This has been confirmed by Royal Mail. The Trading Standards Office are |
Wednesday, 24 November 2010
Monday, 1 November 2010
Angela Merkel and Paddington Roberts (and Theo too)
Cllr Andrew Marshall recently asked me why I continually refer to Labour Camden's deputy leader Angela Mason as Angela Merkel.
Well, Chancellor Merkel is undoubtedly the most powerful woman in Europe and Cllr Merkel is undoubtedly the power behind the throne at Camden Town Hall. Even before she was elected to Camden Council in May 2010, she was writing a column in the Camden New Journal to say how the previous Conservative-LibDem Administration's 'Better and Cheaper' programme was the wrong strategy for Camden and announcing her intention to set up an 'independent' inquiry into Camden's finances.
The independent inquiry didn't last long as Mrs Merkel was employed by the dreadful quango the IDeA (now 'rebranded' as local government Improvement & Development) and she realised that an IDeA consultant shouldn't really be criticising a top-performing local council in this way. But hats off to her anyway, as it was a more constructive piece of opposition than anything Cllr Theo Blackwell came up with during 2006-2010.
Now, this isn't special treatment I'm giving out here to Mrs Merkel. We've been here before with Camden's former Labour leader Dame Jane Paddington Roberts. Paddington got her nickname for the way she stared intensely at anyone saying anything she found hard to swallow in the council chamber, like a certain bear from darkest Peru.
Now if only Theo remotely resembled anyone remotely interesting, such as Ivor Dembina the Israelian comedian....
Well, Chancellor Merkel is undoubtedly the most powerful woman in Europe and Cllr Merkel is undoubtedly the power behind the throne at Camden Town Hall. Even before she was elected to Camden Council in May 2010, she was writing a column in the Camden New Journal to say how the previous Conservative-LibDem Administration's 'Better and Cheaper' programme was the wrong strategy for Camden and announcing her intention to set up an 'independent' inquiry into Camden's finances.
The independent inquiry didn't last long as Mrs Merkel was employed by the dreadful quango the IDeA (now 'rebranded' as local government Improvement & Development) and she realised that an IDeA consultant shouldn't really be criticising a top-performing local council in this way. But hats off to her anyway, as it was a more constructive piece of opposition than anything Cllr Theo Blackwell came up with during 2006-2010.
Now, this isn't special treatment I'm giving out here to Mrs Merkel. We've been here before with Camden's former Labour leader Dame Jane Paddington Roberts. Paddington got her nickname for the way she stared intensely at anyone saying anything she found hard to swallow in the council chamber, like a certain bear from darkest Peru.
Now if only Theo remotely resembled anyone remotely interesting, such as Ivor Dembina the Israelian comedian....
Friday, 29 October 2010
Tom Costello's Treatment - letter October 2010
Dear Sir,
Last week the CNJ published a letter from Richard Arthur, Chair of Camden & Islington NHS Foundation ('Decision is not financial') concerning the case of Tom Costello.
I don't know the ins and outs of Mr Costello's case and obviously am not a doctor. However, the very first sentence of Mr Arthur's letter greatly annoyed me. He wrote: 'You have featured the move of a service user to Northampton.'.
This adoption of the term 'service user' (which while particularly rampant in the health service is increasingly used elsewhere) is dehumanising and uncaring, especially when used as a device to avoid mentioning Mr Costello (in this case) by name.
A health service (or indeed any public or private service) which blinds itself to the fact that it is dealing with individuals who each have a name and families and friends will always run the risk of failing to reassure us that it is on our side, rather than the side of the administrators and bureaucrats.
So please will Mr Arthur and his chums on other local quangoes that are supposed to be acting in our interest do just that and start using our names and thinking of us as human beings rather than as service users, customers or consumers. I accept that this may not alter the medical opinion of what is best for Mr Costello, but it might remove the suspicion that such decisions are taken in the interests of the health service rather than the interests of an individual such as Tom.
Yours etc
Last week the CNJ published a letter from Richard Arthur, Chair of Camden & Islington NHS Foundation ('Decision is not financial') concerning the case of Tom Costello.
I don't know the ins and outs of Mr Costello's case and obviously am not a doctor. However, the very first sentence of Mr Arthur's letter greatly annoyed me. He wrote: 'You have featured the move of a service user to Northampton.'.
This adoption of the term 'service user' (which while particularly rampant in the health service is increasingly used elsewhere) is dehumanising and uncaring, especially when used as a device to avoid mentioning Mr Costello (in this case) by name.
A health service (or indeed any public or private service) which blinds itself to the fact that it is dealing with individuals who each have a name and families and friends will always run the risk of failing to reassure us that it is on our side, rather than the side of the administrators and bureaucrats.
So please will Mr Arthur and his chums on other local quangoes that are supposed to be acting in our interest do just that and start using our names and thinking of us as human beings rather than as service users, customers or consumers. I accept that this may not alter the medical opinion of what is best for Mr Costello, but it might remove the suspicion that such decisions are taken in the interests of the health service rather than the interests of an individual such as Tom.
Yours etc
Monday, 4 October 2010
Labour Splits - Letter October 2010
Dear Sir,
Did you notice the result of the Labour Party leadership election? Not that Red Ed beat Dave, but the votes by Labour members in Camden?
At special meetings in both Hampstead & Kilburn and Holborn & St Pancras CLPs, the activists voted overwhelmingly to back Red Ed, with Diane Abbott second and David Miliband third. They then sent out recommendations to their local membership to vote for Ed.
The released results, however, show that the full local membership of both local constituency parties preferred moderate David Miliband over militant Ed Miliband (just as they did across the whole of London).
So the local Labour activists are clearly out-of-tune with their more moderate membership. Will Labour's Camden leadership now seek to repair this rift, as their new leader has attempted to, by not joining this month's big demonstration against the cuts to public services and by not backing the strikes their union friends are threatening?
After all, as Red Ed has now admitted, the Labour Party fought the last election promising almost as many cuts of its own...
Yours etc
Did you notice the result of the Labour Party leadership election? Not that Red Ed beat Dave, but the votes by Labour members in Camden?
At special meetings in both Hampstead & Kilburn and Holborn & St Pancras CLPs, the activists voted overwhelmingly to back Red Ed, with Diane Abbott second and David Miliband third. They then sent out recommendations to their local membership to vote for Ed.
The released results, however, show that the full local membership of both local constituency parties preferred moderate David Miliband over militant Ed Miliband (just as they did across the whole of London).
So the local Labour activists are clearly out-of-tune with their more moderate membership. Will Labour's Camden leadership now seek to repair this rift, as their new leader has attempted to, by not joining this month's big demonstration against the cuts to public services and by not backing the strikes their union friends are threatening?
After all, as Red Ed has now admitted, the Labour Party fought the last election promising almost as many cuts of its own...
Yours etc
Red Ed sports letter - October 2010
Dear Sir,
The Crow was covering the Labour Party Conference last week, so I hope he noticed the footballing preference of the 'Camden born and raised' Red Ed Miliband.
His first official outing was to a football club, but was it Arsenal?
Oh no! In Ed's case, the 'Red Ed' tag points to something much worse...
He went to Man U!
A warning to all Arsenal (and Spurs) fans, Ed Miliband is definitely noton your side!
Yours etc
The Crow was covering the Labour Party Conference last week, so I hope he noticed the footballing preference of the 'Camden born and raised' Red Ed Miliband.
His first official outing was to a football club, but was it Arsenal?
Oh no! In Ed's case, the 'Red Ed' tag points to something much worse...
He went to Man U!
A warning to all Arsenal (and Spurs) fans, Ed Miliband is definitely noton your side!
Yours etc
Monday, 13 September 2010
UCL Academy - Sept 2010 Letter
Dear Sir,
So the reaction of Labour Camden to a five week delay in getting the go-ahead for the UCL Academy is to delay its opening for a whole year -they were out of office for four years yet already the memories of their previous 35 years of control come flooding back.
Not one senior person connected to the scheme for the UCL Academy seriously believed it was ever in doubt from a new Government which has championed the cause of academies in education. So this delay is a sign of a failure of political will in Camden.
Look at what happened over the previous four years: two judicial reviews in the High Court backed by CASE (the Campaign for Secondary Education),a national campaign against academies run out of Camden chiefly by local Labour Party activists; a tortuous tustle with governors at our secondary schools over aspects of the then Labour Government's requirements regarding the IT component of the Building Schools for the Future investment; and, yes, a very difficult time spent finding new premises for Frank Barnes School for the Deaf, which officers under the previous Labour Administration in Camden had wished to close down completely.
And it's that latter point about what officers wanted, and the response of elected members, which is relevant here. Every time a judicial review was announced Camden had to stop progressing the Academy and officers would come to members and say 'shouldn't we put back the timescale'. Every time there was a need to try again to find a sustainable solution for Frank Barnes or governors were causing IT sign-off deadlines to be put back, the officers would say 'shouldn't we put back the timescale'.
Of course it would be easier for officers (a good number of whom, excellent throughout, worked through holidays and weekends to keep to the project timescale) and contractors to slip back the timescale by a whole year. But that's not the point of public service is it?
Camden needs the UCL Academy because we are short of accessible secondary school places in Camden. The Academy was scheduled to open in September 2011 because that was the Labour Government's timescale for the wave of Building Schools for the Future into which Camden was admitted. Once that happened, it was public knowledge that the Academy would open in September 2011 and the previous Conservative-LibDemAdministration in Camden knew it had to follow through on this despite the set-backs that would inevitably occur along the way.
The other major political reason was to demonstrate how different we were to the previous 35 year Labour Administration in Camden. We remembered the huge delays and cost over-runs connected to the rebuilding of the Swiss Cottage Leisure Centre and all the delays to the modernisation of Camden's social housing and were determined to be a local council which would keep officers in check and that would deliver on schedule.
Sadly, we're now back with a Labour Council which couldn't care less for the feelings of local families, which is delaying repair works to its social housing and which is unwilling to challenge officers when they say something is a bit difficult. Heaven help us when our Labour masters give them Islington to run as well.
Yours etc,
So the reaction of Labour Camden to a five week delay in getting the go-ahead for the UCL Academy is to delay its opening for a whole year -they were out of office for four years yet already the memories of their previous 35 years of control come flooding back.
Not one senior person connected to the scheme for the UCL Academy seriously believed it was ever in doubt from a new Government which has championed the cause of academies in education. So this delay is a sign of a failure of political will in Camden.
Look at what happened over the previous four years: two judicial reviews in the High Court backed by CASE (the Campaign for Secondary Education),a national campaign against academies run out of Camden chiefly by local Labour Party activists; a tortuous tustle with governors at our secondary schools over aspects of the then Labour Government's requirements regarding the IT component of the Building Schools for the Future investment; and, yes, a very difficult time spent finding new premises for Frank Barnes School for the Deaf, which officers under the previous Labour Administration in Camden had wished to close down completely.
And it's that latter point about what officers wanted, and the response of elected members, which is relevant here. Every time a judicial review was announced Camden had to stop progressing the Academy and officers would come to members and say 'shouldn't we put back the timescale'. Every time there was a need to try again to find a sustainable solution for Frank Barnes or governors were causing IT sign-off deadlines to be put back, the officers would say 'shouldn't we put back the timescale'.
Of course it would be easier for officers (a good number of whom, excellent throughout, worked through holidays and weekends to keep to the project timescale) and contractors to slip back the timescale by a whole year. But that's not the point of public service is it?
Camden needs the UCL Academy because we are short of accessible secondary school places in Camden. The Academy was scheduled to open in September 2011 because that was the Labour Government's timescale for the wave of Building Schools for the Future into which Camden was admitted. Once that happened, it was public knowledge that the Academy would open in September 2011 and the previous Conservative-LibDemAdministration in Camden knew it had to follow through on this despite the set-backs that would inevitably occur along the way.
The other major political reason was to demonstrate how different we were to the previous 35 year Labour Administration in Camden. We remembered the huge delays and cost over-runs connected to the rebuilding of the Swiss Cottage Leisure Centre and all the delays to the modernisation of Camden's social housing and were determined to be a local council which would keep officers in check and that would deliver on schedule.
Sadly, we're now back with a Labour Council which couldn't care less for the feelings of local families, which is delaying repair works to its social housing and which is unwilling to challenge officers when they say something is a bit difficult. Heaven help us when our Labour masters give them Islington to run as well.
Yours etc,
Monday, 6 September 2010
Boris' Sky Ride - Letter Sept 2010
Dear Sir,
A huge thank you to the volunteers from the Camden Cycling Campaign and elsewhere for their assistance to novices such as me in helping us to enjoy Boris' Sky Ride on Sunday. To find a stewarded route laid out to take us from Swiss Cottage to the Mall was a huge bonus and was very much appreciated.
My (far more experienced) family and I had a great day out!
Yours etc
A huge thank you to the volunteers from the Camden Cycling Campaign and elsewhere for their assistance to novices such as me in helping us to enjoy Boris' Sky Ride on Sunday. To find a stewarded route laid out to take us from Swiss Cottage to the Mall was a huge bonus and was very much appreciated.
My (far more experienced) family and I had a great day out!
Yours etc
Friday, 6 August 2010
BSF letter - August 2010
Dear Sir,
It was great to get the good news that the Government has given the go-ahead for the UCL Academy, the new Swiss Cottage Special School and the new South Camden Community School!
As the Executive Member for Schools from 2006 to 2010, I worked extemely closely with Camden's officers, UCL, staff and Governors at SwissCottage, Jack Taylor and SCCS and am delighted for all of them that their hard work has been rewarded; just as I am thrilled for the families who will benefit from the provision of the eight additional secondary school forms this will bring to Camden. We had to fight off two Judicial Reviews and work frantically to secure a future for Frank Barnes School along the way, but it was definitely worth it.
Now the Labour Council must deliver these new places on schedule. That means the Academy should open in September 2011 to its first year seven students. It was always going to open in temporary accommodation. No excuses please - just steer the project home on schedule and withinbudget!
At the same time of course, we await with interest the announcement over how future rebuilding schemes will be decided. I was as disappointed as everyone else to lose the rest of our BSF programme, but we must use all the work which has already been carried out to our advantage whenever the new guidance is announced.
And we must also not forget either the need for new primary school places in the north of the borough or for a new secondary south of Euston Road. It would be good to see Camden exploring ways to use the new free school proposals to the advantage of local families rather than sitting on its hands and pretending the change isn't happening...
Yours etc
It was great to get the good news that the Government has given the go-ahead for the UCL Academy, the new Swiss Cottage Special School and the new South Camden Community School!
As the Executive Member for Schools from 2006 to 2010, I worked extemely closely with Camden's officers, UCL, staff and Governors at SwissCottage, Jack Taylor and SCCS and am delighted for all of them that their hard work has been rewarded; just as I am thrilled for the families who will benefit from the provision of the eight additional secondary school forms this will bring to Camden. We had to fight off two Judicial Reviews and work frantically to secure a future for Frank Barnes School along the way, but it was definitely worth it.
Now the Labour Council must deliver these new places on schedule. That means the Academy should open in September 2011 to its first year seven students. It was always going to open in temporary accommodation. No excuses please - just steer the project home on schedule and withinbudget!
At the same time of course, we await with interest the announcement over how future rebuilding schemes will be decided. I was as disappointed as everyone else to lose the rest of our BSF programme, but we must use all the work which has already been carried out to our advantage whenever the new guidance is announced.
And we must also not forget either the need for new primary school places in the north of the borough or for a new secondary south of Euston Road. It would be good to see Camden exploring ways to use the new free school proposals to the advantage of local families rather than sitting on its hands and pretending the change isn't happening...
Yours etc
Monday, 19 July 2010
Camden & Islington - Letter July 2010
Dear Sir,
Earlier this year, Cllr Theo Blackwell, as chair of Camden's Resources Scrutiny Committee made an unusually thoughtful speech highlighting the tough choices ahead for Camden Council no matter who won the general election.
Cllr Blackwell explained, whichever party that won control in Camden should look to see how other councils elsewhere delivered equally good services at less cost and examine ways of sharing services with other boroughs.
Following May's council elections, Cllr Blackwell is now Cabinet Member for Resources and, following the financial excesses of the Gordon Brown and Tony Blair administrations, there is no question that he and Camden have been left facing a very tough financial outlook, as with every other part of the public sector.
Further to his speech earlier this year, Cllr Blackwell has indeed highlighted the need for Camden to explore the sharing of services with other London boroughs. I and other Conservative councillors support this approach. However, Cllr Blackwell has added an additional rider that these boroughs must be ones that share the same 'values'. The same values as whom, I am forced to ask? For Cllr Blackwell seems to have decided that Camden, a top performing council, has similar values to Islington, Haringey and Hackney - councils hardly reknowned for their quality of provision - rather than other councils with top performing services such as Westminster, Kensington & Chelsea and Hammersmith & Fulham.
Our residents are used to four star services. Camden should be looking to share environmental services with Westminster, not Islington; social services with K&C, not Haringey; and, education with Hammersmith &Fulham, not Hackney.
I am left to lament that when Cllr Blackwell spoke about sharing services with councils sharing 'our values' he was meaning his own tribal Labour values rather than those of our local residents. Why else would he want to tie Camden to local authorities reknowned for profligacy, waste, inefficiency and political correctness?
It's impossible not to conclude that Camden's Labour leadership has decided to prioritise its own doctrinal comfort over the quality of local services and local residents have every right to be feeling extremely worried by this.
Yours etc
Earlier this year, Cllr Theo Blackwell, as chair of Camden's Resources Scrutiny Committee made an unusually thoughtful speech highlighting the tough choices ahead for Camden Council no matter who won the general election.
Cllr Blackwell explained, whichever party that won control in Camden should look to see how other councils elsewhere delivered equally good services at less cost and examine ways of sharing services with other boroughs.
Following May's council elections, Cllr Blackwell is now Cabinet Member for Resources and, following the financial excesses of the Gordon Brown and Tony Blair administrations, there is no question that he and Camden have been left facing a very tough financial outlook, as with every other part of the public sector.
Further to his speech earlier this year, Cllr Blackwell has indeed highlighted the need for Camden to explore the sharing of services with other London boroughs. I and other Conservative councillors support this approach. However, Cllr Blackwell has added an additional rider that these boroughs must be ones that share the same 'values'. The same values as whom, I am forced to ask? For Cllr Blackwell seems to have decided that Camden, a top performing council, has similar values to Islington, Haringey and Hackney - councils hardly reknowned for their quality of provision - rather than other councils with top performing services such as Westminster, Kensington & Chelsea and Hammersmith & Fulham.
Our residents are used to four star services. Camden should be looking to share environmental services with Westminster, not Islington; social services with K&C, not Haringey; and, education with Hammersmith &Fulham, not Hackney.
I am left to lament that when Cllr Blackwell spoke about sharing services with councils sharing 'our values' he was meaning his own tribal Labour values rather than those of our local residents. Why else would he want to tie Camden to local authorities reknowned for profligacy, waste, inefficiency and political correctness?
It's impossible not to conclude that Camden's Labour leadership has decided to prioritise its own doctrinal comfort over the quality of local services and local residents have every right to be feeling extremely worried by this.
Yours etc
Monday, 5 July 2010
Towaways - Letter July 2010
Dear Sir,
Certain small parts of Camden have single yellow lines and residents' parking bays which apply for only a couple of hours each day. These are quiet residential areas a fair distance away from shops and tube and rail stations. Two hours parking control a day is sufficient to deter commuters with normally very little impact on the lives of residents living in these roads....
Normally, that is, until Camden sends in the towaway trucks! Towaways are primarily aimed at removing illegally-parked vehicles causing an obstruction.
It is difficult to understand how, when a car can be legally parked on a single yellow line for 22 hours in a day it suddenly becomes a perfidious obstruction that needs urgently to be removed on the remaining two hours of the day. Parking tickets for cars parked illegally in this way are perfectly reasonable, just not the towaways.
Apparently there's a review going on at the moment into parking enforcement, although I haven't seen any consultation announced on Camden's website. I'd hope this particular injustice will be simple and straightforward to adjust, but in case any other resident has an issue with parking they would like to see addressed in the review, I'd suggest they send an email to the new Labour Parking Czar Cllr Sue Vincent at sue.vincent@camden.gov.uk and ask her to confirm that it's within the scope of the review.
Yours etc
Certain small parts of Camden have single yellow lines and residents' parking bays which apply for only a couple of hours each day. These are quiet residential areas a fair distance away from shops and tube and rail stations. Two hours parking control a day is sufficient to deter commuters with normally very little impact on the lives of residents living in these roads....
Normally, that is, until Camden sends in the towaway trucks! Towaways are primarily aimed at removing illegally-parked vehicles causing an obstruction.
It is difficult to understand how, when a car can be legally parked on a single yellow line for 22 hours in a day it suddenly becomes a perfidious obstruction that needs urgently to be removed on the remaining two hours of the day. Parking tickets for cars parked illegally in this way are perfectly reasonable, just not the towaways.
Apparently there's a review going on at the moment into parking enforcement, although I haven't seen any consultation announced on Camden's website. I'd hope this particular injustice will be simple and straightforward to adjust, but in case any other resident has an issue with parking they would like to see addressed in the review, I'd suggest they send an email to the new Labour Parking Czar Cllr Sue Vincent at sue.vincent@camden.gov.uk and ask her to confirm that it's within the scope of the review.
Yours etc
Monday, 28 June 2010
Primary places - letter June 2010
Dear Sir,
One item on which the new Labour Council has been uber-quiet since taking over has been the need for two new primary school forms of entry in the north of Camden.
Let me remind that this is not dependent on the current level of applications for Camden's primaries, but on the independent GLA predictions of future pupil numbers in the borough. Money is obviously in very short supply - Gordon Brown's Primary Capital Programme was never fully funded, thus already forcing councils to prioritise certain schemes before others.
Camden's previous Conservative-LibDem Administration prioritised the provision of new school places. It is highly likely that the new Labour Administration will instead prefer to finance long-needed improvements to some existing primaries. This is their decision and politics is full of tough calls. However, local authorities still have a duty to ensure there are sufficient school places for our young people. The Labour Council has, therefore,a responsibility to local families to explain how they will provide theprimary school places this borough will require into the future.
If it says no to the expansion of St Pauls CoE Primary, what next? Are they gambling on the new Government's 'Free Schools' policy releasing them from the burden of providing school places? We should be told.
A creative solution might be to use the FreeSchools policy to look once again at smaller sites for schools and invite in private providers to work in tandem with the local authority -but does Labour have the vision to do this? There's a lot riding on this for very many families in Camden...
Yours etc
One item on which the new Labour Council has been uber-quiet since taking over has been the need for two new primary school forms of entry in the north of Camden.
Let me remind that this is not dependent on the current level of applications for Camden's primaries, but on the independent GLA predictions of future pupil numbers in the borough. Money is obviously in very short supply - Gordon Brown's Primary Capital Programme was never fully funded, thus already forcing councils to prioritise certain schemes before others.
Camden's previous Conservative-LibDem Administration prioritised the provision of new school places. It is highly likely that the new Labour Administration will instead prefer to finance long-needed improvements to some existing primaries. This is their decision and politics is full of tough calls. However, local authorities still have a duty to ensure there are sufficient school places for our young people. The Labour Council has, therefore,a responsibility to local families to explain how they will provide theprimary school places this borough will require into the future.
If it says no to the expansion of St Pauls CoE Primary, what next? Are they gambling on the new Government's 'Free Schools' policy releasing them from the burden of providing school places? We should be told.
A creative solution might be to use the FreeSchools policy to look once again at smaller sites for schools and invite in private providers to work in tandem with the local authority -but does Labour have the vision to do this? There's a lot riding on this for very many families in Camden...
Yours etc
Monday, 14 June 2010
Martin Davies - Letter June 2010
Dear Sir,
The sad news of Cllr Martin Davies' sudden death will have come as a terrible shock to very many people living in Camden, but especially to all the local residents in Frognal and Fitzjohns Ward, so many whom he had got to know personally since he was first elected for the then Fitzjohns Ward in 1998.
As Martin's fellow ward councillors, we share the loss felt by others, not least his partner Richard and his family. We are well aware of the affection so many people held for him, and of the number of individuals he helped over his years on the council.
We miss him hugely.
Yours sincerely,
Cllrs Andrew Mennear & Laura Trott
The sad news of Cllr Martin Davies' sudden death will have come as a terrible shock to very many people living in Camden, but especially to all the local residents in Frognal and Fitzjohns Ward, so many whom he had got to know personally since he was first elected for the then Fitzjohns Ward in 1998.
As Martin's fellow ward councillors, we share the loss felt by others, not least his partner Richard and his family. We are well aware of the affection so many people held for him, and of the number of individuals he helped over his years on the council.
We miss him hugely.
Yours sincerely,
Cllrs Andrew Mennear & Laura Trott
Monday, 24 May 2010
Fordham's Folly - letter May 2010
Dear Sir,
I enjoyed hugely Richard Osley's account of his 'unparalleled' access to the doomed LibDem election campaign in Hampstead & Kilburn.
Will you be publishing more anecotes of how it all turned pear-shaped?
Or was it also being filmed for wider release?
More please!
Yours etc
I enjoyed hugely Richard Osley's account of his 'unparalleled' access to the doomed LibDem election campaign in Hampstead & Kilburn.
Will you be publishing more anecotes of how it all turned pear-shaped?
Or was it also being filmed for wider release?
More please!
Yours etc
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)