Convicted Liberal Democrat councillor Steve Hurst survives second vote of no confidence
And so convicted Liberal Democrat councillor Steve Hurst lives to fight another day, and survives another vote of no confidence.
Erm, well actually it didn't even get as far as a vote of no confidence as the council voted 44 to 42 not to have the vote of confidence (yep, that's local government for you).
Anyway earlier this week I wrote this blog post, but never posted it. Here it is:
Once again this week Cllr Anderson will attempt to get a motion of no confidence through the council that calls on Cllr Hurst to resign.
And once more he is likely to fail. A threatened Liberal Democrat conspiracy is not likely to materialise.
Cllr Hurst's term of office representing Wavertree (the safest Liberal Democrat seat in the city) ends in May, and he is currently the an approved candidate to stand again.
It appears the party has been willing to waver its normal rules that bar those convicted of breaking election law to even be considered for a candidacy.
If Cllr Hurst is allowed to stand, as now appears likely, baring complete disaster for the Liberal Democrats he will be returned as an elected representative.
It's true to say that the issue has divided the ruling Liberal Democrat administration.
Many of his party colleagues fear that the continued protection of Cllr Hurst and allowing him to stand will dent their chances in next year's election (some don't have the luxury of sitting in safe seats). And could ultimately cost them control of the council - the party has a paper thin majority of just one.
But despite this, and however unpalatable it may be for the so called rebels to continue to support Cllr Hurst they will, because siding with Labour would be even worse.
And so it proved.
7 Comments
Leave a comment
Dale Street Associates
David Bartlett
City editor of the Post and Echo covering politics, regeneration, and urban affairs.
Read My Posts »
What contempt Bradley must have for his local party members abilities that he insists on protecting his fellow firefighter to keep him in that seat and in a senior position, that he will sacrifice the integrity of the Lib Dem administration and add to the discrediting of the local party. Clearly he must think that nobody within there ranks is better than a convicted criminal who was damned by two court judges for his deliberate attempt to mislead the local electorate by skulking around with lies and smears and willing to deceive the public for his own political ends. I cannot believe he acted alone in hatching his criminal scheme and wonder why the leadership continues to protect him. If he had any respect for the party he represents and the elctorate whom he is supposed to serve or any honour within the office he holds, he would have stepped down as a councillor voluntarily. But then that means forgoing the ã9,000+ allowances and the ã5,000+ salary for recently being appointed to the board of Mersey Travel. He is after all saving up with this and his full time fire-fighter salary to retire to Australia, as we were informed ater the trial, once he has finished dicrediting local politics. Which makes it all the more odd that a person who does not even see his own future in Liverpool should be one of the members of the planning committee agreeing and giving the nod to the ugly tat that is destroying our waterfront and throwing up unwanted city apartments, when the city is crying out for decent family homes at affordable prices. He does no good to the reputation of our city or the Lib dems. What are they afraod of by continuing to keep him in office?
Sorry but this is not correct. Cllr Hurst has not been selected to stand again in this seat. All candidiates for the Wavertree Constituency will be chosen in September or October. Cllr Hurst may or may not put his name forward for this seat. The Party may or may not choose to support him. That is democracy!
Hi Richard,
Thanks for pointing out that error, I have ammended the post.
For the sake of clarity, this is the statement I was sent from the Lib Dem national office:
âÂÂCouncillor Hurst declared his conviction to his local party in line with their standard approval procedures and has been re-approved for selection by his local party.âÂÂ
Notwithstanding Kemp's tedious logic-chopping, the criminal Hurst will be selected by the LibDems in due course. A strain of bullying and intimidation runs through that Party as it used to run through Labour in the city. Hurst and his mates will ensure, by thuggish threats if necessary, that his selection is guaranteed. Time for some LibDems to break ranks, on this issue if no other, and support a principled opposition to convicted criminals in the Council chamber. How about it, Cllr Kemp? Or are you scared too?
As someone who lives in the Wavertree ward, I would question just how much "democracy" is going to play a part in this election. This is one of the safest wards in the city and it is more than likely that any individual standing as a LibDem would be elected, irrespective of what they have done. It will be down to the local LibDems to decide whether he becomes our councillor, because if they choose him as a candidate, and his name goes on the ballot paper, he is more or less bound to be elected. Most residents will not know the first thing about his convictions. I just how they can be impressed upon to do the right thing. It is bad enough being represented by LibDems, but corrupt criminal LibDems, that is a step too far!
Australia ? Criminals ? I thought this was a thing of the past...
The culture of LibDem bullying and intimidation is not confined to Liverpool, but both endemic and systemic to LibDems nationally. The worst example must be Sheffield, the corruption capital of Europe, where corrupt LibDems are supported by their party leader.
Feel free to get in touch.