21 June 2007

Cllr Phibbs gets the humps

After his abject performance defending council cuts to the voluntary sector (see previous blog), Cllr Harry Phibbs has returned to normal duty.

Phibbs uses all his skills as an Evening Standard diary columnist in his role as the Tory letter-writer-in-chief to the local papers in Hammersmith & Fulham.

This week in The Chronicle his target is road humps. He wants them removed. He says 'they are an irritant to motorists'. Sounds like a case of 'Hurry up Harry'.

The Tories want to get rid of traffic calming in the borough. Do they ever get out of their Chelsea tractors?

PS why were extra security staff employed at the Irish Centre for Monday's night voluntary sector meeting (see previous blog)? Were they there to protect Cllr Phibbs?


MING said...

I've often thot, and said often enough, that the article (rather than refering to the article in a distant sort of way ... ) should be made electronically available, so what could the blogmaster suggest?

Bestest (and looking forward)

MING said...

One would be, judging from this blog, looking out for any clerical errors.

Do post on ... nothing to be fearful about.

hfconwatch said...

The newspapers are all available in local newsagents (not sure what's available online). Sadly, the coverage of last Monday's meeting was pretty thin.

No doubt reporters will be at the town hall this Wednesday.

MING said...

what is available online is not comprehensive.

It woud be better to have the newspaper articles scanned up and made available online.

I presume (?) google fotos would be a good idea.

MING said...

Please also ensure you post and distribute publically available contact information, such as the ones given elsewhere in this blog (eg for Lillis) at the protest meeting.

Its only a suggestion. Therefore, do take it up.


MING said...

Hello. In response to your post, I was randomly browsing the cabinet meetings and agenda.

Refering to the following URL (copy and paste please)


The documents for 19th Feb 2007 on Pg21 (paper version) and Pg26 on the electronic version detail the large number of efficiencies (ie cuts). It would not be safe to assume all these "efficiencies" are what they say they are - some of these are definitely cuts.

As for the money trail I was talking about, you would see the money trail showing the largest amount of money going to the Lyric Theatre (you will understand the significance of this).

Having looked at the figures, this is the one receiptant that in addition to receiving the largest sum of money, doesn't seem to have a cut budget.

If you don't understand the significance of the above, please have a look for member's declarations of interest, or post and let me know. Emailing me on r96harris@yahoo.com is a good idea too.

I understand you are on a protest tomorrow; best for you to understand this point before you go.