.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

Monday, October 03, 2005

The things that they say (three)

I have just heard the new Kate Bush single, "King of the Mountain", on Virgin Radio. As a long-time fan of her music I had already downloaded it over the weekend. I am now looking forward to the release of her new album, "Aerial", in November, the first in 12 years.

At the conclusion of the track I was astonished to hear the DJ claim that Kate Bush was the "original Bjork". He then went on to state that she is related to US President George W Bush and that as a result she may one day inherit the Presidency. I was both speechless and horrified on both counts. Is this DJ the best that radio can offer these days?
You listen to Virgin Radio.

Enough said really.
Only as an alternative to Roy Noble if I am still at home after 9am.
Well, being a regional list member without a constituency and without a proper job to do, I suspect you are still home after 9am on most week-day mornings.
It shows how little you know about Regional list members and their work David. And yet you and your colleagues choose to pontificate on the subject!
I think what's important is what the people of Wales think of part-time Assembly Members such as yourself.

Having rejected you and your party in every seat in South West Wales at the last Assembly elections, do you think they welcome the fact that you take a seat in the Assembly, without a constituency, claim a salary and expenses at the tax-payers expense and claim to speak on their behalf?
Now you really are showing your ignorance. I do not call a 70 hour week part-time. I deal with an area 7 times that of a constituency member, I deal with casework and I represent people because that was what I was elected to do under a system introduced by Labour. The problem seems to be that this effronts the control freakery of the average Labour politician who do not like sharing their constituency with other parties. My work justifies every penny of my salary and the expenses that I accrue in employing staff to deal with a growing casework load.
Interesting you mention staff there Peter.

Tell me, would there happen to be any rules as to what those staff are allowed to do, given the fact that they are paid from the public purse?

Would the Assembly look askance at...ooh, off the top of me head, a researcher using Assembly resources such as its internet servers, to run a website targeting other political parties?

Just wondering.
Having now read your blog David I can see where you are coming from

There are rules as to the use of Assembly resources. With regards to support staff they do have a political role so they have more latitude than civil servants especially if they are working in support of their AM.
Thanks Peter, that's helpful.

I had supposed there might be a degree of leeway in what the Assembly allows support staff to do.

However, if I were a voter in the area concerned and I found out that my AM had used my money to allow a researcher to set up a website which entrapped those of an opposing political viewpoint into making comments which cost them their job, it might have a bearing on where I put my cross come the next election.

Given the many, many challenges that face Wales, I might think that an AM who felt that was a useful deployment of resources ought to have a rethink on just what his, or her, researchers do with their time.
Can't we have some more comments about Kate? Writing as someone who adored the Hounds Of Love, I've only heard her new single once, and wasn't particularly impressed..

So I'm worried about the album....
Well Chris, if it's any help, the 'Babushka' video is burnt into my adolescent memory. But that's probably rather too much information.
Come on Banksy, tell us who this AM is you claim is misusing public money
Oh, yet another blogger whose identity has been set up since, gosh, today.

Wonder who you might be then?
Name the AM and the researcher or stop using innuendo.
Reveal who you are and I might treat your demand with something other than utter contempt.

Just downright contempt perhaps.

And I don't think you understand the meaning of innuendo.
Boys, boys, please! Gratified as I am to have my blog used as a battleground, if assemblywatcher actually reads David's blog he may find the answer he is looking for.
I have. It doesn't.


1. An indirect or subtle, usually derogatory implication in expression; an insinuation

David Banks is using innuendo to try to blacken an AM's name because he doesn't have the stomach for a libel case that he would lose.
Oh, give me strength.

Firstly, it's obvious that, whoever you are, you work at the Assembly, because you've just trawled through my blog to establish the above. If you'd simply asked me I could have saved you the time.

Once again, I find it odd that people such as yourself have the time and the inclination to do this.

Secondly, as I've said, you don't understand innuendo. Innuendo, in libel, has a very specific meaning. It means something that has an ordinary, innocent meaning, but whose innuendo meaning to those with special knowledge for example, is defamatory.

For example, it is not on the face of it defamatory to say Jack is married to Jill, but it is defematory if a group of people know Jack is already married to Jane. Understand now?

Now, on to what I've actually written, rather than what you misquote me as saying.

If you read my comments carefully you will find that I've said there may be no rules saying an AM's researcher cannot use his or her time to run a website targeting political opponents. Who knows, it may even be part of the job spec. I care not.

What I did say is that voters may be less likely to vote for an AM who did that, because they might think an AM's researcher should be doing more useful things with his, or her, time.

Whether or not an AM has got a researcher doing this I don't know. But there is a lot to suggest that one has. It's not unreasonable therefore to ask questions about it.
Well, I'm grateful for the advice on innuendo. You must be a barrel of laughs as a lecturer.

Back to the AM. You say 'there is a lot to suggest that one has.'

Which one then?

and what's the so-called evidence?

Name names, gutless one.
Accusations of gutlessness ring a little hollow from yet another blogger who posts anonymously.
rpgSince you won't name names, people are entitled to draw their own conclusions.

You're just leaping on the bandwagon of all the accusations on other weblogs and discussion boards. Like them, you have no evidence, you simply want to spread poison.

I think most of your journalistic colleagues would see your posts here as an embarrassment to their profession.
Talk about spreading poison assmebly watcher. How rude. Banksy is right, very learned and has tried to raise the bar. You, on the other hand have nothing other than malice to play with it seems.
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?