The sanctimonious duplicity and double speak of the Green Party in Norwich South

Update : Before I start, and for the sake of clarity (since some Greens reading this article keep going on about Lib Dem bar charts in the comments), can I make clear this article is not about the Greens use of bar charts. It does, however, highlight that the Greens claims that Lib Dem bar charts are wrong, and only theirs are right, is a hollow lie. Please read and address the points I have made about the Green's use of statistics from two separate elections using different voting systems and the Green Party's own stated objection to the Lib Dems doing this. Also note that the Greens are still complaining about Lib Dem claims that the Greens were in 4th place in Norwich when the result last Thursday showed that the Greens were in 4th place ? Confused ? Read on.


Main article starts 

The Green Party have been the darlings of the local media in Norwich for some time. Their success in local elections has allowed local news media outlets to have easy copy on politics issues that seems different and quirky, whilst those same media outlets never expose the Greens to cross examination of their policy, the conduct, their behaviour and their sheer duplicity which those of us who have analysed them for sometimes can see plain as day.

The media had something of a wake up call during the Norwich by-election when the Greens ramped themselves up, and the media fell for it hook, line and sinker.

BBC East gave the Green candidate Rupert "I was once a Lib Dem" Read a seat on the special by-election debate, at the expense of the UKIP candidate, whilst Radio 5, ITV and Sky News frothed with excitement as the Greens told the story of how they were going to cause a major upset.

The Green campaign also got plenty of press attention for a meaningless campaign pledge that the Lib Dems refused to sign for the simple fact that it was meaningless. The media made great play of the Lib Dems refusal to sign the pledge, but printed not one word when the Greens leaflets actually started to make personal attacks on the Lib Dems, despite the fact that the Green "campaign pledge" had supposedly promised not to make such attacks.

At the Norwich North Count, the extent to which the media had been suckered in by the Greens was evident when two reporters from Sky News asked me what was happening and the order of the finishers. When I said the Greens were in 5th place, they simply couldn't believe it and said "Poor Rupert". They had bought the lie, as had the BBC in their special debate. The UKIP candidate who was not on the debate panel came a very well placed 4th and beat the Greens by some distance.

The media had started to see the Greens as not always a trusted source of information. The Greens knew this and according to the EDP (in the print edition, not online) they brought up a high level delegation to speak to the local press and media to persuade them that the Greens could win Norwich South with the EDP going as saying that Adrian Ramsay was made deputy leader for the purpose of giving him a higher media profile). It appears the press learnt from this.

The Norwich North by-election should have been the springboard for the Greens Norwich South campaign, instead it had the opposite effect. The Greens had made fools of the media and would take their comments with a large dose of salt.

The Greens like to talk up the prominence of their councillors and how many they have in Norwich, but in all their literature, offer no solutions to the issues facing Norwich. They run petitions to save this, preserve that, stop the other, but never get round to looking for an answer or coming up with a realistic alternative. it's opposition for oppositions sake, only it isn't when it comes to council votes.

All too often the Greens fail to vote against Labour, leaving it to Lib Dems and Tories to vote against, knowing that Labour have more seats than the Lib Dems and Tories combined, whilst the Greens sit on their hands an abstain when Labour really could be beaten.

So on to this campaign, and the rank hypocrisy, insults and double speak of the Green Party that is endemic in the campaign.

For many months now the Green's have been complaining about the Lib Dems use of the 2005 general election statistics to show the Greens were not best placed to beat Labour. The Greens instead insist on using the most recent local election results or Euro election results.

I should stress, I am not moaning about the barchart. I am however making the point that the Greens moan about Lib Dem bar charts, but are no less willing to use bar charts to make whatever point they want to make. The difference is that the Greens only see it as wrong for the Lib Dems to do this, not for them !

This leaflet shows the statistics the Greens like to use.

You will note that it claims the Greens are in 34% and the Lib Dems on 25%. Theses figures are from the Euro elections.  Is this a fair or accurate figure to quote when referring to a parliamentary election ?

Well according to the Green Party's own Norwich North candidate, Rupert Read, it almost certainly isn't.

He bemoaned the use the Lib Dems made of a bar charts showing general election votes when campaigning in the Euro elections in an article he wrote for Liberal Conspiracy.

Rupert Read said using bar charts from differing electoral systems was was

"a pre-determined, deliberate attempt to undermine the Green campaign using indefensible statistics"

So we are clear, using statistics like this is considered to be wrong by the Greens. So why have they then claimed, on the basis of the Euro election results (under a form of PR) that they are therefore

 "the main challenger to Charles Clarke" 

Surely doing this is, in the words of Rupert Read, was a cynical attempt to

" misrepresent the voting system and our prospects."

Of course, as Rupert added at the end, in deliberately doing these things, people will rightly say  

"we will never let you – nor the public – forget the wrong that you perpetrate, each time you draw a misleading graph, cite an irrelevant statistic, deliberately mislead readers about another Party’s chances…" 

Indeed Rupert, these are lessons the Green Party needs to take heed of. You like to portray yourselves as cleaner than clean and above politics. Your party campaigns in Norwich almost as a "None of the Above" party, who can always be trusted. But every time you seek to criticise the opposition for being poltiical parties and fighting political campaigns, you expose your party as hypocrites.

Of course, the result from the General Election has proved very clearly that the Lib Dems assertion that the Green Party were in fourth place was completely correct, and the Green Party were wrong.

You'd think they might just accept that they made a mistake, but this has been compounded by the comments made by their defeated candidate today. Speaking on the local news today, Adrian Ramsay claimed the Green vote had doubled, and the Lib Dem and Labour vote was falling. Now this is only true if Mr Ramsay now accepts the Lib Dems use of the last general election results were correct, something that the Greens totally reject on their leaflets.

So not only do the Greens peddle leaflets with statistics that they would themselves condemn in articles if they had been delivered by another party, they then decry other parties using the correct figures and then use those correct figures when it suits them to "spin" their way out of a bad result.

And the Greens have form here.

Just a few days ago the Greens were complaining about an opinion poll that put them on 19% in Norwich South. Interestingly, the Lib Dems chose not to complain and just got on with campaigning. Interestingly, the 19% the Lib Dems were given in the poll underscored the Lib Dems final voe by 10%, but the 19% the Greens got overrated them by 2%. It's the only time in political history that a political party had complained that they were being made to look good, but it highlights the Green Party's delusions that they somehow have a divine right in Norwich South.

So it is this driven from the top or is it endemic in the Greens ?

Well if you search the blogs and twitter, you will similarly see what the Greens are like if you scratch the surface.

One comment that caught they eye was this from a Green activist who was in Norwich yesterday before the final result was announced.

When I challenged her via twitter to justify herself and explain why Simon Wright, a former teacher who has had a real job in the real world,  was a, in her words "careerist git !" where as Adrian Ramsay, a full time politician who has been on the city council since leaving university isn't a careerist

Her reply was that it was different for Adrian (presumably because he is a Green)

So ignoring the fact that Simon's family live in Norwich, he lives in Norwich, his wife is a City Councillor, he is a "careerist git".

Still worse was the Green activist's comments on Simon's unsuitability compared to Adrian Ramsay based on their life experience and professions. It seems that the Green Party don't think teachers should be MPs becaus she then wrote

To be fair, some hours later (possibly realising that twitter leaves a paper trail) she did offer her congratulations to Simon. nut it speaks volumes about the Greens' self righteous attitude that anyone else wanting to stand for the area they grew up in is a "careerist", but when a green does worse and has never had a real job and instead has devoated his whole life to one aim, that is being a politician, so long as he is a Green, that is okay.

Perhaps I should return to Rupert Read, who writes today that

"We knocked on every door – which is more than all the other Parties put together did"

Now does he know this to be true ? Can he prove it or is it a political statement based on an assertion of his ? After all if he was being 100% honest he would surely need some proof ?

And in a stunning example of ignoring the facts, he goes on to state

" a typically-untruthful LibDem campaign going on and on about the seat being allegedly a ‘two-horse race’ between them and Labour"

Er ... Rupert. Check out the result. It was a two horse race. Lib Dems were first, Labour second, Tories third and you came fourth. The problem is, only one party was fibbing when it claimed that it was "the main challenger to Charles Clarke"

Who was that again ?

 So let's finish with Rupert Read's own words in the earlier article for Liberal Conspiracy when he wrote

"Such a betrayal of trust will not easily be forgiven; at least, not without an expression of contrition and a sincere promise not to re-offend."

Of course, the difference was that Hereward Cooke, the former leader of the Lib Dem group on Norwich City Council offered an apology for anything that was misleading in Lib Dem leaflets in local elections a few years ago.

Even today, the Greens are telling lies about the Lib Dems conduct in the campaign yet totally ignoring their own double speak and lies.

Forget claiming you are better than everyone else. Politics is what it is and the Greens play as dirty as anyone else.

The Clegg Bounce - An early opinion

People are already summising that the Clegg bounce did not help the party make a breakthrough, it failed to see the party progress, and it disappeared all too quickly. To justify this they point to the number of seats the Lib Dems lost. But is that true. I don't think so.

For myself, I have found people on the door to have been impressed by the Lib Dems, they have taken us seriously and they know more about us. But more important than anything else, consider where the Lib Dems would have been without the bounce.

How many more seats might the Lib Dems have lost if the Tory/Labour fight had been more intense with the Lib Dems totally squeezed out ? I could see, in these circumstances the Lib Dems not only losing a handful of seats, but the party have been reduced to 35 MP's and two elections of hardwork would have been undone overnight.

So don't blame the Clegg bounce for the Lib Dems doing less well than we hoped. Instead we should be grateful that the Clegg bounce stopped as doing as badly as we might have done.

Lib Dems gain Norwich South

I just want to congratulate Simon Wright on his wonderful victory in Norwich South last night (well, five O'Clock this morning).

I had been helping in Norwich South for most of the last week, and spent polling day running the operation in Bowthorpe, Wensum and New Costessey, so am very pleased to have played my part.

I knew, from twitter, that Simon must have been close to winning because the amount of personal offensive abuse being published on twitter by The Green party aimed at Simon Wright was utterly disgraceful. I hope those Greens think long and hard and will consider apologising for their comments which degrade democracy, denigrate the electorate and speaks volumes about the Green Party.

And for all those who say "It's on loan", the Tories said that about North Norfolk to Norman Lamb in 2001. Norman has a majority of 11,000 votes now ! Well done too to Norman.

And another prediction ...

I predict the Tories will JUST have an overall majority AND the exit poll from BBC/ITV/SKY is badly wrong about the Lib Dem number of seats.

My predictions

I might make myself look a fool here (why change the habit of a lifetime I hear you say), but these are my Norfolk election predictions.

1) Norman Lamb to win in North Norfolk with a greater share of the vote than he had in 2005.

Verdict ? Correct. Norman Lamb's share of the vote was up.

2) Keith Simpson (Con) to hold Broadland by 3000 votes

Verdict ? Correct winning candidate, but understated the majority.

3) Chloe Smith to hold Norwich North by 2500 votes

Verdict ? She held on by about 4000 votes.

4) Lib Dems to overtake Labour in North West Norfolk, but  a safe Tory hold.

Verdict ? Correct.

5) Lib Dem vote stays static in South Norfolk

Verdict - Lib Dem vote very slightly down by 1%.   Correct

6) Great Yarmouth - Recount

Verdict - Almost correct. Tory gain though. 

7) Norwich South Lib Dem gain by 500 votes. Labour second, Tories third, Greens fourth.

Verdict - Correct

8) Other seats all Tory holds

Verdict - Correct

Good night all !

Vote Lib Dem for REAL change

David Cameron, would be a change from the present government like a blue table cloth is different from having a red table cloth, but he does not represent a real change from what goes before.

Cameron claimed to be the heir to Blair, whilst Brown was the heir to Blair. They both seek to be the new Tony Blair, and as most of the country knows, we actually don't want another Tony Blair.

If you want real change, where fairness is at the very bedrock of every policy. If you want a party that does not duck the issues and a party that has can really make a difference, then vote Lib Dem today.

Update: And can I wish particular good luck to all Lib Dems, but most of all to Norman Lamb in North Norfolk, Simon Wright in Norwich South and Dan Roper in Broadland.

What is it with Norfolk political candidates ?

After Manish Sood, the Labour candidate described his own party leader (Gordon Brown) as the "worst Prime Minister in history", and another Norfolk based candidate who was standing in Cambridgeshire South East was stripped of his official candidacy because of lewd details being published about his private life, you'd imagine that  we might have had our fill of candidates putting their foot in in in Norfolk. But it appears not.

This morning local news media are reporting that the UKIP candidate for Norwich North, Glenn Tingle, has issued an apology for writing that we should blow up Iran and for denigrating people in Afghanistan.

Have you seen a Land Rover with Lib Dem and Tory Poster Boards in it ?

Both Lib Dem and Tory poster boards are going missing in the Broadland constituency and they seem to be linked to a Land Rover which has been seen in the vicinity of the poster boards on a number of occasions from various sources, particularly in the East of the Broadland constituency.

We know from the Tories that they are having similar problems, and it appears that somone is trying to cause a turf war between the Tories and Lib Dems, I have to say, with no success. The Tories know it is not us and we know it is not them.

We have a very good idea who it is who is responsible, but if you see anyone removing our poster boards make a note of their registration number and let us know.

Tory Party Election Broadcast - Schoolboy error and a costly mistake

Whoever decided to make the last two Tory PEBs identical in style, 75% similar in content, have the same music and the same look in every way has, in my view, made a silly mistake.

As soon as the PEB started, my first thought was "I've seen this before". My wife lost interest (and she's not political in any way) and said she'd seen it too. I wonder how many other people felt that too ?

The problem is, as soon as someone thinks they've seen it before, they switch off, put the kettle on, lose interest in the finer details, and in some cases will think the Tories stupid for showing an identical PEB twice.

Now the more it went on I noticed a few subtle differences. There was some reference to a contract (they did something in Norwich North last year and I don't think it did anything to persuade people or change minds), and one new but at the end. But in essence, it seemed like the same PEB as before.

I was told on a Lib Dem campaign training day once to make sure every leaflet looks different from the previous one or else people will think they are the same leaflet they have already seen. The rule should also apply to election broadcasts.

In my opinion it was a schoolboy error, a silly mistake and a wasted opportunity by the Tories.

Scare Leaflets in Broadland

News reaches me this morning of a group called the "Young Briton's Foundation", a supposedly non partisan organisation, who are delivering leaflets in Broadland with no imprint on them, with the clear aim of the content aimed at scaring people off from voting Lib Dem.

This is starting to make me think the Lib Dems are doing a lot better in Broadland than the Tories expected !

Update: It is claimed by one commenter to this blog that the Young Britons Foundation has as its president Tory MEP Daniel Hannan, who is well known for going on US TV to denounce the NHS. The YBF also appears dislike the NHS, supports torture or prisoners and other nasty things too. You know you're on the right side of the argument when groups like the YBF are against you.

Fifth hand delivered Lib Dem leaflet in Broadland

Yes, I know I appear to have skipped a leaflet, but I failed to count the tabloid that went out at the start of the campaign in my previous count up of leaflets.

So this is the latest leaflet going out in Broadland. My guess, with three days left, is that this is the final leaflet aside from "Good Mornings" and "Knock Up" leaflets in key areas.

Why are the BBC & ITV ignoring this story ?

Where are the BBC and ITV when it comes the THIS story ?

I don't expect Sky News to report it. The Murdoch press are firmly in the Tory camp already.

Third hand delivered Lib Dem leaflet in Broadland

This is the leaflet we have finished delivering in my ward in the last few days.

Lib Dem hand delivered leaflet in Broadland

This was the second leaflet we delivered by hand last week in Broadland constituency

Three weeks later, the leaflet the Tories are still delivering in Broadland

I was staggered today to receive through my door a leaflet that the Tories were delivering when the election was first called more than three weeks ago.

This is the one and only non freepost leaflet that they have got out.

Compare this to the four leaflets we (Lib Dems) have delivered by hand in my ward and across the majority of Broadland with another leaflet having gone out in my ward over the weekend before the election was called.

I'll put the Lib Dem leaflets on my blog later.

Kings Lynn is near Ribble Valley, or so think the Tories

News reaches me from a Facebook contact that the Tories in Kings Lynn have been hand delivering a leaflet that should have been distributed in Ribble Valley.

The Tories are blaming a "young inexperienced campaigner".

How young do you have to be not to realise that the leaflet featured a different Tory MP from Henry Bellingham (the Tory who represents Kings Lynn) and the large words "Ribble Valley" instead of "North West Norfolk".

How NOT to leave a good impression at a hustings meeting

News reaches me of an incident that did not leave a good impression as a hustings meeting was finishing last night.

At the very end, when the candidates were "meeting the public", when one member of the public commented about the age of the photos used on one candidate's leaflets, he was called  by the candidate "a pathetic little man".

Oh dear. Certainly not good practise for a candidate who under any circumstance should not allow himself to be rattled in public, and it perhaps speaks volumes about how this Tory candidate, who assumed he was set for any easy win, is finding the response on the door far less favourable than expected.

I won't name the poor individual. He's suffered enough misery for one day. And I'm off now for a day of delivering leaflets to make sure his fears of defeat become a reality.

Lib Dem Freepost Leaflet in Broadland

Here is the front and back from the Lib Dem Freepost leaflet in the Broadland constituency.
I can't photograph the fold out centre as my camera is not to hand. I might have time to do it tomorrow.

Conservative Second Freepost - Broadland Constituency

Here is the Tories second Freepost leaflet going out in Broadland.

It does seem to use all the same photos as their first Freepost.

Labour Freepost in Broadland

Due to being very busy with work and delivering leaflets, I have been unable to keep up to date with posting copies of all the leaflets on my blog, however, in an attempt to catch up I will post a number of them here in the next 24 hours.

Here is the Labour Freepost leaflet, which arrived last Saturday and another copy of the same leaflet arrived on Tuesday. Quite why the post office are delivering two copies of the same leaflet, is beyond me.

The other issue that is beyond me is why the Labour candidate, who is seeking to represent a landlocked constituency like Broadland, chose to have her photo taken on the coast ! Bizarre and showing a real lack of thought in my opinion.