| Topic: | Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Church Street closure - Breaking news | |
| Posted by: | Phil Andrews | |
| Date/Time: | 05/02/16 10:53:00 |
| As I see it there are two ways of looking at this, in terms of who is where when it comes to the Church Street issue and possibly, by implication, of wider issues in the area. The first, admittedly slightly cynical view is that Ruth and Councillor Curran have basically conjured up this difference of opinion between them, Ruth taking the popular view in the light of her precarious majority and Curran doing the opposite in the belief that he and his administration are unassailable. In this scenario Ruth saves face with her electorate whilst Curran remains the boss. The second is that Ruth is enjoying a new sense of freedom having severed the shackles of the Council administration and is now able to be her own person where local issues are concerned. If this is the case then she will rightly see Curran's response as a snub and indicative of a lack of support for her as MP from the local party he leads. There is little political basis for any disagreement between them. True Curran supported the hard-right candidate Liz Kendall in the leadership election (which may explain the fondness for UKIP amongst certain of his followers) whilst Ruth opted for the slightly softer right option in Yvette Cooper, but that is much of a muchness. More likely this is about egos, and in particular Steve Curran being a very important person enjoying his life as puppet-in-chief at Planet Lampton surrounded in turn by his own salon of poodles. Whichever is the case Ruth gives the impression that she is taking an interest in the views of local people on some matters at least and should be supported in this. Who knows, in the light of this latest snub from Curran she may even decide to reconsider her frankly disappointing lack of support for her constituent Paul Slattery? |