Showing posts with label prat. Show all posts
Showing posts with label prat. Show all posts

Friday, 26 April 2013

Precious Darlings: Brian Coleman - suffer the little children




Not long to go now, until erstwhile Barnet Tory councillor Brian Coleman is up before the beak, at Uxbridge Magistrates' Court, to answer charges, which he denies, relating to the alleged assault of a female resident.

May 3rd, when Councillor Coleman will be standing in the dock, is something of an ominous date, from his perspective: it will be exactly a year since the GLA elections which saw him lose his place on the London Assembly, his chairmanship of Lfepa, eventually followed by the further losses of his Cabinet place, his place on the NLWA board, and even, temporarily at least, his membership of the Conservative party. 

It has been a short, sharp shock for Brian: a spectacular fall, and one which has left him, as a lone independent councillor, isolated, powerless and clearly deeply frustrated. 

At the last full council meeting, Mrs Angry noted, when Councillor Coleman attempted to move a motion, or to intervene in any way , he was not supported by his former colleagues. The questions he had submitted to council were shoved right to the back of the queue, (rather unfairly, Mrs Angry thought, Brian, as it happens) where there was no chance that supplementary questions would be allowed, due to lack of time. 

Interestingly, Coleman's questions were to Leader Cornelius about hospitality, or the lack of it, from Saracens Rugby club, the club who have received such a warm welcome from Barnet Council - and a peppercorn rent for the use of Copthall Stadium, whereas our own Barnet FC club, at home in Underhill for more than a century, has been allowed to depart the borough: the last match was played there on Saturday.

Brian has another outlet for his energies now, of course. He has become a man of letters: not only is he writing his memoirs, but he has become the very thing he has always held in the lowest contempt: a Barnet blogger ...

His latest effort is a real piece of work, combining as it does his favourite subjects of women, children, road safety, nimbyism and faith schools. Yes, Brian is an expert on all these subjects, or at least, he likes to voice his opinions on all these issues, and in this post applies himself to this task with great enthusiasm.

Brian, who has no children, as far as Mrs Angry is aware, is nevertheless an authority on what is best for them, should they have the impertinence to be born, and to be born in the London Borough of Barnet, where a Tory council must be burdened with the duty to provide them with a school place. 

(Brian Coleman, it should be remembered, was not born but created in a laboratory by mad scientists intent on creating a superhuman with extraordinary powers of political insight and natural leadership. The experiment failed, but science's loss was our gain, here in Broken Barnet.)

Ah, but: Brian does not want to provide them with a school place: he wants the council to be divested of its responsibilities to pupils: bring on the free schools, and more and more of them, til no state schools are left. Why does Brian want this? Because he LOVES Michael Gove, and, erm ...  because one primary school he knows has a bunch of governors whom he says feast on pizza and bottles of wine at their meetings, which have been known to go on AFTER 10.30pm, which is past Brian's bedtime, or longer than his concentration span, not sure which.

Brian speaks fondly of the number of faith schools in the borough, although of course as usual failing to refer to the largest community group, that is to say the Catholic community, which nurtured not one but two of the Barnet bloggers ... and our councillor wants to encourage schools which represent other faiths and communities: an admirable ambition, as we all would agree. Oh dear, though - says Brian:

However it seems to me that every time the Community tries to add to the diversity of schools available for parents in Barnet  attempts are made by the NIMBY (Not in my back yard) element to prevent progress.


Ah yes: Nimbyism. (Good of him to explain the term, btw: have often wondered). Oh dear: take a deep breath and read on:

In my view new schools should be opened slap bang in the middle of residential areas . That is where the demand is and it encourages residents to use and appreciate their local schools. I am entirely pro motorist but would make it a criminal offence for parents to drive their children to school . I and probably the vast majority of my generation were never driven to school , we walked or took the bus.

Hmm. So. Let's desconstruct that.

Schools should be slap bang in the middle of residential areas. 

A criminal offence for parents to drive their children to school.

Little Brian Coleman walked or took the bus to school.

Yes, Brian, if we were able to demolish the whole of Broken Barnet and rebuild it - and to be fair, your former Tory colleagues are trying their best to do just that - we might be able to start again, and plan a new borough with schools in the centre of local communities. They are not, they have always and continue to be squeezed into wherever your councillor chums feel is most politically productive.

A criminal offence? Really? But then we might want to make it a criminal offence for, say, councillors to drive to the Town Hall, or Waitrose, or the nearest cash machine. And one imagines our magistrates' courts are rather busy with more important crimes to address, don't you think?

You walked to school, or caught the bus? This may come as a surprise to some, who may have thought your attendance necessitated the accompaniment of an armed escort and a fleet of taxi drivers on standby alert, but we must take your word for it.

And now he makes a typically outrageous remark in regard to some parents' reluctance to walk their children to schools:

Among the excuses I have been presented with are that it is not save for their precious darlings to walk the streets of Barnet .

Their precious darlings.

As it happens, Brian, I used to walk my children miles everyday, to school, to nursery and back, endless journeys. Not every parent, however, lives within walking distance of a school, or is able even to obtain a place at the nearest school to their home.

He continues by claiming that parents insist on using their cars to take children to school because of the 'danger'. Ah: danger? From paedophiles. Says our man:

 ... about one child per year is killed by a stranger , and tragic and appalling as every child killing is , this is the same level as the 1950s ! 

 The suggestion that somehow the streets are awash with paedophiles on the prowl looking to kidnap children and that the only answer is that they need to be driven everywhere in huge 4 by 4s by women with only a vague sense of the rules of the road is absurd.

Yes: so danger, as perceived by parents is that their children will be attacked from paedophiles, and yet again his views of women reveal themselves in all their sexist shame by his offensive remarks about mothers who do not know how to drive.

In fact, this is where he touches on the truth, a harsh truth which he fails to address. The real reason to fear the roads of Barnet is not from predatory paedophiles, but from the appalling standards of safety in some areas of the borough, a danger which he in his former role as Cabinet member with responsibility for roads, has consistently refused to acknowledge, and indeed has taken great efforts to ignore, by removing road safety installations intended to protect our children from harm. 

Yes, Brian, they are indeed our precious darlings. What a shame that you seem not to understand the natural inclination to protectiveness which we feel towards our children.

Coleman observes that the killing of one child a year by a stranger is tragic and appalling, yet fails to be moved by the terrible number of children who die on our roads every year completely avoidably.

Earlier this week, Mrs Angry took her local councillors, and some council officers, on a tour of Squires Lane, here in Finchley, which statistics prove is the site of numerous accidents involving adults and children: there has unfortunately been one fatal accident right outside Mrs Angry's house, caused by a hit and run speeding driver, but there is a large number of schools in the area, and the road is particularly dangerous due to speeding motorists, unmonitored parking,  and most of all, the lack of traffic calming measures. 

We used to have mini roundabouts, and other installations here: they were taken out, due to 'council policy', as Cllr Coleman was of the opinion that they were unnecessary. 

After they were taken out, residents were consulted as to whether they wanted them removed.  When residents objected, and asked for them back, they were told by the council that there was no money to replace them. 

Last week, yet another child was knocked down, badly injured, and airlifted to hospital: so, at last, after a suitable number of sacrificial victims, and now that there is a new Cabinet member and the council's opposition to traffic calming has moved, they came to see the road, and are at least prepared to listen and review the safety of the area.

But let us return to the issue of Nimbyism: funnily enough, his current robust stance on Nimbyism was not evident when Brian Coleman opposed the Saracens' development of Copthall Stadium. Cllr Coleman opposed this because, he said, of the impact of parking at matches on his own ward, Totteridge, which seemed rather absurd as Totteridge is a  long distance from Copthall. Perhaps Brian is not so much a  NIMBYist himself as a PRAT, ie Please Remove All Traffic, when it comes to his own backyard?

But anyway .... schools, schools .... Brian wants us to welcome new plans for the Avanti school to move to the Broadfields area of Edgware. Avanti is already based in Harrow, but is now looking for premisies capable of accommodating a whopping 1,680 pupils.

Now then: Broadfields is the area where Mrs Angry comes from, and her brother and many friends still live there. Her first year at school, in fact, before attending the dreaded St Vincent's, was spent at the neighbouring Broadfields Primary school - an experience which, after the first day, aged four, she was in no mood to repeat, and indeed one which, she announced to her parents, that she had absolutely no intention of repeating, an decision which was sadly overruled by the same parents, with grim determination, despite sit down protests, pleading, and a good deal of melodramatic sobbing every morning for the entire year.

Where the schools are (there are now three in the area) borders the Green Belt, and is extremely badly served in terms of access: not surprisingly, as the area was never intended to accommodate such a density of population. Even in the time of the infant Mrs Angry, a period almost before the age of the motor vehicle, the traffic congestion and parking problems were intolerable: years later, with more schools in the area, to relocate another, huge out of borough school here is madness, and representatives of all political parties agree, as reported in this story in the local Times about a very well attended meeting of residents objecting to the plans: see here

As usual, Coleman has scraped the bottom of the barrel, and resorted to more utterly disgraceful insinuations - and worse - about 'racist and anti-semitic' motivations by objectors to such proposals. 

Coleman, who of course was found guilty last year of smearing a female correspondant and a Jewish resident of being 'anti-semites' has clearly learnt nothing and continues to use such abhorrant tactics to try to discredit those who oppose his views. This is truly nauseating.

The Avanti School will be opposed, not because of racism, but because it is an inappropriate development in that area. Coleman will continue to behave in the way he does until next May, and the local elections, when he will, one presumes, try to stand as a candidate somewhere. 

Whether or not he will be able to stand as a Tory - if indeed this is still technically possible - will depend on the outcome of next week's court case, which Mrs Angry will attend, along with, we can all be sure, a large number of other interested parties.

Uxbridge Magistrates Court, 3rd May, 10 am: details here

*Footnote Tuesday: 

Brian Coleman has again covered himself in glory in his latest post, about the departure of Barnet Football Club from the borough, and its relegation: starting with a touching reference to Enoch Powell, and using that venomous phrase of Thatcherite pleasure in the downfall of old enemies,'Rejoice, rejoice' as a heading, he burbles:

"The late Enoch Powell recounted how when he came down stairs  and picked up the morning paper the day after the February 1974 General Election( which he had opposed and refused to stand as a candidate in )  and saw that Ted Heath had failed to win he sang the Te Deum.

I did exactly  the same yesterday afternoon when I glanced at the football results !

If I had the power I would be ordering that the Church bells in Barnet be rung this morning in celebration of the relegation of Barnet Football Club from the Football League.

I know I am not the only Conservative adding a little Champagne to my orange juice over breakfast this morning at what seems like an end to the 15 year saga of Barnet Football Club ...
"


 Oh dear. 

This is a gross miscalculation, on Coleman's part.  The wrath of Bees fans, mostly Barnet residents, provoked for so long by the party politics the Tory party have played over the Underhill ground issue, is now incendiary, and may well destroy the remaining chances that several local Tory - and independent - councillors may have retained for re-election.

But they have had the last laugh. Hat tip to the Barnet Bugle for spotting this:

Coleman has never allowed comments on his absurd blog: clearly many are left, of a less than complimentary nature. His ego, however, did not allow him to ignore some supportive comments left yesterday on the Barnet FC post. Mrs Angry will assist you in reading the subtext, with red highlights:

The Ifster said...

This is good news and I
have to offer my support to what
is a good point, well
stated.

May I take it that this will
also mean that there will be
no returning for this club in future?

I am sure I am not alone in hoping
so!

And that goes for any other football team.

We will surely get those speaking
against this but we must remain strong,
not crumble and continue to fight in the
knowledge that, depite the minority who
express to the contrary, that the club
really do not add antything to the Borough.

 
Smithy Frombar said... 
 
I total agree with above
comment being a Barnet man
united we must stand against
nasty things happening against
the rights of the council 


Mrs Angry understands that teams of volunteer bell ringers are standing by all over the borough for some more celebrations this weekend. to toast someone very special - and supplies of champagne in all the licensed premises of Broken Barnet are reported to be running dangerously low.

Sunday, 21 October 2012

Matthew Offord, MP for Hendon: who the f*ck is he?



Quirinale, the scene of Matthew Offord's latest reported debacle

Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear ...

Last week Mrs Angry and some of the other Barnet twitterati were rather bemused to find that our MP for Hendon, Mr Matthew Offord, had blocked access to his twitter account. Mrs Angry found this puzzling, although she had been making fun of his sudden interest in putting questions to parliament about elderly cod in the north sea. (This led to a horrible, shameful outbreak of piscatorial punning, late one night, which is best forgotten).

But the real story behind the twitter block is an entirely different kettle of fish.

Reports in today's Mail and Sun reveal that Offord may well have reason to have become overly sensitive, and explains a lot of blog visits in the last few days to Offord themed posts too. 

Yet again, it seems, our friend has become embroiled in an alleged incident which will cause yet more embarrassment for himself, his party, and the local Tory council, already prostrate with mortification over the continued misbehaviour of our own Councillor Brian Coleman.

Here is the Mail story: 



Foul-mouthed MPs trade insults during booze-fuelled argument in front of Army chief at £3,000 banquet

MPS hurled foul-mouthed insults at each other during a boozy £3,000 banquet in front of Army chief General Sir Peter Wall. 

 Labour MPs staged a walkout after Tory MP Matthew Offord called one of them a ‘gobshite’ and another a ‘prat’. 

 In an angry clash over how the last Government had treated British troops, Mr Offord accused Labour MPs of having ‘blood on their hands’ for failing to equip soldiers properly when they were in power. 

One Labour MP told Mr Offord he had drunk too much red wine while another shouted: ‘Get him out!’ 

Last night, the Tory MP denied he had too much to drink, even though he admitted he had the equivalent of a bottle of wine during the evening. 

The rumpus took place at a private dinner attended by 50 MPs and guests on Wednesday at Quirinale, a restaurant a few hundred yards from Parliament. 

The MPs did not have to pay a penny for the £60-a-head banquet, organised by the UK Defence Forum for the All Party Parliamentary Armed Forces Group, which is funded by donations from top defence firms, including BAE Systems. 

Guests had been invited to hear a speech by Sir Peter, Chief of the General Staff, on modern warfare. But as the free wine and beer flowed, the evening degenerated into a different kind of battle. 

According to witnesses, it started when senior Labour MP Dave Watts cast doubt on the Tories’ record on defence in a question to Sir Peter. Mr Offord, 43, a former BBC executive, said:

 ‘I’m not having that. ‘You lot have blood on your hands because you sent our troops into battle without the right gear.’ 

Mr Watts retorted: ‘You’ve had too much red wine.’ The Tory MP shot back: ‘Gobshite!’

 Labour MP Russell Brown waded in, ordering other MPs close to Mr Offord to ‘quieten him down’.But defiant Mr Offord refused to be silenced and told Mr Brown: ‘You are a prat.’ 

Mr Brown replied: ‘That is worse than being called a pleb.’ 

Ex-Labour Minister Lord Foulkes called for Mr Offord to be ejected but he refused to budge. Another Labour MP, addressing Mr Offord, said: ‘Who the f*** is he?’ 

With tempers threatening to boil over, Labour peer Lord McAvoy led a walkout of the party’s politicians. 

Defiant Mr Offord last night said: ‘In no way was I drunk. This is an outrageous attempt to smear me because I said Labour had blood on their hands for the way they treated members of the Armed Forces when they were in power.’ 

He indicated that he was wrong to use the word ‘gobshite’ but refused to apologise for the clash. 

But Lord Foulkes said: ‘Mr Offord’s behaviour was totally unacceptable.

 You will note that the Mail refers to 'foul mouthed MPs'  trading insults, whereas the report indicates that only Tory MP Offord behaved in such a manner.

In the Sun, the story is reported thus:


Tory’s foul tirade

  A TORY sparked a walkout at a VIP dinner after unleashing a foul-mouthed tirade at Labour MPs. 

Matthew Offord called one a “gobs***e” and another a “prat” during a talk by the head of the British Army. 

He began heckling as Labour grandee Dave Watts asked the guest speaker about the impact of defence cuts. 

Mr Offord, sitting a few tables away, yelled: “You’ve got blood on your hands. You sent people into battle with no equipment.” 

General Sir Peter Wall looked stunned as Mr Offord then interrupted his reply to call the MP a “gobs***e”. 

Fellow Labour MP Russell Brown tried to calm the situation only to be branded a “prat”.
 
Parliamentary party chairman Mr Watts, Mr Brown and two other MPs downed their cutlery and walked out of the UK Defence Forum event at the swish Quirinale restaurant in Westminster. 

Mr Watts said: “He wouldn’t shut up. He just kept on going at me. It was extraordinary.”

 Mr Offord said: “Dave Watts suggested I had drunk too much red wine. That’s when I called him a gobs***e. I had been drinking but I certainly wasn’t drunk.” 

Mmm. Glad to hear it. If this is how he behaves when he is sober, citizens, what might he do if he was pissed? 

It is true to say that Matthew Offord has something of a track record for reports of embarrassing incidents of this nature. Readers may recall the story by Guido Fawkes in 2010 alleging misbehaviour at the Tory conference:

http://order-order.com/2010/10/04/handbags-in-the-hyatt/

And on an entirely unconnected theme, our hapless MP has something of an unfortunate habit of suffering rather unusual accidents which do little to bolster the image of dignity to which one might hope a member of parliament would aspire: breaking his wrist in the bathroom on honeymoon, sustaining an eye injury from a mug that flew out of a kitchen cupboard, trying to use Human Rights legislation to oppose a ruling banning his canine SpAd Max, the jack russell terrier (rumoured to be the inspiration for the 'Thick of it's Malcom Tucker), from parliament, telling a gay constituent that marriage between members of the same sex is wrong because marriage is for 'procreation', oh ... ah, yes, and then there was the small matter of the absence from parliament during the London riots, which brings us neatly back to today's story.

Last summer, Mrs Angry had quite a lot of fun with the tale of Matthew Offord, MP, and his mysterious trip to Belize, where he remained while London burned, and the House of Commons reconvened to debate the extraordinary events of that week. Take a look at a post written in August, 2011: 



  as Mrs Angry reported then, Offord claimed to a local Times reporter that he was not just on holiday ... 

"he has also been engaged in Parliamentary business helping the South American country prepare for hurricane season. 

He says he has also been working with coastguards fighting terrorism and the drugs trade, but is unable to say anymore about that side of his trip before he returns on Saturday next week. 

He said: “I certainly have not just gone off on holiday. I’m engaging in Parliamentary work in a third world country. 

It’s not the cocktails on the beach that some people like to think it is.

 Commendable,  you might think. And Matthew posted photographs of himself engaged in this heroic, selfless enterprise - here ...



and here, looking rather wet  ... 



oh? Where is that, Mrs Angry wondered? Because ... doesn't really look much like taking part in  parliamentary work in a third world country, does it? Never understimate the investigative zeal/boundless curiosity of Mrs Angry, citizens of Broken barnet. Mrs Angry spent a couple of hours on google image, trawling through endless photographs of hotel balconies in Belize and look what she found:

 Read more here: 



The Mayan Princess hotel is, according to its website:  ' ... an enchanting and well equipped hotel that Splash Dive Center uses to accommodate our guests when we make trips to the Blue Hole of Belize.' Oh. Matthew is of course a keen scuba diver, but sadly his dedication to the fight against narco terrorism and the forces of nature left him no time to explore any holes, blue or otherwise. Shame.

See, Matthew told us that he was in Belize posing in quasi military uniform due to his duties as a member of the All Party Parliamentary Armed Forces Group, whose dinner, hosted by the United Defence Forum, he was attending last week, when the 'gobshite' incident is alleged to have taken place.



this group is not an official parliamentary body, it is a boys' club for MPs who enjoy dressing up and pretending to be in the armed forces for a few days each year, visiting the men and women who are doing all the actual hard work, and placing their own lives at risk, and then returning to Westminster where they receive honorary ranks, and, rather disgracefully, award themselves medals. This last tradition has been widely criticised, as of course there are servicemen and women who are badly injured in the course of duty who do not receive any medals, and indeed Mrs Angry was told by Col Richard Kemp, former Commander of British forces in Afghanistan, that:  

"The Forces Parliamentary Scheme is valuable but medals and phoney ranks undermines its credibility."

The Armed Forces Group is a mysterious organisation, financially supported, it would appear, although there is little transparency about the issue, by the defence industry, which might be reasonably be thought to represents a potential conflict of interest, mightn't it? And what is the 'UK Defence Forum'? The Sun's report neglected to tell us, and the Mail clearly thought their readers wouldn't be interested. Mrs Angry is interested, though.

According to its website, http://www.ukdf.org.uk/index.html

this forum, with the motto:  'conloqui audete sapientia proficite' - 'through dialogue comes knowledge and wisdom' exists to enable those interested in the issues of defence and security, politicians, senior members of the armed forces, 'defence professionals',  to exchange views and information. It is supposed to be non partisan, and not engaged in lobbying. It is itself supported by companies such as:


Aspire Defence, BAE Systems, Babcock, Benromach Distillery, Berwin Leighton Paisner, Boeing, Carillion, Dalwhinnie United Distillers, EADS, EDS, Finmeccanica, G4S Government Services, General Dynamics, Hiberna, Holdfast, HP, Johnny Walker, KBR, Lockheed Martin, MBDA, Manroy, Marshalls, Maersk, NDI, NewsDesk Media, Nexter, Northrop Grumman, PriceWaterhouse Coopers, QinetiQ, Raytheon, Rolls-Royce, Selex, Shepherd Neame, Smiths Detection, Thales, University of Warwick, Virgin Atlantic, VT Group, Worshipful Companies of Lightmongers; Armourers and Brasiers; Tinplate Workers; Young's Brewery

Mostly funded by defence and security industry then, but a cheering number of distilleries and whiskey manufacturers. 

The Forum was once told by Tony Blair to 'think the unthinkable', we read. Oh. Can you see what Mrs Angry is thinking, Tony? 

Quite what the hosts and other guests made of Matthew Offord's behaviour on Wednesday night is not difficult to imagine. What is undeniably true is that this is yet another boorish outburst by a local Tory and will inevitably add a leaden weight to the sinking reputation of the Conservative party amongst the voters of Broken Barnet. So: not all bad news, is it?

As for Offord: Mrs Angry would suggest that he is sent off on a six month tour of Afghanistan where perhaps the challenge of earning a medal for courage, hard work, and real dedication to duty might just teach him that the reality of life in the armed services amounts to rather more than dressing up in combat gear for another photo opportunity, or dining too well at Quirinale. 

Well, well. Mrs Angry predicts, by the way, that this will not be the only embarrassing Barnet news for the Conservative party, central and local, this week.  Stay tuned ... 

And in the meanwhile, here in Broken Barnet, we will be doing our best to add to the burden of shame with the premiere tomorrow night of 'Barnet - the £1Billion Gamble'. 6pm at the Phoenix, East Finchley, if you would like to come - and why wouldn't you?

Mrs Angry has asked Eric Pickles to escort her, but he has not RSVPd yet, so no doubt as usual she will be stood up. (Last year, she asked Brian Coleman, but we have reason to believe he may be preoccupied with other matters at the moment),  Do come along to see the film, and see a real gobshite in action (Mrs A, that is) - a certain tv news team is covering the event, and ... it promises to be an entertaining evening.