Damage Limitation Exercises - Labour Hits Back

Rumour has it that various New Labour politicians are somewhat ruffled by the comments made on this blog about their actions (or lack thereof) on the quarry issue. The last day or so has seen a flurry of activity in blogland and in the Ruabon veg shop where they've been queuing up to sign the petition against landfill. Here's a picture from Nick Colbourne's blog, showing Karen Sinclair signing.


About 4,000 or so other people have already signed this petition. The Evening Leader would've needed a few extra pages if they'd all issued press releases to announce their happy events as Karen and Nick did. Not quite sure why the Leader article says they were signing the Leader coupons as they clearly aren't. Never mind - perhaps we'll be treated to a picture of them filling in their coupons in tomorrow's edition.

Under the picture, there's about a mile of text. Gosh! He's got a lot of spare time on his hands, but on closer inspection it turns out to be the blogger's cop-out - a cut and paste job. Nick's posted minutes from a full council meeting a year ago (Halloween to be exact), a dismal attempt to prove New Labour's anti-landfill credentials. Sadly, I had the misfortune to be present at this particular council meeting, so I heard the arguments put forward by Labour members. Mostly, they seemed very upset that the Wrexham incinerator was no longer on the cards - it had finally been abandoned as an option a week or two before. One after another, the Labour councillors stood up and announced in various roundabout ways how everything would have been much better if we'd just gone along with the INCINERATION plan. Yeah, right. That would've reduced landfill ok, but we'd all be breathing in dioxins... not that that seemed to worry some Labour councillors, such as ex-leader of the council and OBE Shân Wilkinson, who doesn't believe in any of the scientific evidence about the harmful effects of dioxins and would be perfectly happy for her grandchildren to live next door to an incinerator. So she says.

That was yesterday's blog. On Tuesday, Nick Colbourne posted this explanation for his non-attendance at the quarry protests:

"I can say here and now, that absence will continue due to the potential conflict with my role as a JP on Wrexham Bench. I have taken extensive advice from both the MA and the Clerk to the Justices on the matter and as a result of that advice, I'm not going to partake in any action which could result in embarassment for the Magistracy. If that upsets a minority then so be it. I value my contribution to public service through that sphere and I will continue to make it.
In no way whatsoever does that decision alter, affect or detract from my belief that landfill is WRONG! I shall always argue against landfilling, not just at Hafod, but elsewhere."

Hang on a minute, Nick. You're the elected councillor for this area. What right has the Magistracy to tell you what you can and can't do in your capacity as local councillor or in your free time? Embarrassment for them? That's more important than the health and well-being of your constituents, is it? Get your priorities right! You're right about the conflict of interests though. Clearly you can't continue to be a magistrate and an effective local councillor. So which one is going to go?

Perhaps Nick's constituents could be polled - Should Nick give up being a magistrate so he can represent you properly, or should he give up being your councillor so he won't embarrass his magisterial colleagues being seen standing next to angry residents with banners and placards? What do you think?