Thursday, 24 January 2013

Another Councillor Defection at Thanet District Council


This time it is Cllr Zita Wiltshire, she appears on the council’s website just as an independent now, as does Cllr Ezekiel and as did Cllr Gregory until he was reinstated to the Conservative group earlier this week.

There is no comment from the Conservative Group apparently Bob the leader is still awaiting a letter from Zita, who has told the council she has resigned from the group, but doesn’t appear to have said why.

Update;

in view of the following Twitter exchange:

John Worrow @JohnWorrow
24 Jan
@Cllr_MikeJarvis Police phone records prove there was no phone conversation before Gregory left voice mail he lied to group to be readmitted

Michael Jarvis Michael Jarvis
@Cllr_MikeJarvis
@JohnWorrow You have a very valued point there John I am disappointed that the leader of this group did not take a stronger stance 

I am assuming there is some disquiet within the TDC Conservative group about Cllr Gregory's reinstatement and I am wondering if Cllr Wiltshire's resigning the group is related.  

98 comments:

Peter Checksfield said...

I know I'm stating the obvious, but have you asked her Michael?

Michael Child said...

Peter I tried phoning her earlier and again just now, but didn’t get a reply from either her mobile or landline and as I said I checked with the Conservative group.

I will email her later, but frankly if the Conservative group either don’t know or won’t say I doubt I will get very far.

Peter Checksfield said...

Dr Moores is conspiciously quite on the matter, prefering to blog about snow penises today!

Simon Moores said...

I think you mean "quiet" but there's actually nothing to say as I'm aware of the real story, which is quite frankly no story at all. Meanwhile, over on Twitter, Michael Jarvis, has put the record straight on his last comments.. so back to erections in Westgate which are likely receiving more public interest than this!

Anonymous said...

Dont you think that cllr Wiltshire owes the people that voted for her an explanation? But then maybe she is just another Thanet cuncillor that are serving themselves.

James Maskell said...

Worrow would do himself a favour and probably get more support if he didnt keep trying to twist things as he has tried to do with Cllr Jarvis and putting his own personal issues ahead of his residents concerns at Council meetings. There was no justifying what he said, but something about this doesnt make sense. Gregory sounds in mid-sentence on the November Thanet Watch video.

Hearing the full voicemail, and seeing that it is so (a webcam video for example) would clear things up immediately and leave no doubt. Im not attacking Worrow but seeking clarification on the voicemail.

Tom Clarke said...

I know this lady and it is a personal decision not based on some underlying association with the Worrow/Gregory saga as implied here. It does, yet again though, raise that questiion about people being elected to office under a banner and whether they should seek re-election if they suddenly change sides. My own view, save when very close to new elections anyway, is that anyone who changes their allegiance should be required by law to seek re-election if they wish to remain in that office.

Peter Checksfield said...

Quite.

Peter Checksfield said...

"Bob the leader" isn't exactly doing himself or Thanet Conservatives any favours either. Whatever the exact truth of the matter is, Gregory was instructed to have anger management counselling but refused, yet he's still allowed back.

Anonymous said...

Every defection is a "personal decision" but she should let the public know.

Anonymous said...

So changing the balance of power is "no story"?

Simon Moores said...

Peter Checksfield, as usual, is somewhat disconnected from reality and peddles his own imaginative view of the facts. Ken Gregory "had' anger management counselling as a condition of his readmission. At the same time TDC, found that Cllr Gregory had been acting on a personal basis and therefore no sanctions were available to the council.

Anonymous said...

James if you knew anything you would of won the westgate election. I suggust that you listen and learn!

Anonymous said...

Tom Latchford Clarke talking nonsense again

Anonymous said...

By what you are saying Tom, Ken Gregory should have stood for the BNP .... Its the people not the banner you silly man!

Anonymous said...

Maybe Gary Glitter should have anger mangement counselling as it changes the way people think

Anonymous said...

Simon, It might be wise to avoid trying to defend Cllr Gregory and to distance yourself.

Simon Moores said...

I'm not defending anything or anyone rather than the facts and not the fiction being peddled here!

Peter Checksfield said...

I guess The Isle of Thanet Gazette is also somewhat disconnected from reality and peddles their own imaginative view of the facts... Here's a quote from page 3 of today's edition:

"Mr Gregory, who received a police caution for making the call, is also understood not to have completed an anger management course which he was ordered to take by Tory group leader Bob Bayford."

But if you don't believe me, go out and buy a copy. You might learn a thing or two about your chums.

Peter Checksfield said...

You're the one living in a fantasy world "Doctor"! Haven't you got any patients to see?

Anonymous said...

Its a very thin line for a councillor to claim that they are speaking on a personal basis or as a councillor but in this case would cllr Gregory have phoned cllr Worrow if either one of them were not a councillor? I think not.

Peter Checksfield said...

Exactly anon. Gregory knows that, Bayford knows that, and Moores knows that.

Anonymous said...

Bob Bayford could go on a "Incompetent Leaders counselling course" Some how I don't think it would change him!

Anonymous said...

Cllr Jarvis' words are there for everyone to see James, no wonder you loose elections you silly boy

Tom Clarke said...

No, that is what you are saying, Anon, not me. I am saying that, if you stand for a party, thus attracting the votes of supporters of that party, and then leave that party, you should be required to ask those voters if they still want you. Otherwise resign and leave standing again, if you so wish, under whatever banner you now represent.

Peter Checksfield said...

And John Worrow could go on a "stop milking things and being an attention seeker course" which probably wouldn't work either... The point is that the condition of Ken Gregory returning to the Thanet Tories was that he completes an anger management course, which The Gazette claims he hasn't - and Moores claims they're liars.

Peter Checksfield said...

How do you "loose" an election exactly?

Anonymous said...

Wouldn't it be great if these rules applied to teachers, doctors, police and army officers etc. etc. Say and do what you like but do it in your own time and there can be no repercussions. Dream on. Professional people are expected to behave appropriately at all times. They can't be closet racists, sexists or homophobes and expect to retain their position. Presumably, lower standards are expected of politicians in Thanet. Who decided that?

Anonymous said...

THEY decided it! And THEY need to be reminded that they're there to serve US, not the other way round!

Anonymous said...

Standards decisions are a waste of time. Who makes the decisions? In the main Councillors with vested interests not to find anything wrong. A total waste of time. We all know that Gregory is only there for the expenses and should never have been selected by Sir Roger, especially after having mysteriously not been selected for a safe seat by his own Association. Why didn't he re-stand for St Peters. And no, I am not confusing Ian Gregory.

Michael Child said...

I guess the key problem here is one of communication, resigning from a local political group, particularly in a situation where no group holds the balance of power, is a serious issue.

It would seem inconceivable the Conservative group don’t know the reason for this resignation, so this leaves us all speculating as to why this information has been withheld.

Obviously resigning at the same time that Cllr Gregory is reinstated, combined with the fact that they are both councillors in the same ward suggests a connection.

Viewed from outside it certainly looks as though the Conservative group is coming unstitched.

This is what it says on the South Thanet Conservatives website: “Cllr Zita Wiltshire is a long-serving member of Thanet District Council and Broadstairs and St Peter’s Town Council. She has twice been town Mayor. She has been a cabinet member and portfolio holder for housing and community services, a role which demanded a great deal of hands-on work in meeting with residents, developers, and other Councillors. She is a successful fundraiser, especially for causes relating to the protection of vulnerable people.”

But as I said this is about communication with the electorate, in order to maintain public credibility and respect, whatever reason for the resignation there can be no benefit in withholding it.

Anonymous said...

Shit is an English word that is usually considered vulgar and profane in Modern English. As a noun it refers to fecal matter (excrement) and as a verb it means to defecate or defecate in; in the plural ("the shits") it means diarrhea. Shite is also a common variant in British English and Irish English.[1] As a slang term, it has many meanings, including: nonsense, foolishness, something of little value or quality, trivial and usually boastful or inaccurate talk, or a contemptible person. It may also be used as an expression of annoyance, surprise, or anger, and has other usages as well.

Anonymous said...

Well said Michael. What you got wrong, is that Gregory does't represent St Peters any more. Ian Gregory, Jason Savage and Zita Wiltshire are the Councillors and we never hear of any complaints. When Bayford's mate, 'hope you get aids' Gregory was the Councillor for St Peters, no-one ever knew where he was.

Anonymous said...

Well the lady councillor has told some people including Tom Clarke but does not think that the people that voted for her should know. Hows that for comtempt? As they say you can judge people by the friends they keep.

James Maskell said...

TDC Standards can only consider complaints relating to Council business, therefore it couldnt consider the complaint about the voicemail because Gregory was calling in a private capacity to Worrow on a private telephone. It had nothing to do with the Council, even when Worrow went public about it. The police could act on it but Standards couldnt. The fact that they only knew each other as Councillors is irrelevant. What Council business was that call relating to?

Tom Clarke said...

Surely we can be closet anything we like. The trouble starts when we give vent publicly to our prejudices since one can no longer call a pillock a pillock if he or she falls into any of those groups, racial or sexual, who take offence easily. Having said that, and blessings for small mercies, I can still call my white heterosexual male neighbour a pillock without offending any law. How weird is that.

Tom Clarke said...

They are not councillors in the same ward, Michael, in fact they are not even in the same Conservative Association as one is Thanet North and the other was Thanet South.

As for anon at 5:46, I said I knew her, not that she was my friend, and I have already said elsewhere that her first duty is to tell the people in the ward she represents.

John Holyer said...

In my experience some people are only too eager to be offended. I suppose they feel that by taking offence they gain substance and increase their self worth; it is also exciting to be noticed. I've always been told that it's impossible to insult me because I'm too ignorant. Should I take offence at that, I wonder?

Michael Child said...

Sorry tom mixed up mi Gregories

Anonymous said...

James why do you always try and defend the indefensible. Whether a standards matter or not, the man is an embarrassment. How can you and your colleagues bring yourselves to support such behavior. Your party should have expelled him but I suppose that would be difficult after only just welcoming him with open arms.

Anonymous said...

What, you mean the same way Labour kicked out Mike Harrison for his homophobic rant?

James Maskell said...

I don't support his behaviour and he's not been welcomed with open arms. From what we heard, he served his time and did the anger management course he was asked to do and has returned to the Group. Was it strong enough punishment? No, it should have been longer.

Anonymous said...

James, it should have been instant expulsion. The Tory Party has got to be whiter than white and seen to be so, even in Thanet. A few brain cells wouldn't go amiss either.

Anonymous said...

Mike Harrison and Roger Gale's Homophobic rants were offended people but they were not Police Caution Hate Crimes

Anonymous said...

Millitant Homosexual (Roger Gale) and Gender Bender (Mike Harrison) were not hate crime level.
Roger and Mike did not dial someones person phone number and tell them to DIE OF AIDS!

Anonymous said...

So Ian Gregory supports people that leave homophobic hate messages?

Anonymous said...

What is wrong with calling a BIO or a GAY on there moblie and telling them to DIE of AIDS?

Why should he be asked to apologise if his colleages have no problem with what he said?

Why can't Thanet Conservatives have the same vaules as far right parties like National Front if thats what they like?

Anonymous said...

If the far right cow was not there the victim would not need to milk it!

Anonymous said...

Ken Gregory could have stood for the BNP although the BNP seem to have a better record on equality than Bob Bayford's Local so-called Conservatives

Anonymous said...

Roger Gale upset people by saying 'Millitant Homosexuals' and Mike Harrison upset people by saying 'Gender Bender' The difference Mike Harrison apologised, Roger Gale did not.

But neither Roger or Mike dialed someones mobile telephone number and TOLD THEM TO DIE OF AIDS.

Roger and Mike did not commit HATE crimes.

KEN GREGORY not only did commit one, he also failed to show remorse or apologise!

Anonymous said...

Ask James he is an expert

Anonymous said...

Simon is the same as Cllr Ian Gregory, only a little smarter. Mind you my seven you old is smarter than Cllr Ian Gregory

Anonymous said...

Ian and Ken are actually brothers not the same councillor

Anonymous said...

Its official, Thanet Conservatives, by their decision to suport the hate criminal are homophobic!!

Anonymous said...

Bob Bayford calls tells GAY and Bi Councillors that become independent to stand down call by-elections,
but when a straight woman goes independent he is all nice about it!

Anonymous said...

The following is from Simon Moores' blog and is an example of why rightly or wrongly, that Thanet Conservative are geting a reputation for being a bigoted bunch of anti-gays with one skin colour. Mr Worrow will split the vote and UKIP will win Birchington for KCC

COMMENT FROM THE FOOL'S BLOG
Anonymous said
Perhaps in the name of equality and diversity we could have a heterocentric pride rally in Birchington to even things up a bit.

Simon Moores likes to incite this kind of thing

Anonymous said...

Not sure where you are coming from 9:13pm

Peter Checksfield said...

James, are you 100% certain that he did the anger management course? Certainly the IOTG don't seem to think so.

If Roger Gale called John Worrow a militant homosexual then that was wrong. He's a militant bisexual.

James Maskell said...

Peter, I dont know, but if Simon said he has, Im willing to go with him on it. If thats not the case, then thats a whole different situation. The Gazette isn't always good with facts, eg. claiming May last year I was living in Cliftonville, when I had moved out of the area over two years before.

We know how Gale feels and something like that should be shrugged off as being typical. Wrong but not really worth getting all upset about.

Peter Checksfield said...

Well either way I think the "Dr" owes me an apology.

Simon Moores said...

Ignoring the more 'heterocentric hyperbole' added here during the evening - thanks John - and for James' information, Ken completed anger management counselling, a condition of his political return.

Peter Checksfield said...

Did it work?

Tom Clarke said...

How could one ever tell, Peter. Today, and particularly in the public sector, people from soldiers to civil servants are sent on diversity training. Doea it really make them change the views they hold on sensitive issues or simply make them aware they need to publicly suppress them so as not to give offence. I suspect it is mainly the latter.

As for Worrow, he sees every attack as prompted by homophobia when a lot of people, I suspect you included, are fed up with his attention seeking, distracting council time from its real purpose and general obnoxiousness totally divorced from his sexuality.

As for all the comments here about how anti-Gay the Tories are, this seems to ignore the fact that it is a Tory led government that is introducing 'Equal' marriage, something Labour failed to do in thirteen years in office, whilst Cameron's A list of candidates contained a diaproportionate percentage of gays. There are homophobics in both major political parties as there are in all walks of life. Indeed, there are probably more in the Labour voting working classes than in the enlightened middle class. It is not really a political issue but one of the public getting used to changing society.

Anonymous said...

What is wrong with having a hetero pride rally? Would it be a hate crime to shout obscenities at those taking part in such a rally? I think not. But if the rally was gay or pink pride then the easily offended would shout "homophobia" at the slightest chance and the magistrates court would have to work overtime. Such is the world we live in.

Allan Mallinson said...

10:01, I don't think you can actually split one vote!

Anonymous said...

To So-called Tom Clarke

Councillor Worrow does not see every attack as homophobic, you, however, expose yourself as a 1980s section 28 style bigot by trying to pretend that he does

Anonymous said...

Eskimo A "Hullo B how are you ?"

Eskimo B "Hullo A how do you feel about gays ?"

Eskimo A "No one gay has ever hurt me. So it ain't my business"

Eskimo B "I am gay"

Eskimo A "No you are B. And you are not respecting my basic Eskimo right not to be told your personal business"

Eskimo B "Sorry A I forgot about your rights."

Eskimo A "Shall we pop over to Simon's parish and build a few snow penises"

Eskimo B "Yeah that might catch him out making homophobic comments"

John Holyer said...

I am writing to seek advice and guidance. What is meant by the term 'hetrocentic'; is this used as an epithet; and is there a converse term 'homocentric'?

Tom Clarke said...

To So Called Anonymous

At least I use a name and a Google account and so am both recognisable and traceable. You hide behind an anonymous label, have no idea what my views were on Section 28 and discredit your own comments by your gutlessness. Most people will, however, guess who you are by your style.

Tom Clarke said...

Anon 4:18, are you not aware that Michael's youngsters read this blog or is such language OK in the circumstances with Section 28 repealed? By the way, the block capitals are a dead giveaway not to mentioned the foul obsenities.

Dfl said...

So Tom, does your stance stretch to parties changing direction from their manifesto? I voted for one thing, they did another. We'd be having elections every week.

Or politicians who break party rules and become party-less? Should we have another election for those?

Or is it that you have not engaged brain before typing. Again.

Dfl said...

Do yo think the local conservatives are regretting allowing ken Gregory to defect to them?

Tom, did you picket the council offices demanding Gregory's seat be up for re-election when he crossed the floor in your direction? No, thought not

Tom Clarke said...

Parties who do not stick to their manifesto frequently face the consequences at the next election. Very different to presenting oneself as one thing and then announcing you are something totally different, but if you prefer to have politicians having total freedom to rat on their electoral image, be my guest. It ain't my choice whatever party they first stood for.

As a fellow Dfl I recognise the rudeness as probably from the souff London area. Presumably your brain is constantly engaged, probably trying to work out what it is supposed to be doing after a top level education at Eltham Green or such like.

Tom Clarke said...

I was not in this area then, but I said when Driver defected from Labour on this very blog that he should be required to seek re-election. I don't care which party they go from or to.

Anonymous said...

If we lived in a gay world maybe John.

But as a white middle aged man you know little about prejudice.
You probably don't even understand why many people would find your comments insulting.

But you have ignorence as your defence though, unlike Cllr 'incitement' Moores' who enjoys insulting whole sections of the community.

Anonymous said...

Excuse me, I meant to write "ignorance"

Anonymous said...

The ignorance and section 28 stlye homophobia exposed on this blog, that is used by Thanet Councillors, is unreal.

John Holyer said...

Anonymous 2:26PM

I do not know who you are and neither do I much care. However, you should not presume that I know little about prejudice.

I do in truth understand why a few people would choose to construe my comments as insulting. Not least because some actively seek to be insulted. Once again, this is how they value themselves.

The point I make is that some people can only value themselves by being a part of a minority group. Matt Lucas with his 'the only gay in the village' make this point eloquently.

I do not have the slightest idea why you mention Simon Moores. If you have anything to say to him then you should do so direct; and not seek to smear me with your opinion of him.

Anonymous said...

We don't need to presume your words speak for themselves John Holyer

Anonymous said...

Excuse me, I meant to write "ignorance"

Anonymous said...

John Holyer is an example of white middle aged men that still can't get used to the fact that woman should be equal, for example. In fact he probably thinks that woman already have full equality.

The fact that he thinks minorities want to be offended speaks voulmes. The truth is when someone like Ken Gregory uses the 'N' word for example, and his mates blame the victim, people have a right to be offended.
The problem with John Holyer he is still living in the 1900s. However, we mentioned Simon Moores' because he does not have ignorance or old age as an excuse.

John Holyer said...

And I also meant to say do not seek to patronise me.

However I am flattered that you believe me to be a middle aged man.

I do know something of prejudice. In my teens a group of people set out to persecute me for being Jewish. I can still remember how this made me feel helpless because no matter what I did, good or bad, they would hate me solely because I was a Jew. I was not a Jew; I am a gentile and I told them this. I still to this day regret that I lacked the courage to let them believe that I was a Jew.

Anonymous said...

When will you all realise that by behaving the way you are, you are doing exactly what Worrow wants.

John Holyer said...



I do not understand the point you are endeavouring to make. Other than you clearly have a bee in you bonnet about something.

Do not tell me what I should realise; and do not lecture me on how to behave. Do not seek to patronise me.

For all I know you could be the same well known troll who infests this blog with inane comments about the aquifer, Manston, etc. In which case more fool me for talking to you.

Anonymous said...

AnonymousJanuary 27, 2013 7:04 pm
Why are you demoning worrow, he didnt asked to for all the abused and want gregory's hate mail

Anonymous said...

John H, they are tring to blame the victim in order to try and let their hate criminal colleague Ken Gregory off the hook. Another one of their colleagues has been done for drink driving and another is up in court soon!

Anonymous said...

It seems to me that all people are equal but some people are more equal than others, especially those with an axe to grind.

Allan Mallinson said...

Oh, shame, poor little John the victim. Of course he does not bring any of his misfortunes on himself with his inconsistency, party hopping and constant search for publicity. Most insults are provoked in the first instance by the so called victim.

Anonymous said...

Don't you just love demoning! Add 'abused' and 'gregory's' and one can see JW has support amongst the less literate.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
sologays said...

thanks anon 3.56. Things were starting to look positive for us on David Green's blog, but now he wants to check what I say before considering whether to publish. I guess its a case of love has ended before its begun.........

Anonymous said...

You're right Mallinson. You're a twit. You provoked me with your idiotic comments.

Anonymous said...

It's your chance again John with the pollution of the Manston aquifer. You said you didn't care even if there was no pollution and there is no pollution anyway. You're wrong aren't you. So very very wrong.

Allan Mallinson said...

Thus proving the point. I do assure you, however, that the feeling is mutual, but at least I am a twit with a name. What's your excuse for being anonymous?

sologays said...

I should expand....my question to Ramsgate Mayor David Green on his blog, was pertaining to issues regarding how my group has been "managed" over the years regarding our use of a stretch of seafront in Ramsgate. If my question had been put anonymously I daresay I would have got an answer, or at the very least my words would not have been filtered or blocked.

Anonymous said...

You've debased naming you twit. Any more foolish comments passing as debate? Thor cleanup?

Ren Wood said...

Unbelievable - some people are debating the victim status of a certain councillor and up pops the Thanet bore with the Thor clean up. You simply could not make it up and it probably only happens in Thanet.

Anyone, please, how can one debase naming. Ay least a name enables others to follow a thread whereas so many of the anonymous contributions are only recognisable by their pet themes, e.g. monitors or homophobia, crass stupidy or use of block capitals. One even manages to combine the repetetive theme of pollution with both crass stupidy and insults and then has the cheek to call it debate.

John Holyer said...

Ren Wood,

You are right.

I suspect that this is just one person or at the most two who is best ignored. When I lived in London there was a man who used to stand outside Tesco hurling insults at passers by. The troll on this blog is not disimilar.