Friday, 4 March 2011

Flammable Underpants

Pete Ruhemann is suddenly a sensitive soul.

It is a fact that he used the word "Quisling" personally against the Lib Dem group leader pointing his finger whilst he said it. All pretty unambiguous you would have thought. Except he seems to be wriggling like a worm on a hook. His defence seems to be "but sir, he called us names first".

Well sort of, when I made a comment I directed it against the Labour Party as a whole, not individuals. And more crucially in my own time, not whilst on council business. The findings of the courts in the case of Ken Livingstone "Nazi guard" jibe made it clear that when not acting on council business you are entitled to freedom of expression. Cllr Ruhemann made his comment during a council meeting whilst acting in his capacity as a councillor in the council chamber. They are not comparable.

He also refers to another comment I made where Labour reported me to the Standards Board, again made in my own time and in a personal capacity using a words that the Irish Daily Star thought was fit for a front page headline.

I have thought better since then about insulting individuals without good reason, but Labour haven't.

But let's use another word that applies to Peter Ruhemann. This is from an email by Roger Sym:

From: Roger Sym [mailto:Roger@******]
Sent: 02 April 2010 14:15
To: Roger Sym private
Subject: Actions from the EC Meeting on 1st April 2010

d) Pete Ruhemann is producing the next Reading Banner to go to the Borough Wards.

The Reading Banner mentioned contained an untruthful statement about an election candidate that at the time it was made was known to be incorrect and of the sort that Labour were guilty of during the last election campaign (cf: Phil Woolas) and from Labour's own internal email we know that particular Reading Banner was written by Peter Ruhemann.

I hope Labour don't mind me therefore in my own time whilst not on council business using the factually correct word to describe Peter Ruhemann: LIAR.



Don't you think it's a bit like being a Policeman - i.e. you're never off duty.

Your comment was a tad reckless simply because you represent a political party 24/7.

Councillours are like school children (respect is due) with the hurt, defeated Labour shite being the most obstreperous.

Was said...

You make a good point about "reckless" which is fair comment.

The inconvenient fact is that the courts have decided that councillors can be "off duty". It is a fundamental human right protected by law [Collins judgement ]

You have to also remember that the local Standards Board has ruled that Peter Jones was allowed to call a councillor a "twat" during a public meeting in the "cut and thrust of debate" (He also audibly called Isobel Ballsdon a "Silly Cow" during a planning meeting.)

Yet I was found guilty of having a joke with my twitter friends about requiring "silver bullets" to deal with Basher McKenzie when replying to them after they suggested that wooden stakes and garlic was required as though he was some poor sensitive member of the public.

What I have discovered is that Labour like to dish it but when someone volleys it back they turn into poor hurt little puppy dogs.


Labour has always specialised in attacking the messenger and not addressing the message.

I'd rather have someone like yourself making the odd twitter gaff representing me than a politically correct mouth on a stick like McKenzie any day.