Street lights: 'why did council pay for faulty equipment?' asks councillor

Street lights: 'why did council pay for faulty equipment?' asks councillor

Street lights: 'why did council pay for faulty equipment?' asks councillor

First published in News Watford Observer: Photograph of the Author by , Chief Reporter

A leading opposition politician has questioned the reason why Hertfordshire’s streetlights are still malfunctioning three years after the switch-off initiative.

Stephen Giles-Medhurst, a county councillor for Oxhey and central Watford and leader of the Hertfordshire Liberal Democrat group, asked why the county paid for faulty equipment.

His comments come after the council’s Conservative administration warned there could be further problems with streetlights when clocks go forward next Sunday.

Streetlight issues started around the switch-over to British Summer Time in 2012 after the council installed photocells to control the money-saving nighttime switch-off initiative.

Following the warning, councillor Giles-Medhurst said: "After almost three years of switching the lights off at midnight we still cannot get an assurance that the regular problem we have had every time the clocks change will not occur.

"Each year and time we are assured it will not be a problem.

"Tories have admitted in advance there will be problems.  The question I want answered is why on earth did they pay for faulty equipment to start with, was the night time turn-off all rushed through with no checking on equipment or its capability?"

Earlier this week the council said any lights that did malfunction would be fixed by its contractor Amey Lafarge at the company's expense.

Comments (40)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

12:23pm Thu 20 Mar 14

Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford says...

Loads of bluster from Giles but not much content.

Giles comment is confusing.

Is he saying the council purchased equipment that was faulty (likely), or is he asking why equipment was purchased that was inadequate (less likely)?

Loads of people and organisations purchase faulty equipment because at the time of purchase they were told the equipment was perfect. It's part of life, some things are faulty when they arrive. Ask anyone.

Out of interest Giles, what would you have done differently as a LibDem? Don't just whinge, tell us your solution.

Whingers without solutions - who needs them?
Loads of bluster from Giles but not much content. Giles comment is confusing. Is he saying the council purchased equipment that was faulty (likely), or is he asking why equipment was purchased that was inadequate (less likely)? Loads of people and organisations purchase faulty equipment because at the time of purchase they were told the equipment was perfect. It's part of life, some things are faulty when they arrive. Ask anyone. Out of interest Giles, what would you have done differently as a LibDem? Don't just whinge, tell us your solution. Whingers without solutions - who needs them? Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford
  • Score: -2

12:40pm Thu 20 Mar 14

not a regular says...

Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford wrote:
Loads of bluster from Giles but not much content. Giles comment is confusing. Is he saying the council purchased equipment that was faulty (likely), or is he asking why equipment was purchased that was inadequate (less likely)? Loads of people and organisations purchase faulty equipment because at the time of purchase they were told the equipment was perfect. It's part of life, some things are faulty when they arrive. Ask anyone. Out of interest Giles, what would you have done differently as a LibDem? Don't just whinge, tell us your solution. Whingers without solutions - who needs them?
The council should have had some measures in place within the contract to protect itself when purchasing its street lighting equipment. Or at the very least attempted to replace any faulty equipment. So by the sounds of things there is blame to be laid at the council's door for either rushing into an agreement or for not activating its clauses to provide value for money to its residents.

Have you never returned anything faulty to a shop?
[quote][p][bold]Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford[/bold] wrote: Loads of bluster from Giles but not much content. Giles comment is confusing. Is he saying the council purchased equipment that was faulty (likely), or is he asking why equipment was purchased that was inadequate (less likely)? Loads of people and organisations purchase faulty equipment because at the time of purchase they were told the equipment was perfect. It's part of life, some things are faulty when they arrive. Ask anyone. Out of interest Giles, what would you have done differently as a LibDem? Don't just whinge, tell us your solution. Whingers without solutions - who needs them?[/p][/quote]The council should have had some measures in place within the contract to protect itself when purchasing its street lighting equipment. Or at the very least attempted to replace any faulty equipment. So by the sounds of things there is blame to be laid at the council's door for either rushing into an agreement or for not activating its clauses to provide value for money to its residents. Have you never returned anything faulty to a shop? not a regular
  • Score: 4

12:53pm Thu 20 Mar 14

Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford says...

not a regular wrote:
Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford wrote:
Loads of bluster from Giles but not much content. Giles comment is confusing. Is he saying the council purchased equipment that was faulty (likely), or is he asking why equipment was purchased that was inadequate (less likely)? Loads of people and organisations purchase faulty equipment because at the time of purchase they were told the equipment was perfect. It's part of life, some things are faulty when they arrive. Ask anyone. Out of interest Giles, what would you have done differently as a LibDem? Don't just whinge, tell us your solution. Whingers without solutions - who needs them?
The council should have had some measures in place within the contract to protect itself when purchasing its street lighting equipment. Or at the very least attempted to replace any faulty equipment. So by the sounds of things there is blame to be laid at the council's door for either rushing into an agreement or for not activating its clauses to provide value for money to its residents.

Have you never returned anything faulty to a shop?
More times than I care to remember NAR.

If you consider the amount of streetlights involved it is probably not reasonable for the council to test each unit beyond an initial sample.

Statisticians know all about this sampling technique for quality control.

It's not unreasonable for the council to expect the vast majority of units to work as described.

We have no figures to suggest how widespread this issue is. It just annoys me when the LibDems in opposition at County start going on about how the Tories haven't done something perfectly but have no ideas of their own on how to do things better. It's just opportunism and point scoring.

The story goes on to say the faults are repaired without charge to the council.

I would say the Council has acted just about as well as could be expected on this and the LibDems are just whinging for the sake of it.
[quote][p][bold]not a regular[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford[/bold] wrote: Loads of bluster from Giles but not much content. Giles comment is confusing. Is he saying the council purchased equipment that was faulty (likely), or is he asking why equipment was purchased that was inadequate (less likely)? Loads of people and organisations purchase faulty equipment because at the time of purchase they were told the equipment was perfect. It's part of life, some things are faulty when they arrive. Ask anyone. Out of interest Giles, what would you have done differently as a LibDem? Don't just whinge, tell us your solution. Whingers without solutions - who needs them?[/p][/quote]The council should have had some measures in place within the contract to protect itself when purchasing its street lighting equipment. Or at the very least attempted to replace any faulty equipment. So by the sounds of things there is blame to be laid at the council's door for either rushing into an agreement or for not activating its clauses to provide value for money to its residents. Have you never returned anything faulty to a shop?[/p][/quote]More times than I care to remember NAR. If you consider the amount of streetlights involved it is probably not reasonable for the council to test each unit beyond an initial sample. Statisticians know all about this sampling technique for quality control. It's not unreasonable for the council to expect the vast majority of units to work as described. We have no figures to suggest how widespread this issue is. It just annoys me when the LibDems in opposition at County start going on about how the Tories haven't done something perfectly but have no ideas of their own on how to do things better. It's just opportunism and point scoring. The story goes on to say the faults are repaired without charge to the council. I would say the Council has acted just about as well as could be expected on this and the LibDems are just whinging for the sake of it. Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford
  • Score: -1

1:31pm Thu 20 Mar 14

Dnorty says...

Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford wrote:
Loads of bluster from Giles but not much content.

Giles comment is confusing.

Is he saying the council purchased equipment that was faulty (likely), or is he asking why equipment was purchased that was inadequate (less likely)?

Loads of people and organisations purchase faulty equipment because at the time of purchase they were told the equipment was perfect. It's part of life, some things are faulty when they arrive. Ask anyone.

Out of interest Giles, what would you have done differently as a LibDem? Don't just whinge, tell us your solution.

Whingers without solutions - who needs them?
WHY is Grange Road Bushey not included in the lights off at midnight ? Is there something special about this road.
[quote][p][bold]Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford[/bold] wrote: Loads of bluster from Giles but not much content. Giles comment is confusing. Is he saying the council purchased equipment that was faulty (likely), or is he asking why equipment was purchased that was inadequate (less likely)? Loads of people and organisations purchase faulty equipment because at the time of purchase they were told the equipment was perfect. It's part of life, some things are faulty when they arrive. Ask anyone. Out of interest Giles, what would you have done differently as a LibDem? Don't just whinge, tell us your solution. Whingers without solutions - who needs them?[/p][/quote]WHY is Grange Road Bushey not included in the lights off at midnight ? Is there something special about this road. Dnorty
  • Score: 2

1:44pm Thu 20 Mar 14

TRT says...

Are you sure the council didn't get a reduced cost deal from the suppliers, Lucy Zodion? These were a new breed of "intelligent" part-night sensors designed to get round the problem of GMT/BST clock shifting. I believe Hertfordshire was the first council to try these out in the field as it were. Beta testers, to use the software term.

For those interested...
These sensors have no components which receive, say, radio clock data, and instead derive an idea of when they are approaching the spring and autumn equinox from observations of dawn and dusk (there should be exactly 12 hours between dawn and dusk at the equinox). Obviously dawn/dusk sensors are integral to a street-lamp controller anyway. These observations enable the microprocessor to set the date and time clock and thereby enable the units to be programmable for turn off/on times. The older, simpler, more reliable controllers simply measured the dawn to dusk time and ran a second timer at double the speed of the first in order to turn the lamp off at the midpoint of the dawn to dusk period from the day before. A third timer turned the lamp back on after 6 hours, provided it wasn't dawn already.
Obviously, we humans shift our clocks around so mid-night is not always 12 o'clock. The older method would suffer from a one hour deviation from expectation during daylight saving time.
Both methods, microprocessor and discrete component, would "fail-safe" to lights on dusk-dawn in the event of a power failure erasing the previous night's timing information.
Are you sure the council didn't get a reduced cost deal from the suppliers, Lucy Zodion? These were a new breed of "intelligent" part-night sensors designed to get round the problem of GMT/BST clock shifting. I believe Hertfordshire was the first council to try these out in the field as it were. Beta testers, to use the software term. For those interested... These sensors have no components which receive, say, radio clock data, and instead derive an idea of when they are approaching the spring and autumn equinox from observations of dawn and dusk (there should be exactly 12 hours between dawn and dusk at the equinox). Obviously dawn/dusk sensors are integral to a street-lamp controller anyway. These observations enable the microprocessor to set the date and time clock and thereby enable the units to be programmable for turn off/on times. The older, simpler, more reliable controllers simply measured the dawn to dusk time and ran a second timer at double the speed of the first in order to turn the lamp off at the midpoint of the dawn to dusk period from the day before. A third timer turned the lamp back on after 6 hours, provided it wasn't dawn already. Obviously, we humans shift our clocks around so mid-night is not always 12 o'clock. The older method would suffer from a one hour deviation from expectation during daylight saving time. Both methods, microprocessor and discrete component, would "fail-safe" to lights on dusk-dawn in the event of a power failure erasing the previous night's timing information. TRT
  • Score: 7

3:08pm Thu 20 Mar 14

Harry's Bar says...

Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford wrote:
Loads of bluster from Giles but not much content.

Giles comment is confusing.

Is he saying the council purchased equipment that was faulty (likely), or is he asking why equipment was purchased that was inadequate (less likely)?

Loads of people and organisations purchase faulty equipment because at the time of purchase they were told the equipment was perfect. It's part of life, some things are faulty when they arrive. Ask anyone.

Out of interest Giles, what would you have done differently as a LibDem? Don't just whinge, tell us your solution.

Whingers without solutions - who needs them?
"Whingers without solutions - who needs them?"....sounds like something from the Nuremberg Rally.
[quote][p][bold]Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford[/bold] wrote: Loads of bluster from Giles but not much content. Giles comment is confusing. Is he saying the council purchased equipment that was faulty (likely), or is he asking why equipment was purchased that was inadequate (less likely)? Loads of people and organisations purchase faulty equipment because at the time of purchase they were told the equipment was perfect. It's part of life, some things are faulty when they arrive. Ask anyone. Out of interest Giles, what would you have done differently as a LibDem? Don't just whinge, tell us your solution. Whingers without solutions - who needs them?[/p][/quote]"Whingers without solutions - who needs them?"....sounds like something from the Nuremberg Rally. Harry's Bar
  • Score: -6

10:17pm Thu 20 Mar 14

Cranius says...

Why has the council switched away from using the tried and tested Sangamo Q550 Solar Dial Time Switch??
Why has the council switched away from using the tried and tested Sangamo Q550 Solar Dial Time Switch?? Cranius
  • Score: 2

10:27am Fri 21 Mar 14

Mike Watford says...

Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford wrote:
Loads of bluster from Giles but not much content. Giles comment is confusing. Is he saying the council purchased equipment that was faulty (likely), or is he asking why equipment was purchased that was inadequate (less likely)? Loads of people and organisations purchase faulty equipment because at the time of purchase they were told the equipment was perfect. It's part of life, some things are faulty when they arrive. Ask anyone. Out of interest Giles, what would you have done differently as a LibDem? Don't just whinge, tell us your solution. Whingers without solutions - who needs them?
...oh, the irony, Phil ! :-)
[quote][p][bold]Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford[/bold] wrote: Loads of bluster from Giles but not much content. Giles comment is confusing. Is he saying the council purchased equipment that was faulty (likely), or is he asking why equipment was purchased that was inadequate (less likely)? Loads of people and organisations purchase faulty equipment because at the time of purchase they were told the equipment was perfect. It's part of life, some things are faulty when they arrive. Ask anyone. Out of interest Giles, what would you have done differently as a LibDem? Don't just whinge, tell us your solution. Whingers without solutions - who needs them?[/p][/quote]...oh, the irony, Phil ! :-) Mike Watford
  • Score: 1

10:36am Fri 21 Mar 14

ancientandageing says...

As far as I can see this cllr is doing his job.
UKIP may wan't to reflect on the reality & limits of being a minority within an administration, seeing as that is their short term target.
As far as I can see this cllr is doing his job. UKIP may wan't to reflect on the reality & limits of being a minority within an administration, seeing as that is their short term target. ancientandageing
  • Score: -2

10:39am Fri 21 Mar 14

Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford says...

Mike Watford wrote:
Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford wrote:
Loads of bluster from Giles but not much content. Giles comment is confusing. Is he saying the council purchased equipment that was faulty (likely), or is he asking why equipment was purchased that was inadequate (less likely)? Loads of people and organisations purchase faulty equipment because at the time of purchase they were told the equipment was perfect. It's part of life, some things are faulty when they arrive. Ask anyone. Out of interest Giles, what would you have done differently as a LibDem? Don't just whinge, tell us your solution. Whingers without solutions - who needs them?
...oh, the irony, Phil ! :-)
Giles just whinges.

Next time, elect someone that can improve things instead of just trying to find fault.

I'm no Conservative supporter but I can see that Giles is just being opportunistic here - typically LibDem.

I will be happy to debate Giles anytime on this issue but it won't happen because Giles is just pointing out a failure that is largely beyond the control of the council.

Opportunistic whinger? LibDem Giles Medhurst.

If you want to get away from this sort of politics you have to stop electing people like Giles.
[quote][p][bold]Mike Watford[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford[/bold] wrote: Loads of bluster from Giles but not much content. Giles comment is confusing. Is he saying the council purchased equipment that was faulty (likely), or is he asking why equipment was purchased that was inadequate (less likely)? Loads of people and organisations purchase faulty equipment because at the time of purchase they were told the equipment was perfect. It's part of life, some things are faulty when they arrive. Ask anyone. Out of interest Giles, what would you have done differently as a LibDem? Don't just whinge, tell us your solution. Whingers without solutions - who needs them?[/p][/quote]...oh, the irony, Phil ! :-)[/p][/quote]Giles just whinges. Next time, elect someone that can improve things instead of just trying to find fault. I'm no Conservative supporter but I can see that Giles is just being opportunistic here - typically LibDem. I will be happy to debate Giles anytime on this issue but it won't happen because Giles is just pointing out a failure that is largely beyond the control of the council. Opportunistic whinger? LibDem Giles Medhurst. If you want to get away from this sort of politics you have to stop electing people like Giles. Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford
  • Score: -6

10:53am Fri 21 Mar 14

TRT says...

Cranius wrote:
Why has the council switched away from using the tried and tested Sangamo Q550 Solar Dial Time Switch??
Because the Sangamo costs ten times as much as the SS9 and the infrastructure of the existing lighting wouldn't allow for a county wide deployment where entire roads can be controlled from a single pillar or roadside junction box. The Sangamo is fine for e.g. blocks of flats or new roads. The SS series are just simple plug-in replacements of a standard lighting module. Quick and cheap to install.
[quote][p][bold]Cranius[/bold] wrote: Why has the council switched away from using the tried and tested Sangamo Q550 Solar Dial Time Switch??[/p][/quote]Because the Sangamo costs ten times as much as the SS9 and the infrastructure of the existing lighting wouldn't allow for a county wide deployment where entire roads can be controlled from a single pillar or roadside junction box. The Sangamo is fine for e.g. blocks of flats or new roads. The SS series are just simple plug-in replacements of a standard lighting module. Quick and cheap to install. TRT
  • Score: 1

11:40am Fri 21 Mar 14

ancientandageing says...

Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford wrote:
Mike Watford wrote:
Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford wrote:
Loads of bluster from Giles but not much content. Giles comment is confusing. Is he saying the council purchased equipment that was faulty (likely), or is he asking why equipment was purchased that was inadequate (less likely)? Loads of people and organisations purchase faulty equipment because at the time of purchase they were told the equipment was perfect. It's part of life, some things are faulty when they arrive. Ask anyone. Out of interest Giles, what would you have done differently as a LibDem? Don't just whinge, tell us your solution. Whingers without solutions - who needs them?
...oh, the irony, Phil ! :-)
Giles just whinges.

Next time, elect someone that can improve things instead of just trying to find fault.

I'm no Conservative supporter but I can see that Giles is just being opportunistic here - typically LibDem.

I will be happy to debate Giles anytime on this issue but it won't happen because Giles is just pointing out a failure that is largely beyond the control of the council.

Opportunistic whinger? LibDem Giles Medhurst.

If you want to get away from this sort of politics you have to stop electing people like Giles.
Looking at the WO over recent weeks it looks like a UKIP are making a concerted local newspaper campaign, with the Moyoral candidate and his agent posting an awful lot on this website, they do seem to have come in for some flake and whilst a lot of people are intermittent posters, it does seem odd that some very passionate people seem to have dissapered along with a number of posts, I don’t know why this should be the case and I don’t know why not, either.
On the subject of UKIP, I found this which may explain why they are posting on so many stories and not concentrating on producing their own manifesto for the local election .
http://www.ukipdaily
.com/use-local-press
-media-campaigns-ele
ctoral-success/#.Uyw
gB_l_v1Y
In this they list ploys such as
“In my branch we have a system of key branch figures, including local Councillors, reviewing the local press (published on a Friday) each weekend and deciding in which areas to attack. Then the letters are written and we try to spread it around members so that the same name does not keep on appearing. Either they are given the topic and left to do it themselves, or a good copywriter does a draft, forwards it, the signatory may modify it to suit their style and then sends it off to the paper.”
The intention is to attack other parties to get them “on the Defensive” and to set the agenda, it is all about winding people up and then “wading back in” with UKIP’s answer in order to garner support.
Clearly within in this article is displayed a knowledge of the “dark arts” of manipulation and I would not be surprised if there was a wholesale campaign of this ilk going on on this website. It may be that they have a little group of people some posters complainants and researcher, not that dissimilar from the above example working on this, getting opposing posters chucked and getting posts removed and chucked of. Whilst Phil and David plough on with the task of getting the UKIP message across.
Now it may look to the outside word, or at least the 85% plus of people who don’t support UK in any way, that the Watford Observer is endorsing UKIP, although it is not. This will mean that some of the 85% will be swayed, especially if the local candidate is able to keep at bay any national criticesem of the UKIP party.
Having followed my local paper over the last few months this is exactly what appears to be happening and it may well be damaging to the Paper and to local democracy if this campaign continues unchallenged.
[quote][p][bold]Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mike Watford[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford[/bold] wrote: Loads of bluster from Giles but not much content. Giles comment is confusing. Is he saying the council purchased equipment that was faulty (likely), or is he asking why equipment was purchased that was inadequate (less likely)? Loads of people and organisations purchase faulty equipment because at the time of purchase they were told the equipment was perfect. It's part of life, some things are faulty when they arrive. Ask anyone. Out of interest Giles, what would you have done differently as a LibDem? Don't just whinge, tell us your solution. Whingers without solutions - who needs them?[/p][/quote]...oh, the irony, Phil ! :-)[/p][/quote]Giles just whinges. Next time, elect someone that can improve things instead of just trying to find fault. I'm no Conservative supporter but I can see that Giles is just being opportunistic here - typically LibDem. I will be happy to debate Giles anytime on this issue but it won't happen because Giles is just pointing out a failure that is largely beyond the control of the council. Opportunistic whinger? LibDem Giles Medhurst. If you want to get away from this sort of politics you have to stop electing people like Giles.[/p][/quote]Looking at the WO over recent weeks it looks like a UKIP are making a concerted local newspaper campaign, with the Moyoral candidate and his agent posting an awful lot on this website, they do seem to have come in for some flake and whilst a lot of people are intermittent posters, it does seem odd that some very passionate people seem to have dissapered along with a number of posts, I don’t know why this should be the case and I don’t know why not, either. On the subject of UKIP, I found this which may explain why they are posting on so many stories and not concentrating on producing their own manifesto for the local election . http://www.ukipdaily .com/use-local-press -media-campaigns-ele ctoral-success/#.Uyw gB_l_v1Y In this they list ploys such as “In my branch we have a system of key branch figures, including local Councillors, reviewing the local press (published on a Friday) each weekend and deciding in which areas to attack. Then the letters are written and we try to spread it around members so that the same name does not keep on appearing. Either they are given the topic and left to do it themselves, or a good copywriter does a draft, forwards it, the signatory may modify it to suit their style and then sends it off to the paper.” The intention is to attack other parties to get them “on the Defensive” and to set the agenda, it is all about winding people up and then “wading back in” with UKIP’s answer in order to garner support. Clearly within in this article is displayed a knowledge of the “dark arts” of manipulation and I would not be surprised if there was a wholesale campaign of this ilk going on on this website. It may be that they have a little group of people some posters complainants and researcher, not that dissimilar from the above example working on this, getting opposing posters chucked and getting posts removed and chucked of. Whilst Phil and David plough on with the task of getting the UKIP message across. Now it may look to the outside word, or at least the 85% plus of people who don’t support UK in any way, that the Watford Observer is endorsing UKIP, although it is not. This will mean that some of the 85% will be swayed, especially if the local candidate is able to keep at bay any national criticesem of the UKIP party. Having followed my local paper over the last few months this is exactly what appears to be happening and it may well be damaging to the Paper and to local democracy if this campaign continues unchallenged. ancientandageing
  • Score: 2

12:08pm Fri 21 Mar 14

yellow hornet says...

ancientandageing wrote:
Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford wrote:
Mike Watford wrote:
Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford wrote:
Loads of bluster from Giles but not much content. Giles comment is confusing. Is he saying the council purchased equipment that was faulty (likely), or is he asking why equipment was purchased that was inadequate (less likely)? Loads of people and organisations purchase faulty equipment because at the time of purchase they were told the equipment was perfect. It's part of life, some things are faulty when they arrive. Ask anyone. Out of interest Giles, what would you have done differently as a LibDem? Don't just whinge, tell us your solution. Whingers without solutions - who needs them?
...oh, the irony, Phil ! :-)
Giles just whinges.

Next time, elect someone that can improve things instead of just trying to find fault.

I'm no Conservative supporter but I can see that Giles is just being opportunistic here - typically LibDem.

I will be happy to debate Giles anytime on this issue but it won't happen because Giles is just pointing out a failure that is largely beyond the control of the council.

Opportunistic whinger? LibDem Giles Medhurst.

If you want to get away from this sort of politics you have to stop electing people like Giles.
Looking at the WO over recent weeks it looks like a UKIP are making a concerted local newspaper campaign, with the Moyoral candidate and his agent posting an awful lot on this website, they do seem to have come in for some flake and whilst a lot of people are intermittent posters, it does seem odd that some very passionate people seem to have dissapered along with a number of posts, I don’t know why this should be the case and I don’t know why not, either.
On the subject of UKIP, I found this which may explain why they are posting on so many stories and not concentrating on producing their own manifesto for the local election .
http://www.ukipdaily

.com/use-local-press

-media-campaigns-ele

ctoral-success/#.Uyw

gB_l_v1Y
In this they list ploys such as
“In my branch we have a system of key branch figures, including local Councillors, reviewing the local press (published on a Friday) each weekend and deciding in which areas to attack. Then the letters are written and we try to spread it around members so that the same name does not keep on appearing. Either they are given the topic and left to do it themselves, or a good copywriter does a draft, forwards it, the signatory may modify it to suit their style and then sends it off to the paper.”
The intention is to attack other parties to get them “on the Defensive” and to set the agenda, it is all about winding people up and then “wading back in” with UKIP’s answer in order to garner support.
Clearly within in this article is displayed a knowledge of the “dark arts” of manipulation and I would not be surprised if there was a wholesale campaign of this ilk going on on this website. It may be that they have a little group of people some posters complainants and researcher, not that dissimilar from the above example working on this, getting opposing posters chucked and getting posts removed and chucked of. Whilst Phil and David plough on with the task of getting the UKIP message across.
Now it may look to the outside word, or at least the 85% plus of people who don’t support UK in any way, that the Watford Observer is endorsing UKIP, although it is not. This will mean that some of the 85% will be swayed, especially if the local candidate is able to keep at bay any national criticesem of the UKIP party.
Having followed my local paper over the last few months this is exactly what appears to be happening and it may well be damaging to the Paper and to local democracy if this campaign continues unchallenged.
I understand the point you are making but it is very hard to take Mr Cox seriously.

On the one hand he clearly states he wants the hospital to remain where it is, on the other hand, he hasn’t ruled out moving the hospital nearer to Hemel or St Albans.

He clearly has had difficulty drawing up a local manifesto to stand on, as promised some time ago.

As for the Observer taking down over 320 comments in the past few days I am sure we can make our own minds up about where the complaint originated.
[quote][p][bold]ancientandageing[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mike Watford[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford[/bold] wrote: Loads of bluster from Giles but not much content. Giles comment is confusing. Is he saying the council purchased equipment that was faulty (likely), or is he asking why equipment was purchased that was inadequate (less likely)? Loads of people and organisations purchase faulty equipment because at the time of purchase they were told the equipment was perfect. It's part of life, some things are faulty when they arrive. Ask anyone. Out of interest Giles, what would you have done differently as a LibDem? Don't just whinge, tell us your solution. Whingers without solutions - who needs them?[/p][/quote]...oh, the irony, Phil ! :-)[/p][/quote]Giles just whinges. Next time, elect someone that can improve things instead of just trying to find fault. I'm no Conservative supporter but I can see that Giles is just being opportunistic here - typically LibDem. I will be happy to debate Giles anytime on this issue but it won't happen because Giles is just pointing out a failure that is largely beyond the control of the council. Opportunistic whinger? LibDem Giles Medhurst. If you want to get away from this sort of politics you have to stop electing people like Giles.[/p][/quote]Looking at the WO over recent weeks it looks like a UKIP are making a concerted local newspaper campaign, with the Moyoral candidate and his agent posting an awful lot on this website, they do seem to have come in for some flake and whilst a lot of people are intermittent posters, it does seem odd that some very passionate people seem to have dissapered along with a number of posts, I don’t know why this should be the case and I don’t know why not, either. On the subject of UKIP, I found this which may explain why they are posting on so many stories and not concentrating on producing their own manifesto for the local election . http://www.ukipdaily .com/use-local-press -media-campaigns-ele ctoral-success/#.Uyw gB_l_v1Y In this they list ploys such as “In my branch we have a system of key branch figures, including local Councillors, reviewing the local press (published on a Friday) each weekend and deciding in which areas to attack. Then the letters are written and we try to spread it around members so that the same name does not keep on appearing. Either they are given the topic and left to do it themselves, or a good copywriter does a draft, forwards it, the signatory may modify it to suit their style and then sends it off to the paper.” The intention is to attack other parties to get them “on the Defensive” and to set the agenda, it is all about winding people up and then “wading back in” with UKIP’s answer in order to garner support. Clearly within in this article is displayed a knowledge of the “dark arts” of manipulation and I would not be surprised if there was a wholesale campaign of this ilk going on on this website. It may be that they have a little group of people some posters complainants and researcher, not that dissimilar from the above example working on this, getting opposing posters chucked and getting posts removed and chucked of. Whilst Phil and David plough on with the task of getting the UKIP message across. Now it may look to the outside word, or at least the 85% plus of people who don’t support UK in any way, that the Watford Observer is endorsing UKIP, although it is not. This will mean that some of the 85% will be swayed, especially if the local candidate is able to keep at bay any national criticesem of the UKIP party. Having followed my local paper over the last few months this is exactly what appears to be happening and it may well be damaging to the Paper and to local democracy if this campaign continues unchallenged.[/p][/quote]I understand the point you are making but it is very hard to take Mr Cox seriously. On the one hand he clearly states he wants the hospital to remain where it is, on the other hand, he hasn’t ruled out moving the hospital nearer to Hemel or St Albans. He clearly has had difficulty drawing up a local manifesto to stand on, as promised some time ago. As for the Observer taking down over 320 comments in the past few days I am sure we can make our own minds up about where the complaint originated. yellow hornet
  • Score: 22

8:56pm Fri 21 Mar 14

ancientandageing says...

@yellow hornet Whilst yes I see your point on taking them seriously that does not mean that it is not appropriate to have very real and serious concerns about them.

As David Penn is now saying he will stand for election I really think it is worth examining a concern I have. As an ancient I have cause for concern that away from here on a different site he has been using racist dog whistles, that is on the UKIP Daily site his posting about Sikh exemption to wearing motorcycle helmet and reference to quotes of Enoch Powell he may well of been directly appealing to racists and saying “I am one of you”.

As an ancient I recall the 90’s 80’s and indeed 70’s in this time the BNP and before the NF used to put forward exactly the same argument and quote exactly the same Politician. This in itself does not I repeat not mean that David Penn is a racist, It could be totally unrelated but it does mean that it is a legitimate question to ask, is in no way defamatory to inquire and examine what has been said.

Furthermore It is worth noting that since the imposition of the helmet law car drivers have had to wear seatbelts as do the passengers and like this is equally as much of an infringement in ones rights to take stupid risks.
The focus on Sikhs whilst it has a certain logic is not even handed, it does not say that Sikhs should be made to wear tin hats when serving in the army, that should they chose to put their life on the line in defence of our freedom they must wear a tin hat. And in essence this is all the motorcycle exemption was, an extension of the same exemption they had in the armed services.

Now I am no fan of any religion but if this central belief is important to a religion and it is clearly the case that Sikh had such an exemption in the armed services it makes utter sense to have the bike exception, it is an article of faith and part of the person, in a sense that is fundamentally different to the desire to “l pop down a quiet country lane to the corner shop on a hot summer’s day” without a helmet on

Looking at the article David Penn appeals to our humanity and concern for a the actions of a misguided motorcyclist Fred Hill, by asserting that “This incensed Fred, not because he was racist” . Not only this but ny association he is also asserting that he David Penn is not racist either. To paraphrase an old friend of mine might say “the candidate doth protest…”
The reason being that David Penn has lived in or near Watford for the past forty years, as have I and that as such he is likely aware that the very same assertions he puts forward about the Sikh exception have been put forward time and time again ad nausea by the BNP and before them the NF.

Now it is the case that in 1973 the divisive MP Enoch Powell put across a case for not wearing helmets and in this case was not making a “river of Blood speech”, it is also the case that if you are stuck in the 1970’s you might hold it OK to quote Enoch Powell, but that was the seventies and you still had the Black and white minstrel show on the telly, now it is dubious ar best akin to quoting Mussolini on train times , unless of course you wish to appeal to racists.

Looking at the theme of the argument I again find it concerning it is that it is attacking the oxymoronic notion of “the liberal dictatorship” , I mean what is it, please tell me! As far as I can see it is just a notion and idea that UKIP have and use as an excuse to argue for a relentless rolling back of the state in line with some perverted Smithsonian ideal.

However how this sits with the idea of an office of common sense doesn't really compute as this is more state not less. (albeit by local gov proxy). Nor does it compute that if this were his concern he would not be able to find a less controversial example or cause than one championed by Enoch Powell, the British National Party and the National Front, I also fail to see that someone of David Penns abilities would fail to see this.
@yellow hornet Whilst yes I see your point on taking them seriously that does not mean that it is not appropriate to have very real and serious concerns about them. As David Penn is now saying he will stand for election I really think it is worth examining a concern I have. As an ancient I have cause for concern that away from here on a different site he has been using racist dog whistles, that is on the UKIP Daily site his posting about Sikh exemption to wearing motorcycle helmet and reference to quotes of Enoch Powell he may well of been directly appealing to racists and saying “I am one of you”. As an ancient I recall the 90’s 80’s and indeed 70’s in this time the BNP and before the NF used to put forward exactly the same argument and quote exactly the same Politician. This in itself does not I repeat not mean that David Penn is a racist, It could be totally unrelated but it does mean that it is a legitimate question to ask, is in no way defamatory to inquire and examine what has been said. Furthermore It is worth noting that since the imposition of the helmet law car drivers have had to wear seatbelts as do the passengers and like this is equally as much of an infringement in ones rights to take stupid risks. The focus on Sikhs whilst it has a certain logic is not even handed, it does not say that Sikhs should be made to wear tin hats when serving in the army, that should they chose to put their life on the line in defence of our freedom they must wear a tin hat. And in essence this is all the motorcycle exemption was, an extension of the same exemption they had in the armed services. Now I am no fan of any religion but if this central belief is important to a religion and it is clearly the case that Sikh had such an exemption in the armed services it makes utter sense to have the bike exception, it is an article of faith and part of the person, in a sense that is fundamentally different to the desire to “l pop down a quiet country lane to the corner shop on a hot summer’s day” without a helmet on Looking at the article David Penn appeals to our humanity and concern for a the actions of a misguided motorcyclist Fred Hill, by asserting that “This [the Sikh exception] incensed Fred, not because he was racist” . Not only this but ny association he is also asserting that he David Penn is not racist either. To paraphrase an old friend of mine might say “the candidate doth protest…” The reason being that David Penn has lived in or near Watford for the past forty years, as have I and that as such he is likely aware that the very same assertions he puts forward about the Sikh exception have been put forward time and time again ad nausea by the BNP and before them the NF. Now it is the case that in 1973 the divisive MP Enoch Powell put across a case for not wearing helmets and in this case was not making a “river of Blood speech”, it is also the case that if you are stuck in the 1970’s you might hold it OK to quote Enoch Powell, but that was the seventies and you still had the Black and white minstrel show on the telly, now it is dubious ar best akin to quoting Mussolini on train times , unless of course you wish to appeal to racists. Looking at the theme of the argument I again find it concerning it is that it is attacking the oxymoronic notion of “the liberal dictatorship” , I mean what is it, please tell me! As far as I can see it is just a notion and idea that UKIP have and use as an excuse to argue for a relentless rolling back of the state in line with some perverted Smithsonian ideal. However how this sits with the idea of an office of common sense doesn't really compute as this is more state not less. (albeit by local gov proxy). Nor does it compute that if this were his concern he would not be able to find a less controversial example or cause than one championed by Enoch Powell, the British National Party and the National Front, I also fail to see that someone of David Penns abilities would fail to see this. ancientandageing
  • Score: -7

4:59pm Sat 22 Mar 14

ancientandageing says...

Well it looks like the UKIP answer to concerns about a concerted campaign, in line with advice from the UKIP Dailey; and publication of remarks that can be argued to be racist Dog Whistles, by one of its candidates, is to orchestrate some negative feedback… Most illuminating
Well it looks like the UKIP answer to concerns about a concerted campaign, in line with advice from the UKIP Dailey; and publication of remarks that can be argued to be racist Dog Whistles, by one of its candidates, is to orchestrate some negative feedback… Most illuminating ancientandageing
  • Score: 7

5:22pm Sat 22 Mar 14

Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford says...

ancientperson

have you posted on this site before under a different name?

Your style and content seem very familiar.
ancientperson have you posted on this site before under a different name? Your style and content seem very familiar. Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford
  • Score: -8

5:22pm Sat 22 Mar 14

Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford says...

(Sorry for posting off-topic)
(Sorry for posting off-topic) Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford
  • Score: -7

7:18pm Sat 22 Mar 14

ancientandageing says...

ancientandageing wrote:
Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford wrote:
Mike Watford wrote:
Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford wrote:
Loads of bluster from Giles but not much content. Giles comment is confusing. Is he saying the council purchased equipment that was faulty (likely), or is he asking why equipment was purchased that was inadequate (less likely)? Loads of people and organisations purchase faulty equipment because at the time of purchase they were told the equipment was perfect. It's part of life, some things are faulty when they arrive. Ask anyone. Out of interest Giles, what would you have done differently as a LibDem? Don't just whinge, tell us your solution. Whingers without solutions - who needs them?
...oh, the irony, Phil ! :-)
Giles just whinges.

Next time, elect someone that can improve things instead of just trying to find fault.

I'm no Conservative supporter but I can see that Giles is just being opportunistic here - typically LibDem.

I will be happy to debate Giles anytime on this issue but it won't happen because Giles is just pointing out a failure that is largely beyond the control of the council.

Opportunistic whinger? LibDem Giles Medhurst.

If you want to get away from this sort of politics you have to stop electing people like Giles.
Looking at the WO over recent weeks it looks like a UKIP are making a concerted local newspaper campaign, with the Moyoral candidate and his agent posting an awful lot on this website, they do seem to have come in for some flake and whilst a lot of people are intermittent posters, it does seem odd that some very passionate people seem to have dissapered along with a number of posts, I don’t know why this should be the case and I don’t know why not, either.
On the subject of UKIP, I found this which may explain why they are posting on so many stories and not concentrating on producing their own manifesto for the local election .
http://www.ukipdaily

.com/use-local-press

-media-campaigns-ele

ctoral-success/#.Uyw

gB_l_v1Y
In this they list ploys such as
“In my branch we have a system of key branch figures, including local Councillors, reviewing the local press (published on a Friday) each weekend and deciding in which areas to attack. Then the letters are written and we try to spread it around members so that the same name does not keep on appearing. Either they are given the topic and left to do it themselves, or a good copywriter does a draft, forwards it, the signatory may modify it to suit their style and then sends it off to the paper.”
The intention is to attack other parties to get them “on the Defensive” and to set the agenda, it is all about winding people up and then “wading back in” with UKIP’s answer in order to garner support.
Clearly within in this article is displayed a knowledge of the “dark arts” of manipulation and I would not be surprised if there was a wholesale campaign of this ilk going on on this website. It may be that they have a little group of people some posters complainants and researcher, not that dissimilar from the above example working on this, getting opposing posters chucked and getting posts removed and chucked of. Whilst Phil and David plough on with the task of getting the UKIP message across.
Now it may look to the outside word, or at least the 85% plus of people who don’t support UK in any way, that the Watford Observer is endorsing UKIP, although it is not. This will mean that some of the 85% will be swayed, especially if the local candidate is able to keep at bay any national criticesem of the UKIP party.
Having followed my local paper over the last few months this is exactly what appears to be happening and it may well be damaging to the Paper and to local democracy if this campaign continues unchallenged.
Dear me Phil Cox, I thought you cold do better than that. Know this, the ancientandageing one can see through your attempt to put him or her on the defensive. Yes the old fossil has read the cut down version of your dark arts for local newspapers. Not that anyone really has to in order to see what you guys are up to.

But just in case it is in this please refer to the above post
[quote][p][bold]ancientandageing[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mike Watford[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford[/bold] wrote: Loads of bluster from Giles but not much content. Giles comment is confusing. Is he saying the council purchased equipment that was faulty (likely), or is he asking why equipment was purchased that was inadequate (less likely)? Loads of people and organisations purchase faulty equipment because at the time of purchase they were told the equipment was perfect. It's part of life, some things are faulty when they arrive. Ask anyone. Out of interest Giles, what would you have done differently as a LibDem? Don't just whinge, tell us your solution. Whingers without solutions - who needs them?[/p][/quote]...oh, the irony, Phil ! :-)[/p][/quote]Giles just whinges. Next time, elect someone that can improve things instead of just trying to find fault. I'm no Conservative supporter but I can see that Giles is just being opportunistic here - typically LibDem. I will be happy to debate Giles anytime on this issue but it won't happen because Giles is just pointing out a failure that is largely beyond the control of the council. Opportunistic whinger? LibDem Giles Medhurst. If you want to get away from this sort of politics you have to stop electing people like Giles.[/p][/quote]Looking at the WO over recent weeks it looks like a UKIP are making a concerted local newspaper campaign, with the Moyoral candidate and his agent posting an awful lot on this website, they do seem to have come in for some flake and whilst a lot of people are intermittent posters, it does seem odd that some very passionate people seem to have dissapered along with a number of posts, I don’t know why this should be the case and I don’t know why not, either. On the subject of UKIP, I found this which may explain why they are posting on so many stories and not concentrating on producing their own manifesto for the local election . http://www.ukipdaily .com/use-local-press -media-campaigns-ele ctoral-success/#.Uyw gB_l_v1Y In this they list ploys such as “In my branch we have a system of key branch figures, including local Councillors, reviewing the local press (published on a Friday) each weekend and deciding in which areas to attack. Then the letters are written and we try to spread it around members so that the same name does not keep on appearing. Either they are given the topic and left to do it themselves, or a good copywriter does a draft, forwards it, the signatory may modify it to suit their style and then sends it off to the paper.” The intention is to attack other parties to get them “on the Defensive” and to set the agenda, it is all about winding people up and then “wading back in” with UKIP’s answer in order to garner support. Clearly within in this article is displayed a knowledge of the “dark arts” of manipulation and I would not be surprised if there was a wholesale campaign of this ilk going on on this website. It may be that they have a little group of people some posters complainants and researcher, not that dissimilar from the above example working on this, getting opposing posters chucked and getting posts removed and chucked of. Whilst Phil and David plough on with the task of getting the UKIP message across. Now it may look to the outside word, or at least the 85% plus of people who don’t support UK in any way, that the Watford Observer is endorsing UKIP, although it is not. This will mean that some of the 85% will be swayed, especially if the local candidate is able to keep at bay any national criticesem of the UKIP party. Having followed my local paper over the last few months this is exactly what appears to be happening and it may well be damaging to the Paper and to local democracy if this campaign continues unchallenged.[/p][/quote]Dear me Phil Cox, I thought you cold do better than that. Know this, the ancientandageing one can see through your attempt to put him or her on the defensive. Yes the old fossil has read the cut down version of your dark arts for local newspapers. Not that anyone really has to in order to see what you guys are up to. But just in case it is in this please refer to the above post ancientandageing
  • Score: 7

9:19am Sun 23 Mar 14

ancientandageing says...

Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford wrote:
ancientperson

have you posted on this site before under a different name?

Your style and content seem very familiar.
In direct answer to you, whilst I am totally unaware of anyone raising the issue of UKIP racist dog whistles, but am aware of the subject being raised of UKIP manipulation of local media, I would suggest that it may well seem familiar to you because it is true, other people elsewhere are saying it, or indeed that little nagging voice in your head is saying it.
As to analysis of style: given that writing in different styles and having draft letters modified by others in to appear to be someone else put forward as a campaign tool: I would suggest that this focus on style may be from the UKIP world of deceit.
[quote][p][bold]Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford[/bold] wrote: ancientperson have you posted on this site before under a different name? Your style and content seem very familiar.[/p][/quote]In direct answer to you, whilst I am totally unaware of anyone raising the issue of UKIP racist dog whistles, but am aware of the subject being raised of UKIP manipulation of local media, I would suggest that it may well seem familiar to you because it is true, other people elsewhere are saying it, or indeed that little nagging voice in your head is saying it. As to analysis of style: given that writing in different styles and having draft letters modified by others in to appear to be someone else put forward as a campaign tool: I would suggest that this focus on style may be from the UKIP world of deceit. ancientandageing
  • Score: 7

3:42pm Sun 23 Mar 14

Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford says...

How about answering my very direct very simple question?

Have you posted on this site before under a different name?

Yes or No will do.
How about answering my very direct very simple question? Have you posted on this site before under a different name? Yes or No will do. Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford
  • Score: -11

4:45pm Sun 23 Mar 14

yellow hornet says...

You sound like the Spanish inquisition Mr Cox.

How long before you send the boys round?
You sound like the Spanish inquisition Mr Cox. How long before you send the boys round? yellow hornet
  • Score: 9

4:45pm Sun 23 Mar 14

ancientandageing says...

I think I am Ancientandandageing therefore I am Ancientandageing, as my old mate Rene would say.
Now as for what you think. Lets first clear something up; I am not even sure you exist, or indeed in what form you exist, so maybe we should resolve that first
It could be that you are a lone poster standing for Mayor making rash Shouldisems that sound like promises. Equally you could be typeing out of turn, or indeed you might not even exist at all So I ask is the idea of Phil Cox any more than a figment of my imagination, if not is it the case that Phil Cox is the dog or the Tail, the Puppet or the Puppeteer, so to speak
I think I am Ancientandandageing therefore I am Ancientandageing, as my old mate Rene would say. Now as for what you think. Lets first clear something up; I am not even sure you exist, or indeed in what form you exist, so maybe we should resolve that first It could be that you are a lone poster standing for Mayor making rash Shouldisems that sound like promises. Equally you could be typeing out of turn, or indeed you might not even exist at all So I ask is the idea of Phil Cox any more than a figment of my imagination, if not is it the case that Phil Cox is the dog or the Tail, the Puppet or the Puppeteer, so to speak ancientandageing
  • Score: 10

5:57pm Sun 23 Mar 14

ancientandageing says...

yellow hornet wrote:
You sound like the Spanish inquisition Mr Cox.

How long before you send the boys round?
Or is that "Fairies wearing Boots"?

LOL
[quote][p][bold]yellow hornet[/bold] wrote: You sound like the Spanish inquisition Mr Cox. How long before you send the boys round?[/p][/quote]Or is that "Fairies wearing Boots"? LOL ancientandageing
  • Score: 7

6:05pm Sun 23 Mar 14

ancientandageing says...

That was a Joke Phil, its just you seem Paranoid here and fairies wear boots is a track from the album "Paranoid" by Black Sabbath.
That was a Joke Phil, its just you seem Paranoid here and fairies wear boots is a track from the album "Paranoid" by Black Sabbath. ancientandageing
  • Score: 9

8:33am Mon 24 Mar 14

Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford says...

Co-incidence then that DKYN disappears and AA turns up straightaway.

I have heard a rumour DKYN was banned. Let's hope your comments do not lead you into further trouble now. Please try to keep on subject.
Co-incidence then that DKYN disappears and AA turns up straightaway. I have heard a rumour DKYN was banned. Let's hope your comments do not lead you into further trouble now. Please try to keep on subject. Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford
  • Score: -6

8:48am Mon 24 Mar 14

yellow hornet says...

Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford wrote:
Co-incidence then that DKYN disappears and AA turns up straightaway.

I have heard a rumour DKYN was banned. Let's hope your comments do not lead you into further trouble now. Please try to keep on subject.
Phil Cox now resorting to name calling in the playground.

How low can he go?
[quote][p][bold]Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford[/bold] wrote: Co-incidence then that DKYN disappears and AA turns up straightaway. I have heard a rumour DKYN was banned. Let's hope your comments do not lead you into further trouble now. Please try to keep on subject.[/p][/quote]Phil Cox now resorting to name calling in the playground. How low can he go? yellow hornet
  • Score: 7

8:56am Mon 24 Mar 14

yellow hornet says...

Phil Cox on the 6th of March at 10.37 you posted;

Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford says...

I also know what I would do differently as Mayor. Our manifesto should be on our website next week so please keep an eye out for it. It will explain what we believe needs to change to turn our council into the sort of council people will be proud of.

I suppose that statement was an aspiration and not a promise?

Two weeks late and counting. We cant have someone running the Council unable to keep to timescales.
Phil Cox on the 6th of March at 10.37 you posted; Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford says... I also know what I would do differently as Mayor. Our manifesto should be on our website next week so please keep an eye out for it. It will explain what we believe needs to change to turn our council into the sort of council people will be proud of. I suppose that statement was an aspiration and not a promise? Two weeks late and counting. We cant have someone running the Council unable to keep to timescales. yellow hornet
  • Score: 8

9:43am Mon 24 Mar 14

ancientandageing says...

Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford wrote:
Co-incidence then that DKYN disappears and AA turns up straightaway.

I have heard a rumour DKYN was banned. Let's hope your comments do not lead you into further trouble now. Please try to keep on subject.
Co-incidence that UKIP post what look like racist dog whistles and adapt the BNP slogan, and get all (well vast majority) of the ex BNP votes, well I will let you decide.

Phil Cox I have answered your Question at least five times but there goes, some people don't get it when you spell it out for them, never mind. What is it with DKYN I detect a bit of nervousness on your part, are you afraid or paranoid, or do you just want to manipulate the media in line with the UKIP daily strategy for media deception and manipulation?
[quote][p][bold]Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford[/bold] wrote: Co-incidence then that DKYN disappears and AA turns up straightaway. I have heard a rumour DKYN was banned. Let's hope your comments do not lead you into further trouble now. Please try to keep on subject.[/p][/quote]Co-incidence that UKIP post what look like racist dog whistles and adapt the BNP slogan, and get all (well vast majority) of the ex BNP votes, well I will let you decide. Phil Cox I have answered your Question at least five times but there goes, some people don't get it when you spell it out for them, never mind. What is it with DKYN I detect a bit of nervousness on your part, are you afraid or paranoid, or do you just want to manipulate the media in line with the UKIP daily strategy for media deception and manipulation? ancientandageing
  • Score: 7

9:55am Mon 24 Mar 14

ancientandageing says...

yellow hornet wrote:
Phil Cox on the 6th of March at 10.37 you posted;

Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford says...

I also know what I would do differently as Mayor. Our manifesto should be on our website next week so please keep an eye out for it. It will explain what we believe needs to change to turn our council into the sort of council people will be proud of.

I suppose that statement was an aspiration and not a promise?

Two weeks late and counting. We cant have someone running the Council unable to keep to timescales.
opps just bumping, to keep on topic
[quote][p][bold]yellow hornet[/bold] wrote: Phil Cox on the 6th of March at 10.37 you posted; Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford says... I also know what I would do differently as Mayor. Our manifesto should be on our website next week so please keep an eye out for it. It will explain what we believe needs to change to turn our council into the sort of council people will be proud of. I suppose that statement was an aspiration and not a promise? Two weeks late and counting. We cant have someone running the Council unable to keep to timescales.[/p][/quote]opps just bumping, to keep on topic ancientandageing
  • Score: 6

11:39am Mon 24 Mar 14

Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford says...

A few malicious posters (or the same one using different posting names) suggested that certain posts were withdrawn because of comments from UKIP posters on the WO.

This was clearly untrue, but then when has the truth ever been important to posting trolls?

I would just like to set the record straight.

Whilst I continue to post, a Labour poster, Dontknowhynot seems to have disappeared from the WO, as does Ramage, another Labour posting name.

I am sure others have spotted that already but as a Ukip supporter I always prefer the truth to false rumour and smear.

DKYN posted several times a day until AA showed up. Now there are no posts from DKYN but posts in the same vein from AA.

It's fairly clear to me what has happened and that has I hope now put the record straight.
A few malicious posters (or the same one using different posting names) suggested that certain posts were withdrawn because of comments from UKIP posters on the WO. This was clearly untrue, but then when has the truth ever been important to posting trolls? I would just like to set the record straight. Whilst I continue to post, a Labour poster, Dontknowhynot seems to have disappeared from the WO, as does Ramage, another Labour posting name. I am sure others have spotted that already but as a Ukip supporter I always prefer the truth to false rumour and smear. DKYN posted several times a day until AA showed up. Now there are no posts from DKYN but posts in the same vein from AA. It's fairly clear to me what has happened and that has I hope now put the record straight. Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford
  • Score: -6

11:44am Mon 24 Mar 14

yellow hornet says...

Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford wrote:
A few malicious posters (or the same one using different posting names) suggested that certain posts were withdrawn because of comments from UKIP posters on the WO.

This was clearly untrue, but then when has the truth ever been important to posting trolls?

I would just like to set the record straight.

Whilst I continue to post, a Labour poster, Dontknowhynot seems to have disappeared from the WO, as does Ramage, another Labour posting name.

I am sure others have spotted that already but as a Ukip supporter I always prefer the truth to false rumour and smear.

DKYN posted several times a day until AA showed up. Now there are no posts from DKYN but posts in the same vein from AA.

It's fairly clear to me what has happened and that has I hope now put the record straight.
You seem to be in the playground again Phil.

What childish behaviour you are exhibiting Phil.
[quote][p][bold]Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford[/bold] wrote: A few malicious posters (or the same one using different posting names) suggested that certain posts were withdrawn because of comments from UKIP posters on the WO. This was clearly untrue, but then when has the truth ever been important to posting trolls? I would just like to set the record straight. Whilst I continue to post, a Labour poster, Dontknowhynot seems to have disappeared from the WO, as does Ramage, another Labour posting name. I am sure others have spotted that already but as a Ukip supporter I always prefer the truth to false rumour and smear. DKYN posted several times a day until AA showed up. Now there are no posts from DKYN but posts in the same vein from AA. It's fairly clear to me what has happened and that has I hope now put the record straight.[/p][/quote]You seem to be in the playground again Phil. What childish behaviour you are exhibiting Phil. yellow hornet
  • Score: 8

11:54am Mon 24 Mar 14

ancientandageing says...

yellow hornet wrote:
Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford wrote:
A few malicious posters (or the same one using different posting names) suggested that certain posts were withdrawn because of comments from UKIP posters on the WO.

This was clearly untrue, but then when has the truth ever been important to posting trolls?

I would just like to set the record straight.

Whilst I continue to post, a Labour poster, Dontknowhynot seems to have disappeared from the WO, as does Ramage, another Labour posting name.

I am sure others have spotted that already but as a Ukip supporter I always prefer the truth to false rumour and smear.

DKYN posted several times a day until AA showed up. Now there are no posts from DKYN but posts in the same vein from AA.

It's fairly clear to me what has happened and that has I hope now put the record straight.
You seem to be in the playground again Phil.

What childish behaviour you are exhibiting Phil.
Oh be careful or He might tell teacher on you
[quote][p][bold]yellow hornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford[/bold] wrote: A few malicious posters (or the same one using different posting names) suggested that certain posts were withdrawn because of comments from UKIP posters on the WO. This was clearly untrue, but then when has the truth ever been important to posting trolls? I would just like to set the record straight. Whilst I continue to post, a Labour poster, Dontknowhynot seems to have disappeared from the WO, as does Ramage, another Labour posting name. I am sure others have spotted that already but as a Ukip supporter I always prefer the truth to false rumour and smear. DKYN posted several times a day until AA showed up. Now there are no posts from DKYN but posts in the same vein from AA. It's fairly clear to me what has happened and that has I hope now put the record straight.[/p][/quote]You seem to be in the playground again Phil. What childish behaviour you are exhibiting Phil.[/p][/quote]Oh be careful or He might tell teacher on you ancientandageing
  • Score: 6

12:02pm Mon 24 Mar 14

Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford says...

Not really, just putting the lies told about me to bed.
Not really, just putting the lies told about me to bed. Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford
  • Score: -8

12:23pm Mon 24 Mar 14

yellow hornet says...

Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford wrote:
Not really, just putting the lies told about me to bed.
Childish doesn't come close to describing your comments.

Do you really think you have what it takes to be Mayor with such childlike comments?
[quote][p][bold]Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford[/bold] wrote: Not really, just putting the lies told about me to bed.[/p][/quote]Childish doesn't come close to describing your comments. Do you really think you have what it takes to be Mayor with such childlike comments? yellow hornet
  • Score: 6

12:26pm Mon 24 Mar 14

ancientandageing says...

Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford wrote:
Not really, just putting the lies told about me to bed.
I think the only direct lie that you, no sorry David Penn accused DKYN of was this

"1) UKIP have promised a manifesto and not delivered it

Phil Cox never promised a manifesto by a given date, so the above is a LIE. What he said here on this site was that the manifesto would PROBABLY be up last week. Guess what though. We all have jobs to do and finding the time to get us all together means that sometimes things do not run smoothly. Our webmaster has other commitments. We are real people who have to earn our living, see to our families just like everyone else. So we are not perfect and timings are not exact, but it and other material will all be available well before the election."

Not so much a lie as a misunderstanding is it I mean (many people would have read it as a promise including both DKYN and Ancientandageing) Should in most peoples book id a promise a weak promise maybe but a promise none the less, If mistaking "should" for a promise makes Someone a liar....
Semantic slithering does your credibility no good at all really
[quote][p][bold]Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford[/bold] wrote: Not really, just putting the lies told about me to bed.[/p][/quote]I think the only direct lie that you, no sorry David Penn accused DKYN of was this "1) UKIP have promised a manifesto and not delivered it Phil Cox never promised a manifesto by a given date, so the above is a LIE. What he said here on this site was that the manifesto would PROBABLY be up last week. Guess what though. We all have jobs to do and finding the time to get us all together means that sometimes things do not run smoothly. Our webmaster has other commitments. We are real people who have to earn our living, see to our families just like everyone else. So we are not perfect and timings are not exact, but it and other material will all be available well before the election." Not so much a lie as a misunderstanding is it I mean (many people would have read it as a promise including both DKYN and Ancientandageing) Should in most peoples book id a promise a weak promise maybe but a promise none the less, If mistaking "should" for a promise makes Someone a liar.... Semantic slithering does your credibility no good at all really ancientandageing
  • Score: 3

12:37pm Mon 24 Mar 14

Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford says...

yellow hornet wrote:
Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford wrote:
Not really, just putting the lies told about me to bed.
Childish doesn't come close to describing your comments.

Do you really think you have what it takes to be Mayor with such childlike comments?
It is important to expose lies and deceits.
[quote][p][bold]yellow hornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford[/bold] wrote: Not really, just putting the lies told about me to bed.[/p][/quote]Childish doesn't come close to describing your comments. Do you really think you have what it takes to be Mayor with such childlike comments?[/p][/quote]It is important to expose lies and deceits. Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford
  • Score: -10

1:14pm Mon 24 Mar 14

yellow hornet says...

Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford wrote:
yellow hornet wrote:
Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford wrote:
Not really, just putting the lies told about me to bed.
Childish doesn't come close to describing your comments.

Do you really think you have what it takes to be Mayor with such childlike comments?
It is important to expose lies and deceits.
Yes I agree it is important to expose lies and deceit.

Not sure your posts fall into that category. More playground nonsense, that is not at all suitable for a serious Mayoral candidate to be involved in.

Why not concentrate on your manifesto, sending out literature and knocking on doors rather than the puerile comments you resort to on these pages.
[quote][p][bold]Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]yellow hornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford[/bold] wrote: Not really, just putting the lies told about me to bed.[/p][/quote]Childish doesn't come close to describing your comments. Do you really think you have what it takes to be Mayor with such childlike comments?[/p][/quote]It is important to expose lies and deceits.[/p][/quote]Yes I agree it is important to expose lies and deceit. Not sure your posts fall into that category. More playground nonsense, that is not at all suitable for a serious Mayoral candidate to be involved in. Why not concentrate on your manifesto, sending out literature and knocking on doors rather than the puerile comments you resort to on these pages. yellow hornet
  • Score: 10

4:13pm Mon 24 Mar 14

ancientandageing says...

yellow hornet wrote:
Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford wrote:
yellow hornet wrote:
Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford wrote:
Not really, just putting the lies told about me to bed.
Childish doesn't come close to describing your comments.

Do you really think you have what it takes to be Mayor with such childlike comments?
It is important to expose lies and deceits.
Yes I agree it is important to expose lies and deceit.

Not sure your posts fall into that category. More playground nonsense, that is not at all suitable for a serious Mayoral candidate to be involved in.

Why not concentrate on your manifesto, sending out literature and knocking on doors rather than the puerile comments you resort to on these pages.
Deceit like this:-
"Then the letters are written and we try to spread it around members so that the same name does not keep on appearing. Either they are given the topic and left to do it themselves, or a good copywriter does a draft, forwards it, the signatory may modify it to suit their style and then sends it off to the paper."
perpetrated by UKIP as a model for others to follow in.
http://www.ukipdaily
.com/use-local-press
-media-campaigns-ele
ctoral-success/#.UzB
YD_l_v1Y

But then if you set the bar low enough for others you can say that a "LIE" is simply making the mistake of assuming honesty in intent a a degree in competence means that when a Mayoral candidate says should it is akin to a promise.
[quote][p][bold]yellow hornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]yellow hornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford[/bold] wrote: Not really, just putting the lies told about me to bed.[/p][/quote]Childish doesn't come close to describing your comments. Do you really think you have what it takes to be Mayor with such childlike comments?[/p][/quote]It is important to expose lies and deceits.[/p][/quote]Yes I agree it is important to expose lies and deceit. Not sure your posts fall into that category. More playground nonsense, that is not at all suitable for a serious Mayoral candidate to be involved in. Why not concentrate on your manifesto, sending out literature and knocking on doors rather than the puerile comments you resort to on these pages.[/p][/quote]Deceit like this:- "Then the letters are written and we try to spread it around members so that the same name does not keep on appearing. Either they are given the topic and left to do it themselves, or a good copywriter does a draft, forwards it, the signatory may modify it to suit their style and then sends it off to the paper." perpetrated by UKIP as a model for others to follow in. http://www.ukipdaily .com/use-local-press -media-campaigns-ele ctoral-success/#.UzB YD_l_v1Y But then if you set the bar low enough for others you can say that a "LIE" is simply making the mistake of assuming honesty in intent a a degree in competence means that when a Mayoral candidate says should it is akin to a promise. ancientandageing
  • Score: 6

7:54pm Mon 24 Mar 14

ancientandageing says...

Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford wrote:
A few malicious posters (or the same one using different posting names) suggested that certain posts were withdrawn because of comments from UKIP posters on the WO.

This was clearly untrue, but then when has the truth ever been important to posting trolls?

I would just like to set the record straight.

Whilst I continue to post, a Labour poster, Dontknowhynot seems to have disappeared from the WO, as does Ramage, another Labour posting name.

I am sure others have spotted that already but as a Ukip supporter I always prefer the truth to false rumour and smear.

DKYN posted several times a day until AA showed up. Now there are no posts from DKYN but posts in the same vein from AA.

It's fairly clear to me what has happened and that has I hope now put the record straight.
Begging your pardon but Ramage 1996 has not disappeared, oh dear for a Mayoral Candidate you don't seem to have your finger on the Pulse.

Maybe all your complaints (UKIP members) didn;t achieve their objective, must try harder!
[quote][p][bold]Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford[/bold] wrote: A few malicious posters (or the same one using different posting names) suggested that certain posts were withdrawn because of comments from UKIP posters on the WO. This was clearly untrue, but then when has the truth ever been important to posting trolls? I would just like to set the record straight. Whilst I continue to post, a Labour poster, Dontknowhynot seems to have disappeared from the WO, as does Ramage, another Labour posting name. I am sure others have spotted that already but as a Ukip supporter I always prefer the truth to false rumour and smear. DKYN posted several times a day until AA showed up. Now there are no posts from DKYN but posts in the same vein from AA. It's fairly clear to me what has happened and that has I hope now put the record straight.[/p][/quote]Begging your pardon but Ramage 1996 has not disappeared, oh dear for a Mayoral Candidate you don't seem to have your finger on the Pulse. Maybe all your complaints (UKIP members) didn;t achieve their objective, must try harder! ancientandageing
  • Score: 8

9:13am Tue 25 Mar 14

ancientandageing says...

ancientandageing wrote:
yellow hornet wrote:
Phil Cox on the 6th of March at 10.37 you posted;

Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford says...

I also know what I would do differently as Mayor. Our manifesto should be on our website next week so please keep an eye out for it. It will explain what we believe needs to change to turn our council into the sort of council people will be proud of.

I suppose that statement was an aspiration and not a promise?

Two weeks late and counting. We cant have someone running the Council unable to keep to timescales.
opps just bumping, to keep on topic
So Phil Cox
If you say as the Mayoral candidate say the Manifesto (your Manefesto, under your control) SHOULD be on the website, just what expectation should people have?
[quote][p][bold]ancientandageing[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]yellow hornet[/bold] wrote: Phil Cox on the 6th of March at 10.37 you posted; Phil Cox - UKIP Mayoral candidate for Watford says... I also know what I would do differently as Mayor. Our manifesto should be on our website next week so please keep an eye out for it. It will explain what we believe needs to change to turn our council into the sort of council people will be proud of. I suppose that statement was an aspiration and not a promise? Two weeks late and counting. We cant have someone running the Council unable to keep to timescales.[/p][/quote]opps just bumping, to keep on topic[/p][/quote]So Phil Cox If you say as the Mayoral candidate say the Manifesto (your Manefesto, under your control) SHOULD be on the website, just what expectation should people have? ancientandageing
  • Score: 10

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree