Some Shouting & Swearing
Older readers of this blog will know that we’ve discussed Sue Marshall before back when we mentioned that she was a Momentum activist and she seemed to be insisting she was not. You will remember how that one ended.
Well, Sue Marshall is back. She turned up with a gentleman companion and a petition at a Full Council meeting of Fenland District Council this week.
I disagree with much of what Sue Marshall says, but I usually rather like her spirit and obvious political passion. I can’t say the same about the foul-mouthed bad-tempered fellow she was with, sadly.
It all got a bit hot and bothered what with Sue’s gentleman friend (I use the term “gentleman” in the loosest possible sense) going on a sweary rant, disrupting the meeting and referring to the Councillors in a derogatory way, as well as making some vague threats. Sue got a little shouty too. It was all very dramatic.
Of course, it was meant to be dramatic. The purpose probably being to generate some press coverage and to frame an issue for the elections next year. Although Sue has since insisted she is no longer a member or activist of the Labour party (an issue which her ex-colleagues confirm.) The NE Cambs Labour website still has a big picture of her with the words “meet your team” naming her the Chairman, so its not a surprise there was some confusion. Apparently, the main NE Cambs Labour website is “a bit out of date.” Or “a couple of years out of date” depending on which left-winger is talking to you.
I don’t expect it was any coincidence that the protestors were seen having lunch with a certain Truly Truly Truly Independent lady a few days prior to the meeting. The Truly Truly Truly Independent
Party group has so far refused to condemn the aggressive and rude actions of their fellow left-wingers, but again nobody is very surprised. The suggestion that this was a collaboration does not seem immensely far-fetched to me, but what do I know?
All this “he said she said” aside, it was a pretty sad spectacle. The motion was asking for the council to not do a thing that it was already not doing. A joke of a motion really, which is precisely why I abstained. How can you vote on a motion that is asking for something not to happen which is already not happening? I did ask if they meant to use the word “ever” but that was a step too far. God forbid their motion actually made logical sense? A real shame, as the petition itself was not unhelpful and most of us had sympathy with its aims.
Anyway, all’s well that ends well. There’s no additional charge being applied at this time and if the issue comes back against next year it will come to Full Council to discuss. Seems a pretty good result to me. With a better worded motion and a little less “f*ck this” and “f*ck you all” from the bloke in the hat we probably could have had a consensus. But that wouldn’t have been any good for their 2019 election leaflets, now would it? #sigh