The Blame Game

It is standard Labour practice in my home area to blame the Conservative administration of the local council for unpopular decisions that have been enforced by Labour Ministers.

Indeed, it was a useful exercise for observers to note that, almost every time something unpopular was announced here, there was a government minister involved somewhere in the process, dictating policy and holding the purse strings. The clues were there for anyone who was paying close attention...

It therefore comes as no surprise to me that the same happens elsewhere, such as this latest revelation by Simon Emmett regarding Labour-run Greenwich Council. They denied they were going to make (substantial!) cuts, knowing full well they planned to do so, and in the likelihood of having a change of national government (presumed to be Conservative) so they could shift the blame to them.

That is the reverse of much of what happens here, where we have some £28 million taken off our grant every year via two wangles (one of over £22 million, then the infamous "floor damping" of over £5 million) yet Labour councillors claim we are being treated well by their (now defunct) government.

They do that using percentage increases rather than the actual amounts the government's own formula determines is needed, in order to make it look like we are getting increases "in real terms", and by double-counting capital investment (for which we bid via proper Business Cases) as revenue (running costs) as well. I have even witnessed that same capital money being counted three times by Labour's finance spokesman at one Budget Council meeting a couple of years ago.

Now I've written all that, I can expect one of the occasional Labour-supporting trolls to appear and try to suggest that all parties do the same (it's their standard method that you might have read before, here and elsewhere, when they realise they can't sensibly deny something).

However, I keep very good records in all directions, so can back up my claims both ways round (Labour's dishonesty, my side's honesty) if necessary, though the material can be lengthy so I'd have to seek out manageable extracts for here.

Usually it works best in "instant rebuttal" in teh Council Chamber (where I hope to be again one day) where I can immediately prove or disprove something, much to the Labour Group's annoyance. Having just about everything on my portable computer, with me in the meeting, meant I could quote verbatim and even show documents to others as proof.

I've killed off "manufactured" anti-Conservative news stories that way, before they were able to be published, where it needed to be done. Subsequent retraction in the local press would have been too late: the damage would already have been done. This annoyed the Labour Group even more.

It was always a very satisfying aspect of what I did, and could never be refuted, though they tried occasionally. I look forward to the prospect of doing so again.

Meanwhile, I have been known to brief our main "attack dogs" just before a Council meeting starts, with bang up-to-date information on something that might well arise during the evening, before taking my seat in the public gallery. Twice I have thus been able to defuse opposition tales based on falsehoods, during the past two years, by proxy.

It is the only way: confront Labour with the truth and show them up publicly. It won't stop them but it has an effect on their credibility. I know very well the part I have played in ensuring the Labour presence on the Council has been declining ever since I was first elected.

It was by exposing irrefutable truths (even though the local media wasn't interested in reporting them, but there are other ways of letting the public know!) that several former Labour councillors lost vote share in 2003 and 2007, and at least two of those whom I could name (but shan't, despite a strong temptation) almost certainly lost their seats as a result of what I did, even before I had the portable computer in the Chamber.

Thus the truth will win out, eventually, and shifting one's own blame or other dishonest tactics will have only short-term success, if even that. Breaking the habits of a (political) lifetime, though, well that'll be difficult for Labour who have been so reliant on lies and spin that I don't think they know or could handle any other way.

Perhaps that's why they have been dying throughout the current millennium: they are just so a party of yesterday, and the rest of us have now moved on, demanding higher standards than Labour can ever deliver.

UPDATE on 17 May: it seems that the Liberal Democrats' Paddy Ashdown isn't above flinging blame around either...