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.
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:
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.
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
…and numerous articles via Google.