Hastings in the limelight!

Hasting as we know only had a by-election last year which was brought about due to the resignation of two Conservative councillors, Michael Lambrechs and Daniel Poulter. Both seats went to Labour as a result of these by-elections. Hastings however holds elections every other year for half of the Council. County Council Elections are held every four years and European Parliamentary Elections every five years. These elections are usually held on the first Thursday in May.
Hastings is due to go to the polls for the local Council elections this coming May. One councilor position in each ward will be up for grabs. Now most of the wards are rather even in that both the incumbent councilors belong to the same political faction. However there are a couple of wards where there is a split; notably Silverhill – split between a Labour and Independent councilors where the Labour seat is up for election and Gensing – split between Liberal Democrat and Labour where the Liberal Democrat seat is up for election.

The way wards are split in Hastings every ward has an election every other year for one of the incumbent councilor seats. And it looks as if Nicky Boy has his beady eye (no pun intended) on these elections. They are fielding three candidates with Paul Price and Fay Hughes looking for votes in the Tressell ward and Michael Lovett is hoping to get elected in Hollington. They are probably counting on the general back swing from Labour. Getting the protest vote has always been a road in for the Blithering Neolithic Partisans.

One of the reasons I am firmly against the ‘No Platform’ is because it gives the Pig Farmer ample opportunity to pay the ‘more-sinned-against-then-sinning’ card. And boy oh boy does he love it!!! Where was this better illustrated then in the meeting held by the ‘One eyed King in the country of the Blind’ … Yes I am talking about the recent ‘rally to arms’ held by Nicky Boy himself at a ‘secret’ location. So secret even the location did not know about it till afterwards so it seems.

According to an article in the Hasting’s & St Leonards Observer (19 February 2008) he is quoted as saying:

"I would love to come down and debate issues in public but we are simply not able to. All that would happen is our opposition would bus in demonstrators to stand outside or put pressure on the owner of the venue to not to let us meet there."We would then most likely be blamed for any disturbances so we have to go out of our way to avoid confrontation."

When you look at the various comment on the BNP visit the majority of them are concerned with whether or not the BNP should or should not be allowed to visit. Very few are actually about what the aims for Hastings are as far as the BNP is concerned. What did not come out loud and clear, and probably should have done was the feeling that ‘removal of foreign nationals’ is clearly something the BNP is interested in.

In the same article as above The Pig Farmer is quoted as saying: "Tourists come visit the town expecting to see somewhere connected to 1066 and the Battle of Hastings. They are expecting an English seaside town - not what it has become now." Of course I may be wide of the mark now but I would have thought that most people are aware that this is no longer 1066 and that a certain degree of progress has been made since then.

Though Hastings is, quite rightly so, proud of its historical past no one would wish to see any town, whether an English seaside or not, resting on its laurels … especially when those laurels are assumed to go back as far as 1066. There are a great many other attractions in Hastings and many of them do not date back as far as 1066. However they too have their part to play in what makes Hastings unique.

I personally think that the BNP is interested in Hastings because it deems it ripe for what it excels at; the sowing of disharmony and discontent. That Hastings, along with many other towns in England has areas of deprivation is not disputed. That Hastings in common with many other boroughs has a council that at times seems deaf to the people it is supposed to represent will not be questioned. What I do wonder though is whether the introduction of a party that advocates the highlighting of differences rather then commonalities will actually serve any constructive purpose.