A message from Neil Davidson drops into my inbox, which, as always with Beestonia I’ll publish in full:

Dear Mr Goold,

Anna Soubry’s house has been on the market with Bairstow Eves since last September.

For personal family reasons, she could not put it on the market before then.

Once it is sold she will be buying a property in the constituency.

I would be grateful if you would correct your website.

Neil Davidson.
Campaign Manager

Which is surely good news, and I’m sure any earlier aspersions cast upon the Soubry team (while not wanting to bring this to any personal level, a bit of context is provided by explaining Mr Davidson is Anna’s long term partner) are laid to rest. We’re only eighteen months into the present government, and things aren’t going too well with the economy. It’s only understandable that it takes some time to sell a property as there are only a few people, such as MPs, in a position to purchase. I accept that Anna is chomping at the bit to move here asap, even if it is only until Spring 2015 when she decamps to Rushcliffe to claim the long held Crown of Ken Clarke.

Since I seem to be bending our MP’s ear right now – well, her partners, so I’m sure he can pass a message on- I’d just like to expand on my previous essay regarding Anna.

Anna has recently found a stance to try and maintain some following in Broxtowe, in a typically political fashion. I say ‘political’ as it’s a rather cynical method all parties fall back on, a fault of the general system rather than any individual. However. It is still not acceptable and those who perpetuate it are damaging democracy, which leads to the shameful turn-out at last weeks by-elections, where nearly 75% of the electorate stayed at home rather than determine their representative,

Welcome to the world of popularism. Here, politicians wrap themselves in whatever flag seems to blaze brightest, whichever cause pre-Levenson Murdoch fancied, whatever was tested on focus groups and found ‘warm’.

New Labour were guilty of pushing this polticizing into the mainstream, but the new rulers have seized it with the vengence. Pre-PM Cameron advocated, depending on where public mood was, hugging hoodies, huskies and homosexuals. All admirable, if they had been at all sincere.

Souby spent the first year of her tenure as our representative struggling to find a popularist cause to latch onto. Her ability to commit gaffes at the most primary level (see the posties debacle; the hiring of Craig Cox and her resistance to moving to the constituency as true political face-palms) made any attempts to anchor herself too dangerous to undertake.

Then along came the Greenbelt. An ideal cause for Anna, as it was wonderfully non-committal. While her own government threatened to strip local authorities of power should they not find adequate land for planning; it was easy to grab a following in areas threatened by develpment, even if they really were only consultation suggestions rather than agreed plans. This has had a distorting effect on Borough planning, and could lead to planning regulations being removed from the Borough altogether, giving unscrupulous developers free rein. See Beestonia passim for more on this.

Still, she got a nicely designed banner for her newsletter out of it, proclaiming she was Champion of the Greenbelt. As a recent adventurer into the world of print publishing, I do love a good font.

I’d support the protection of the greenbelt, if it was that simple. But one has to look at the engineering behind this stance, and examine it’s veracity: thats what I do cos I’m sure you lot are far too busy not being political obsessives to care for.

Today, Wednesday 21st March, a heap of new regulations will be passed with the Budget that could have the most detrimental effect on the environment ever known since the 1825 Burning of Orphans and Anything Not Made of Steel law within a single swathe of legislation. It’s been rather overshadowed by issues involving tax, the NHS and road privatisation,yet is possibly the issue we’ll look back on in a few years time and wonder how the hell it got under our radars.

I could explain each facet myself, and if you trust me, read on, if you need more evidence I’ll be sticking links below as I find them:

http://www.foe.co.uk/news/budget_2012_35215.html

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/joss-garman-a-black-wednesday-for-the-environment-7576245.html?origin=internalSearch

So is Anna likely to vote against these proposals, which on the whole support profit-driven developers against the environment? Proclamations from the last few months suggest this is a given, considering her evident concerns against development on anything containing chlorophyll. Yet it would be the first time she’d voted against the government, so it’s a real test of her sincerity.

Annas obviously a busy woman, so she may have overlooked this legislation as she papers up her porcelain in preperation of an inniment  move to Broxtowe.  So perhaps it’s best to appeal to her partner, an evident reader of this blog, to ensure this message is passed on. Though thats ensuring he too isn’t too busy, having to simulataneously run Anna’s campaign while being a non-executive board member of, errrr, Persimmon Homes, who have a reputation for sub-standard new builds* , and would be very happy to have the government lift restrictions on what they can get away with.

I will be the first to welcome you to Broxtowe, Anna. God help you if your boyfriend had anything to do with building your new gaffe.

*Wikipedia:

Persimmon has regularly come in for criticism due to poor build quality on a number of their homes. Examples include wiring up sockets dangerously giving the potential to shock, installing wobbly bannisters, laying turf on builder’s rubble rather than on newly laid soil and radiators not properly fixed to the wall

Also:

*http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/watchdog/2010/05/new_homes.html

*http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/northamptonshire/7792467.stm

…and numerous articles via Google.

Soubry (sort of) Replies via her Politically Perilous Persimmon Partner.

Advertisements

6 thoughts on “Soubry (sort of) Replies via her Politically Perilous Persimmon Partner.

  1. tamar says:

    So less than a year then? But it thought she said it was on the market before that… ? and there was a letter published in The Beeston Express to this effect circa two weeks ago.
    I’m assuming these “personal reason” are nothing like the ‘personal reason’ Nick Palmer had for moving to Mapperley (you know, when Soubry jumped on that faster than a big hypocrite bandwagon jumper who’s got its hypocrite bandwagon jumping license back…). Non? *Maybe* “personal reasons” also covers ‘she didn’t want to move’?
    Dunno. At least she’s on it now.
    I know a few people who like a house with a pool in Mapperley. I might mention it to them. For personal reasons* I wouldn’t myself, but hey ho.

    *when i say personal reasons, I mean money.

  2. Murray says:

    It was on this subject that I recently emailed Anna and received a reply addressed to ‘Dear Matt’… I took it as a compliment.

    You’re quite right, her newsletters are full of bile for the council but offer nothing alternative beyond “work[ing] with local communities to formulate a proper plan”, which is somewhat ironic given that in the same newsletter she castigates the council’s attempts to do just this as “a totally meaningless exercise”.

    I asked her why she was pursuing this line when her own party’s proposed planning reforms would make it much easier to build on greenbelt. She replied with “your information and analysis I am afraid are wrong. The draft NPPF is the document you need to read”. My response – that I was quoting directly from that very document, which both puts clear emphasis on “economic development” over environmental concerns, and removes the obligation to build on brownfield first – has to date gone unacknowledged.

    I’m afraid my experience of Anna is leading me to believe that she is only interesting in corresponding with you up to the moment she realises you’re not a simpleton who can be fobbed off with empty popularism.

  3. Geoff says:

    Hmmm. So Mr Beestonia’s “big Souby scoop” turned out to a load of old tripe!

    No surprises there!

  4. Javid says:

    “Since last Sepember” would that would be Sept 2011? But I thought she made the promise in April 2010 and got elected in May 2010.

    There’s a coincidence. I and a few others started mentioning this in the Beeston Express around summer 2011 (we gave her a year to move). The might of the keyboard!

    How much does she want for her house?

  5. tamar says:

    Javid, I always liked your letters to The BE – hello.

    A bit longer ago than I thought – but here’s the letter i was thinking of:

    Over the boundary
    DEAR EDITOR: Some weeks
    ago, your correspondent J Arthur
    raised the question of whether MP
    Anna Soubry would honour the
    promise she made to the electors of
    Broxtowe, and move into the
    consituency if she won the election.
    Since the, her silence on this
    issue has been deafening. One
    wonders whether she even bothers
    reading the letters column of The
    Beeston Express. Had she done
    so, she would have noticed that a
    number of other correspondents
    have also asked the same
    question. Could I request that the
    Editor contacts her and asks her
    to give a simple answer to this
    simple question.
    Her heroine, Margarent
    Thatcher, once famously said,
    of herself, “The Lady’s not for
    turning.” Perhaps Ms Soubry has
    decided that her motto is “The
    Lady’s not for moving.”
    It is rumoured that she has
    been biding her time until she is
    appointed as the Conservative
    candidate in the safe seat of
    Rushcliffe, assuming that the
    genial but ageing Kenneth
    Clarke stands down at the next
    election. That way, she would
    not have to face almost certain
    defeat in Broxtowe at the hands
    of Dr Palmer, and the prospect
    of unemployment. But with the
    recently announced boundary
    changes, Rushcliffe might not
    exist at the next election, and
    she would then be fighting
    other prominent Tories to be the
    candidate for another constituent.
    I am sure there is enough
    here for Ms Soubry to make it
    the subject of her next column.
    So come on, Anna. Give your
    constituents the answers they
    want. Are you moving into
    Broxtowe? Or do your political
    aspirations lie elsewhere?
    R Johnson
    Chilwell Road, Beeston

    Friday, September 23, 2011

  6. Javid says:

    I remember that one Tamar – a cracker.

    I expect to see a few more letters on this subject in the next edition. It’s her column next time which I understand is to be renamed “The view of an outsider”

    My writing hand is getting itchy.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s