Comments

DAMESATHOME@YAHOO.CO.UK
send the Dame your information, discretion assured.
Comments are welcome but do not necessarily reflect the view of the Dame.
Offensive/inappropriate comments will be deleted and the poster banned.

Friday, 8 July 2011

Thai Tidings





The Dame thought she would give her 'take' on the Daily Mail article. The loyal Phelps DHL'd a copy of the paper to her Thai luxury 'state of the art' hideaway(no Phelps, you cannot stay and I will not dilate upon the reason) Left: The Dame's Thai Villa

Cllr Cockell is telling anyone who will listen that it is all old news, but he is embarrassed by the timing: worse the the fact that it has taken away from the very smug feeling of ‘another step up the ladder’- and, far more importantly, the huge income boost. Some of the Labour and LibDem lot(and probably quite a few Tories) are saying if he really cared about doing a good job in the ‘Royal Borough’, as he loves to call it, he would deduct his new salary from his council allowance. After all, he secured this unusually generous allowance (£65k) in the first place by telling colleagues that the job of leader had become a full time one. Suddenly, it is no longer full time.... but just a couple of days a week! In fact Cockell was very lucky with the Mail Article. Two very embarrassing matters were not mentioned. 

First his very unwise statement on the internet immediately after the details of his extravagant trip to New York became public. With unconscious irony he said ‘My expenses are mostly routine’!! (only you could think that one up, Councillor) ‘but I have been on one foreign trip to a conference paid for by this council and as this is unusual I am providing a separate account of this trip, and full documentation’. Full documentation? But there was no restaurant receipt for the dinner with the nameless 'mystery guest'. Something else ShortlyShortly forgot:his two other Royal Borough funded trips to the US. Other forgettable things? Well how about all those chauffeur driven trips he had made in the Bentley:then he told the local press that he only went in the Bentley when the Mayor gave him lift.

When challenged about the 'factual inconsistency' he said it was a 'political denial'-or rubbish to that effect. And what about the reaction of his colleagues? Most would say his standing with colleagues is so low it has made little difference. Just one more embarrassment from the man who puts himself first and everything and everyone else nowhere. Even his ‘supporters’ want him to go, and he knows it, but he needs the money. In the meantime the residents must pay the price of an accident prone leadership, where the joint working with Hammersmith and Westminster make his own position daily more irrelevant and even the existence of the ‘Royal Borough’ itself an expensive and irrelevant anachronism. If he had the slightest conscience he would resign while he still has a little dignity left.

4 comments:

  1. Guess What! Cockell does not pay any interest to the views of the Hornet

    ReplyDelete
  2. Interesting to note that H&F Cllrs loathe him even more than our own, for his arrogance, pomposity and incompetence; he is also fond of 'political truths' as you have already spotted.

    They can't imagine how he has survived so long in K&C.

    ReplyDelete
  3. 18:19
    Guess what you simple soul....many thousands of others do. And what you say is not true. I have heard he HATES it. So go and give us some real information....
    Ex Officer

    ReplyDelete
  4. As that other famous old tart said,'he would say that,wouldn't he.
    And by the way Driveller, this constant brown nosing won't help you:he thinks you are real clown for losing a by election!!!!
    BTW I hear that Pooter reads the Dame with regularity......
    The Man from S.Ken

    ReplyDelete

Comments are your responsibility. Anyone posting inappropriate comments shall have their comment removed and will be banned from posting in future. Your IP address may also be recorded and reported. Persistent abuse shall mean comments will be severely restricted in future.