Lambeth Councillor resigns after arrest over porn allegations

[co-op]

I can't find anything in these leaflets that alleges that "Lambeth Labour are all paedophiles".

Well obviously it's not a direct allegation, but then what's the relevance of the arrest at all? Why mention it? Let alone by quoting these stupid tabloid headlines and chucking in these stupid graphics of a copper.

If it was for some kind of systemic abuse of council office then you could possibly claim that Labour should have known something or whatever, but for alleged sexual offences - it's utterly non-relevant.

It's deeply grubby. But as I said before, Lambeth Labour party are no better.

The back page makes the valid point that the Labour candidate claims to "live locally" but in fact lives in fashionable Abbeville Road, Clapham where she was a councillor for many years but got booted out in May - in contrast with the Lib Dem candidate who has lived in Tulse Hill for 50 years, and is an active local campaigner and community activist. Tulse Hill shouldn't be seen as a shoe-in for rejected Labour councillors looking for a safe berth.

That's a perfectly fair point; councillors *ought* to live in their wards, it makes much more sense all round. You could call it a personal attack but I think it's a highly valid point; in a borough with any kind of thoughtful political debate Labour ought to answer the point and say why they've selected a candidate from outside the ward - there can be perfectly valid reasons.

Although the LDs might want to be cautious about trying to make capital out of playing the "who's the poshest party in Lambeth" card, they might find it's them (just judging by the addresses of the LD candidates in my ward in May).

 

[teuchter]

What other candidates are standing other than LD/Lab/Con?

 

[ericjarvis]

I can't find anything in these leaflets that alleges that "Lambeth Labour are all paedophiles".

This Lib Dem material, while rather tabloid in tone, seems to me fairly innocuous, given that it is simply quoting what has already been in local papers, the Evening Standard and on the BBC web site. The back page makes the valid point that the Labour candidate claims to "live locally" but in fact lives in fashionable Abbeville Road, Clapham where she was a councillor for many years but got booted out in May - in contrast with the Lib Dem candidate who has lived in Tulse Hill for 50 years, and is an active local campaigner and community activist. Tulse Hill shouldn't be seen as a shoe-in for rejected Labour councillors looking for a safe berth.

Oh look. First post with a bland pseudonym, and it's yet another "I'm not actually smearing Labour but the Labour/Party candidate this that or the other and the Lib Dems are wonderful and the sun shines out of their candidate's arse." Just fuck off. It's not only puerile, juvenile, and dishonest. It's not even subtle.

 

[Tricky Skills]

Blimey. You really have got a hang up over this supposed LibDem love in. Get over it, man.

 

[co-op]

Blimey. You really have got a hang up over this supposed LibDem love in. Get over it, man.

TBF observer111 comes across as a just-registered Lib-Dem supporter/member/candidate/whatever

 

[brix]

TBF observer111 comes across as a just-registered Lib-Dem supporter/member/candidate/whatever

Yep, this ^^^

 

[slcr]

I've just politely handed back my leaflet to the two Lib Dem people who are right now leafleting my block, said that I understood they weren't the ones who wrote it, but hoped they would pass back up the party the fact that I thought it was pretty sickening that they were writing such sensationalist stuff about someone against whom nothing had yet been proved.

The response was an instant earful of rude/angry "oh well they wrote awful stuff about us during the election" and "it's only repeating what's in the papers, isn't it" pretty much shouted.

Pretty low calibre of local activists I think.

Blergh. I don't get why parties have to stoop to this.

[Disclosure: non-party political.]

 

[slcr]

Exactly. These are the people we have to choose from to represent us politically at council level. This kind of playground campaigning is corrosive and displays a lack of respect for the local electorate.

^^ put it much better than I just did

 

[OpalFruit]

Things are never that simple.

The police thought they were dealing with abuse in the Spanner case but it was just "deviant" consenting sexuality. They still pursued it.

The definition of child porn in law means u could get done even if the images were totally fabricated or the person was over the age of consent but looked younger.

Sexuality is a prime area for Moral Panics and hasty legislation.

Well I agree with all of that. Pursuit of Spanner case was a civil liberties scandal.

 

[ellmann164]

Well I agree with all of that. Pursuit of Spanner case was a civil liberties scandal.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

It was a scandal but not in the way you're implying.

The principles aimed at in the original trial judgements of

(a) not introducing a complete blanket defence of consent for all acts of sadomasochism regardless of the level of injury, cruelty and harm involved

(b) retaining society's distinctions between sex and violence and the right to make such distinctions and

(c) reaffirming the right of the state in civil and criminal law to protect people from themselves as well as from others in certain circumstances

were all good law, but the trial judges made mistakes in their directions to the jury. The appeal judges then compounded those mistakes, first by introducing inconsistencies that appeared to criminalise all consensual acts of sadomasochism (such as whipping and insertion-related sex), then by laying down dodgy moral judgements on homosexuality and S&M that seemed to link the two together among other things. That's where the scandal lies.

It's those inconsistencies and moral judgements that the defendants keep going to Europe over.

Difficult cases make bad law and Spanner was a really difficult case. The people involved were truly perverted and the acts involved truly horrific, so much so that they have never been fully documented outside of the original court papers. The courts didnt understand it and didnt want to understand. It also tainted homosexuality in the public's mind in exactly the same way as does every school or children's home sex abuse scandal that hits the papers.

No public figure in their right mind would want to be associated with Spanner in any shape or form, whether in terms of the acts themselves or as part of a defence of consent. Every single politician who has ever been linked with anything approaching Spanner type activity has come off the worst for it.

If you want to help Toren Smith it would be a good idea to drop the subject of Spanner. Permanently. It doesn't do him any favours and no one has produced any evidence of S&M practices in this this case.

Apologies for being heavy-handed about this but when the case goes to trial I think you'll understand.

 

[gaijingirl]

We had the lib-dems back again yesterday. I told him what I thought of their flyer. Obviously I don't know what the truth is regarding Toren Smith but I did not approve of that flyer at all and I don't think I'll be voting for them now. He said they only made it because lots of people had been asking what had happened with Toren Smith. Poor excuse really.

 

[ellmann164]

Missing the point; we've come to expect our newspapers to be full of shit, but it's depressing when the major political parties join in with this.

What is the point of this mud-slinging? To suggest that Lambeth Labour are all paedophiles? It's absurd; and hasn't even been proved in the case of Toren Smith.

Mind you, Lambeth Labour party are so happy to play this game themselves that they deserve all the retaliation they get, but it's deeply depressing trying to work out who to vote for in Lambeth now.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yes Lambeth Labour have done their fair share of nasty smear campaigns, including during the recent elections with a certain ex-councillor's help, but you should still consider voting for them here.

What Steve Reed did to Toren Smith was ruthless and unpleasant but it beat the alternative. The alternative would have been to have TS continue on the front bench for the next couple of years protesting his innocence until either the start or the outcome of the trial one way or the other and he was either affirmed as innocent or found guilty. No one would have had the stomach for that and the stink would eventually have put the entire administration at risk.

I'm not Steve Reed's biggest fan (being one of the many victims of his world class opportunistic streak) but he showed good decisive leadership here and the people who resent him now will thank him later as events unfold.

Don't vote LibDem for God's sake. You appear to have forgotten all those dodgy councillors and council candidates they had during the LibCon coalition of 2002-2006 that either refused to serve their constituents for years or got into embarrassing messes in their private life but still refused to stand down because they wanted to keep the LibCon coalition in power. I give Steve Reed credit for sparing the people of Lambeth (and Toren Smith himself) that spectacle.

Ruth Ling's harmless enough. If her biggest crime is that she's a poncey middle class Abbeville Road arriviste out of place in a good solid working class seat like Tulse Hill then I can live with that. Other than that you can always vote Green.

 

[co-op]

Don't vote LibDem for God's sake.

Well I won't, not least because I don't live in the ward...

But wouldn't anyway.

Other than that you can always vote Green.

That's what I did in May but they didn't get a seat.

But the Greens got 2000+ votes in Tulse Hill in May so maybe they can win this ward?

 

[Rushy]

Well I won't, not least because I don't live in the ward...

But wouldn't anyway.



That's what I did in May but they didn't get a seat.

But the Greens got 2000+ votes in Tulse Hill in May so maybe they can win this ward?

Greens are going to have to shout a little bit louder if they want to turn 2000 into a winning number. Lab and Libs had 5,000 and 10,000ish.

I imagine the turnout will be pretty low though - so if they motivate their supporters it might be possible? I haven't heard anything from them.

 

[gaijingirl]

We had a letter through from the Greens outlining their policies. Just the one - they said to save paper, which is obviously fair enough. Libdem drop TONS of stuff through and knocked at the door 3 times. Not heard anything from Labour.

 

[co-op]

Greens are going to have to shout a little bit louder if they want to turn 2000 into a winning number. Lab and Libs had 5,000 and 10,000ish.
.

I'd agree it's a longish shot for the greens but in the last normal year (ie when no general election) - ie 2006, Labour got about 1500 per councillor which gave them a comfortabe win and the Lib-Dems got just 372, 432 and 582 which put them well behind the greens 718 (just one candidate stood).

Given that the labour vote will be hard to get out since they've got the council safely won and - I guess - the lib-dems will struggle a little with the whole junior-tory thing that Clegg's got them into, the Greens do have a shout here.

 

[teuchter]

Got a labour flyer yesterday - it included a bit that was saying about how people have been offended/outraged by the Lib-Dem flyers. There was a quote from a "local political commentator" saying how it was despicable and disgusting or words to that effect.

 

[Tricky Skills]

Got a labour flyer yesterday - it included a bit that was saying about how people have been offended/outraged by the Lib-Dem flyers. There was a quote from a "local political commentator" saying how it was despicable and disgusting or words to that effect.

Yep - the LibDem campaign was disgusting. Nu Labour are hardly squeaky clean when it comes to mudslinging though.

 

[gaijingirl]

Got the same flyer today - good work Tricky Skills!

 

[Rushy]

Copy of response to complaint about campaigning in Tulse Hill.

****************

Thank you very much for your note.

We have had a large number of people ask us what the background to Toren Smith's resignation was, particularly since the Leader of the Council distributed a quite opaque letter on this subject. It seemed reasonable to set the record straight, and, in the circumstances, simply to reprint what local newspapers have reported.

Residents I have spoken to do indeed find it shameful that this episode has occurred, and particularly that Toren Smith should have resigned so shortly after his election in May. He has not offered any explanation of his decision to residents.

Now, the Labour Party has selected a candidate from outside the area, whom they hope to parachute into the seat without significant challenge. The flyer concerned informs residents about the background to the by-election (about which, as I say, many have asked) and, importantly, makes very clear what the choice is - either a Labour candidate, who has no prior connection to the area and described herself only a few weeks ago as a "Clapham Commoner", or an excellent local candidate in Terry Curtis - whose record of action in the area is longstanding and beyond reproach.

I do hope that whatever our disagreements over how best to handle the sensitive subject of Toren Smith's resignation, you will feel able to support the local candidate in this election so that Tulse Hill has a strong voice on Lambeth Council in the coming years.

Yours sincerely,

Ashley Lumsden
Agent, Tulse Hill By-election

Printed, published and promoted by A Lumsden oh behalf of T Curtis (Liberal Democrats) both at Unit 6 Hermes House, 59 Josephine Avenue, London SW2 2JZ

From:
Date: 14 June 2010 11:23
Subject: Standard of Campaigning in Tulse Hill Ward, Brixton
To: office@sarahludfordmep.org.uk, terrycurtis@lambethlibdems.org.uk, chris@chrisnicholson.org.uk, simon@simonhughes.org.uk

I was fairly ashamed for the Liberal Democrats when I received the A3 size “Labour Councillor Quits in Shame” flyer through the door yesterday. As well as being unproven, the matter is irrelevant to the campaign.

Terry Curtis would have received my support on the basis that he is genuinely local and, I would have thought, best able to represent my views. However, I believe this mailing displays a real lack of judgement and poor understanding of the local residents. I do not wish to be associated with such a spiteful campaign or candidate.

Positive and constructive campaigning on genuine issues would be welcome here. Please take a look at the reaction from other local voters on this discussion board since the 13th when the flyer was sent out.

http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=10761883&posted=1#post10761883

 

[Rushy]

Copy of response to complaint about campaigning in Tulse Hill.

****************

Thank you very much for your note.

We have had a large number of people ask us what the background to Toren Smith's resignation was, particularly since the Leader of the Council distributed a quite opaque letter on this subject. It seemed reasonable to set the record straight, and, in the circumstances, simply to reprint what local newspapers have reported.

Residents I have spoken to do indeed find it shameful that this episode has occurred, and particularly that Toren Smith should have resigned so shortly after his election in May. He has not offered any explanation of his decision to residents.

Now, the Labour Party has selected a candidate from outside the area, whom they hope to parachute into the seat without significant challenge. The flyer concerned informs residents about the background to the by-election (about which, as I say, many have asked) and, importantly, makes very clear what the choice is - either a Labour candidate, who has no prior connection to the area and described herself only a few weeks ago as a "Clapham Commoner", or an excellent local candidate in Terry Curtis - whose record of action in the area is longstanding and beyond reproach.

I do hope that whatever our disagreements over how best to handle the sensitive subject of Toren Smith's resignation, you will feel able to support the local candidate in this election so that Tulse Hill has a strong voice on Lambeth Council in the coming years.

Yours sincerely,

Ashley Lumsden
Agent, Tulse Hill By-election

Printed, published and promoted by A Lumsden oh behalf of T Curtis (Liberal Democrats) both at Unit 6 Hermes House, 59 Josephine Avenue, London SW2 2JZ

From:
Date: 14 June 2010 11:23
Subject: Standard of Campaigning in Tulse Hill Ward, Brixton
To: office@sarahludfordmep.org.uk, terrycurtis@lambethlibdems.org.uk, chris@chrisnicholson.org.uk, simon@simonhughes.org.uk

I was fairly ashamed for the Liberal Democrats when I received the A3 size “Labour Councillor Quits in Shame” flyer through the door yesterday. As well as being unproven, the matter is irrelevant to the campaign.

Terry Curtis would have received my support on the basis that he is genuinely local and, I would have thought, best able to represent my views. However, I believe this mailing displays a real lack of judgement and poor understanding of the local residents. I do not wish to be associated with such a spiteful campaign or candidate.

Positive and constructive campaigning on genuine issues would be welcome here. Please take a look at the reaction from other local voters on this discussion board since the 13th when the flyer was sent out.

http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=10761883&posted=1#post10761883

and the following:

I have seen Ashley Lumsden’s reply to you which I fully endorse.

Best regards,

Sarah Ludford [MEP]

 

[teuchter]

That response from the Lib Dems just isn't good enough. I don't think that whoever wrote it gets what is wrong about what they did. Nor does the MEP, apparently.

 

[brix]

That response from the Lib Dems just isn't good enough. I don't think that whoever wrote it gets what is wrong about what they did. Nor does the MEP, apparently.

No they just don't get that it's nasty, lowlife, spiteful and shabby

I got a reply which pointed out that I didn't live in Toren Smith's ward

I think the implication was that I therefore didn't have a right to comment, or that my comments didn't matter. Hopefully they'll get completely hammered at the ballot box because of this. I know that I will be doing my bit to spread the word about how disgustingly they've behaved.

 

[gaijingirl]

"We have had a large number of people ask us what the background to Toren Smith's resignation was, particularly since the Leader of the Council distributed a quite opaque letter on this subject. It seemed reasonable to set the record straight, and, in the circumstances, simply to reprint what local newspapers have reported"

It's a stock reply - this is almost word for word what the libdem campaigner on the doorstop said to me when I confronted him on the issue.

 

[teuchter]

the idea that 'setting the matter straight' is achieved by reprinting what the local papers say is particularly laughable.

I wonder if they thought including the little picture of the policeman waving his baton set the matter even straighter.

Haven't had a reply to my email.

 

[melmaloney]

No real issues on Tulse Hill?

Although I am a mother of teenage children, I feel really sorry for Toren Smith who has been branded a pervert before he has even been committed for trial.

Surely there must be other issues that interest the voters of this ward -

• the proposed Fenstanton School
• the poor state of council housing
• the ridiculously petty nature of the issues upon which the candidates are seeking election

What sort of morons do the leaders of the main parties take us for?

The question that voters should be asking themselves is whether any of the candidates are worth crossing the road to vote for.

 

[Gixxer1000]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

good solid working class seat like Tulse Hill .

LMAO Dickhead

 

[melmaloney]

Trivial Pursuits?

and the following:

I have seen Ashley Lumsden’s reply to you which I fully endorse.

Best regards,

Sarah Ludford [MEP]

Erh . . . . Are you sure about this? Can any of this be of national or European interest?

​

 

[Rushy]

Erh . . . . Are you sure about this? Can any of this be of national or European interest?

​

To be fair I emailed Terry Curtis (agent replied after reminder sent), Chris Nicholson (2 mails - no reply), Simon Hughes (2 mails - no reply) and Sarah Ludlow (replied after reminder sent). Was going to email Clegg's office but was in a rush and couldn't find email address.

Sarah Ludlow was a bit of a random choice to cc: but she is MEP for London so I thought worth making views aware to.

I'm really disappointed with the replies. Probably being a bit sensitive but I really dislike the feeling that Lib Dem reps believe potential electors would be impressed by or want to associate with that kind of campaigning or indeed accept the excuse that it was all just intended 'to inform us'. So for this particular election they lost my vote in protest - just not sure yet where I am going to put it.

 

[Rushy]

Tweet on Labour website:

"Labour increased it's vote share in the Tulse Hill byelection yesterday - congratulations to Cllr Ruth Ling, and thanks to all that helped. 10 minutes ago"

Surprised that Labour increased its majority. 52% vs. Lib Dem's 31% (based on an impressive 21% turnout!). Lib Dems must have sent out quite literally ten flyers for every mailing we received for any other party so must have just pissed people off. The gf decided not to vote Lib Dem on the grounds that their campaign wasted so much paper!

Chris Nicholson did eventually reply to my email saying that they review their campaigning standards after each election so hopefully some sort of message will have got through.