Buckland is an MP and not Snelgrove. House with no name
  • Score: 5

8:53am Wed 23 Jul 14

Sandor Clegane says...

Even staunch Labour supporters - or anti-Tories as they like to call themselves - couldn't seriously want Snelgrove back as local MP could they?
Even staunch Labour supporters - or anti-Tories as they like to call themselves - couldn't seriously want Snelgrove back as local MP could they? Sandor Clegane
  • Score: 7

9:33am Wed 23 Jul 14

Davey Gravey says...

I remember Tomlinson regularly using this website to run down Labour and petty issues pre him getting elected. I do not see Labour candidates doing so.
I remember Tomlinson regularly using this website to run down Labour and petty issues pre him getting elected. I do not see Labour candidates doing so. Davey Gravey
  • Score: -2

9:51am Wed 23 Jul 14

messyits says...

Ollie Dognacky wrote:
That picture makes him look like a karaoke singer or X Factor contestant.
Maybe even Paul Potts.
Seriously though, this topic has been debated and summarised on TalkSwindon and Mr Buckland comes out fairly well.
Considering the blinkered Tory Troll always accuses the site as being a lefty forum, it just goes to show that this is the abused site and not TalkSwindon.
Score + 256👍
Agreed--however--do keep your eyes open as information on the troll has been under investigation for a while for disclosing inadvertently from positions of trust as a councillor as many T/S members are aware.
The incident in which Robert was called to answer to has been debated with many incorrect claims as the body hearing the claim due to the triviality of the incident simply censured him and was not referred to either of the higher bodies. He was not an MP at the time and has been a very active and hard working MP and under the rules was not obliged to divulge what amounts to a slap on the wrist. Thank you and T/S FOR A BALANCED DEBATE.
This was supported further when the mothers case was dismissed as the school aided by Robert supplied every scrap of evidence to that court without prejudice.
[quote][p][bold]Ollie Dognacky[/bold] wrote: That picture makes him look like a karaoke singer or X Factor contestant. Maybe even Paul Potts. Seriously though, this topic has been debated and summarised on TalkSwindon and Mr Buckland comes out fairly well. Considering the blinkered Tory Troll always accuses the site as being a lefty forum, it just goes to show that this is the abused site and not TalkSwindon. Score + 256👍[/p][/quote]Agreed--however--do keep your eyes open as information on the troll has been under investigation for a while for disclosing inadvertently from positions of trust as a councillor as many T/S members are aware. The incident in which Robert was called to answer to has been debated with many incorrect claims as the body hearing the claim due to the triviality of the incident simply censured him and was not referred to either of the higher bodies. He was not an MP at the time and has been a very active and hard working MP and under the rules was not obliged to divulge what amounts to a slap on the wrist. Thank you and T/S FOR A BALANCED DEBATE. This was supported further when the mothers case was dismissed as the school aided by Robert supplied every scrap of evidence to that court without prejudice. messyits
  • Score: -6

11:03am Wed 23 Jul 14

Sandor Clegane says...

Nooo, prospective Labour MPs and councillors never use the Adver to make negative comments about their Tory opponents. Not at all. Ever.

In fact, they're basically angels.

Not like those evil Tories who hate everyone and only spend their days trying to make things as unpleasant as possible for the town.

Honestly, some of the stuff posted here is beyond laughable.
Nooo, prospective Labour MPs and councillors never use the Adver to make negative comments about their Tory opponents. Not at all. Ever. In fact, they're basically angels. Not like those evil Tories who hate everyone and only spend their days trying to make things as unpleasant as possible for the town. Honestly, some of the stuff posted here is beyond laughable. Sandor Clegane
  • Score: 8

11:37am Wed 23 Jul 14

The Artist formally known as Grumpy Old Man says...

The Artist formally known as Grumpy Old Man wrote:
Davey Gravey wrote:
Make sure you turn up and vote out both the failing Tory mps next May. A lot of rebuilding of their damage will need to be done just like after the last time their lot wrecked everything.
What damage have our two MP's done then? They've both done a huge amount more for the town than the previous incumbents...
So lots of down voting then, but no actual evidence of our two local MP's causing "damage" to our town...
[quote][p][bold]The Artist formally known as Grumpy Old Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Davey Gravey[/bold] wrote: Make sure you turn up and vote out both the failing Tory mps next May. A lot of rebuilding of their damage will need to be done just like after the last time their lot wrecked everything.[/p][/quote]What damage have our two MP's done then? They've both done a huge amount more for the town than the previous incumbents...[/p][/quote]So lots of down voting then, but no actual evidence of our two local MP's causing "damage" to our town... The Artist formally known as Grumpy Old Man
  • Score: 4

12:37pm Wed 23 Jul 14

Davey Gravey says...

The Artist formally known as Grumpy Old Man wrote:
The Artist formally known as Grumpy Old Man wrote:
Davey Gravey wrote:
Make sure you turn up and vote out both the failing Tory mps next May. A lot of rebuilding of their damage will need to be done just like after the last time their lot wrecked everything.
What damage have our two MP's done then? They've both done a huge amount more for the town than the previous incumbents...
So lots of down voting then, but no actual evidence of our two local MP's causing "damage" to our town...
Ive not cast a single vote for anyone in this thread. I just want to comment and not get into debates if that is ok with you? Have a good day.
[quote][p][bold]The Artist formally known as Grumpy Old Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The Artist formally known as Grumpy Old Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Davey Gravey[/bold] wrote: Make sure you turn up and vote out both the failing Tory mps next May. A lot of rebuilding of their damage will need to be done just like after the last time their lot wrecked everything.[/p][/quote]What damage have our two MP's done then? They've both done a huge amount more for the town than the previous incumbents...[/p][/quote]So lots of down voting then, but no actual evidence of our two local MP's causing "damage" to our town...[/p][/quote]Ive not cast a single vote for anyone in this thread. I just want to comment and not get into debates if that is ok with you? Have a good day. Davey Gravey
  • Score: -1

12:43pm Wed 23 Jul 14

The Artist formally known as Grumpy Old Man says...

Davey Gravey wrote:
The Artist formally known as Grumpy Old Man wrote:
The Artist formally known as Grumpy Old Man wrote:
Davey Gravey wrote:
Make sure you turn up and vote out both the failing Tory mps next May. A lot of rebuilding of their damage will need to be done just like after the last time their lot wrecked everything.
What damage have our two MP's done then? They've both done a huge amount more for the town than the previous incumbents...
So lots of down voting then, but no actual evidence of our two local MP's causing "damage" to our town...
Ive not cast a single vote for anyone in this thread. I just want to comment and not get into debates if that is ok with you? Have a good day.
That's fine by me (and I didn't say that you did vote to be fair), but don't be surprised when people pull you up on comments you make that are without any substance or evidence.

Have a good day yourself :)
[quote][p][bold]Davey Gravey[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The Artist formally known as Grumpy Old Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The Artist formally known as Grumpy Old Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Davey Gravey[/bold] wrote: Make sure you turn up and vote out both the failing Tory mps next May. A lot of rebuilding of their damage will need to be done just like after the last time their lot wrecked everything.[/p][/quote]What damage have our two MP's done then? They've both done a huge amount more for the town than the previous incumbents...[/p][/quote]So lots of down voting then, but no actual evidence of our two local MP's causing "damage" to our town...[/p][/quote]Ive not cast a single vote for anyone in this thread. I just want to comment and not get into debates if that is ok with you? Have a good day.[/p][/quote]That's fine by me (and I didn't say that you did vote to be fair), but don't be surprised when people pull you up on comments you make that are without any substance or evidence. Have a good day yourself :) The Artist formally known as Grumpy Old Man
  • Score: 1

2:00pm Wed 23 Jul 14

Ollie Dognacky says...

💐How lovely🌷 everyone wishing for each other to have a nice day...
💓feeling💕the
love💖
💐How lovely🌷 everyone wishing for each other to have a nice day... 💓feeling💕the love💖 Ollie Dognacky
  • Score: -1

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree