All,
I’m guessing that that not everyone who reads this is on twitter, so here’s a bit of news you may not have seen. Conservative District Councillor Jonathan Gullis, who has said he is standing down from the Council in November, has changed his mind and now supports the ASL development on the Campden Road. I’ve copied this from his twitter feed:
‘I have just signed the petition for a supermarket and petrol station in#Shipston.’
‘The detailed reason why I have changed my position on the ASL application will be avaliable to read by Monday.’
It will be interesting to see if this is now the official Conservative Party position, as this will mean the only (political) opposition to the supermarket in Shipston will be coming from the Liberal Democrats, and will give pro supermarketers (if that’s a word) a choice between the Conservatives and Labour. At the very least it’s a U-turn comparable with Nick Clegg’s decision to support tuition fees after being safely elected…..
Regards,
Philip
Your stirring things up a little there Philip. I would lay heavy odds that the Conservative candidate will be anti-supermarket leaving me as the only pro-supermarket candidate. Jonathan is prepared to defy his Party and who can blame as a teacher facing the day to day reality of Conservative education policies.
Posted by Jeff Kenner | August 31, 2012, 4:04 pmJeff,
Ah, but what they say during an election……..
And I would hope everyone would agree, particularly after the GCSE fiasco, that this Government is making a complete hash of education.
Philip
Posted by Philip Vial | August 31, 2012, 9:04 pmPhilip,
Of course I have no issue you publishing this however I would like to rasie a few points.
1) I am speaking for this as the only Conservative who supports this so would rather this was not made to look like it is Tory policy as that is misleading.
2) It would have been curious if you could have asked me reasons for my change of position, or indeed ask for the comments I will post and I could have given those so you could actually display the arguments.
3) I find it really cheap to try and bring a national political position with your reference to Clegg into this. It is something I find distasteful.
4) MOST importantly, planning is a non-political issue and by trying to bring politics into only “muddies the waters”. I think it is sad that any planning decisions should be politically driven.
Thank you for taking the time to read this.
Best,
Jonathan
Posted by Jonathan Gullis | August 31, 2012, 4:25 pmJonathan,
Yes, to be fair I have been told by others that it’s not the Conservative position.
Jeff and Richard have both let the electorate know their views on the development by delivering leaflets to local people and telling them. You announce the news by telling 20-30 local people on twitter. I know which two people’s position I have more respect for.
As far as the comparison with Nick Clegg goes, I still can’t think of a better one. Both campaign on a particular policy, both reverse it after an election. I think I’ll stand by that.
Philip
Posted by Philip Vial | August 31, 2012, 9:09 pmI’m not sure Jonathan’s pre-2011 election was anti-supermarket. I think I remember his tweets about “consultation” and “localism” on this issue. I might be wrong but his anti-supermarket position didn’t materialise until the run-up to the ASL application post the election.
I also have to agree that the Nick Clegg change of position is unfair. Nick Clegg sold out a fundamental value. This isn’t about values. This is about Jonathan looking at all the issues and deciding on balance the application is one he can support.
And even if this is a change of position, I don’t think it’s necessarily wrong to either (a) admit you were wrong or (b) notice that the situation has now changed and so the policy needs to change. If the national government changes their mind on public sector pensions or NHS reform, would it be a good thing? I appreciate they are more important issues than a supermarket but the principle is still the same.
Posted by Rob O'Malley | August 31, 2012, 9:31 pmRob,
I think I have to disagree with you about points 1 & 2 and I can provide evidence…….
Paragraph 3 is too reasonable to disagree with entirely!
Philip
Posted by Philip Vial | August 31, 2012, 9:41 pmPhilip, in the light of your reply to Jonathan don’t you need to change your headline?
Posted by Jeff Kenner | September 2, 2012, 6:52 pmJeff,
I don’t think so. That was my question at the time and (unlike other sites) I’ve given full right to reply.
I think going back and editing the meaning of stories afterwards is wrong (even if I’ve been shown to be incorrect) and would make your and Jonathan’s replies senseless.
It stays. Happy to do a new story when we know the position of all the candidates though.
Philip
Posted by Philip Vial | September 2, 2012, 6:59 pm“Happy to do a new story when we know the position of all the candidates though”
That will probably depend on which position looks the most popular
Posted by Terry Simmonds | September 4, 2012, 1:16 pmTerry,
And they accuse ME of cynisicm!
Posted by Philip Vial | September 4, 2012, 1:38 pmTerry, when I took a pro-supermarket position I was told it would lose me votes. It did lose me some but it’s the right stand to take for Shipston and I’ll stick with it..
Posted by Jeff Kenner | September 7, 2012, 6:43 pm