Barnet CPZ Action are raising money for their legal case. Send a cheque made payable to "Barnet CPZ Action" to 88 Summerlee Avenue, East Finchley, London N2 9QH or donate via the PayPal link on the blog. Here are some extracts from their latest post:
1. [Barnet argues] The case only concerns "a limited number of residents of the Borough of Barnet" and, therefore, is not a case of broad importance. [We of course disagree. In any event, the case concerns everyone in Barnet: i.e it concerns the 90% of residents who are being subsidised and not just the 10% who are doing the subsidising]If it's of any interest to anyone, as far as I know David Attfield has had no connection with any of the anti-cuts groups or activities in the borough, so that claim is completely spurious. I still support him though!
2. David [Attfield, bringing the case] is simply opposed to the "extent of spending cuts in Barnet" and his claim is "purely political". His remedy should be the ballot box and not the court.
...4. Barnet Council have instructed one of the country's leading QCs, James Goudie, despite the fact that they know that David will largely be conducting the action himself.
Posts
6 comments:
Yes, yes, but in a very real sense, in a deeply fundamental way, as we weigh the complexities of cause and effect, is it right to suggest that it was the hammer that smashed the peanut and that the anvil had no part to play? Or could we say, looking at it from the upside under, that really it was the anvil that was at fault?
I dunno - but I think I should be told! I mean, if some busybody pipsqueak hadn't reached for lawyers then the council wouldn't have reached for theirs. Elections are supposed to mandate governments to enact their policies. You lot just want to cry 'foul' every five minutes. You must be costing the tax-peyers of Barnet a pretty penny.
Thanks for those thoughts, quite reasonable.
However, I'm in favour of Barnet not doing stupid things that lead to legal challenges. If you take a look the CPZ fees hike is indefensible. I predict Attfield et al will win. Barnet raising the stakes is an attempt to frighten them into backing away.
Oh come off it Duff: did the Nazi party have a full policy mandate from the German people?
Most of the more idiotic actions our council has taken, such as voting themselves a nice fat pay rise,and implementing 400% parking charge rises, were, funnily enough, not stated in any policy documents at the time of election. This is rather like a con man knocking on an old lady's door, persuading her to let him into to the fron parlour and then stealing her savings, absolving himself from blmae by saying he was invited inside. This might be common practice in Frome, but here in the metropolis we frown upon such wickedness.
Well, yes, Mrs 'A', actually the Germans did mandate the nazi party, something of which they do like to be reminded these days.
As for Barnet council who seem to be a prize collection of dolts you rememdy is to vote the rascals out not run up huge bills which you will have to pay.
By the way, did you like my little bit of philosophising? You'd think I'd graduated from Middleses PolyUni, wouldn't you?
Past my cocoa time that should have read "do not like to be reminded".
Ladies,
My advice to you. Learn from my mistake. Never marry out of sympathy
Post a Comment