The ArgusHove treated unfairly by council, says MP (From The Argus)

Get involved: Send your news, views, pictures and video by texting SUPIC to 80360 or email us.

Mike Weatherley MP says Hove is treated unfairly by the council

The Argus: Mike Weatherley MP Mike Weatherley MP

AN MP has claimed his constituency is being unfairly treated when it comes to council funding for major projects.

Mike Weatherley, MP for Hove and Portslade, has said there is a “dearth of large projects” taking place on the west side of the city despite his residents accounting for about 40 per cent of council revenue.

He has written to the chief executive of Brighton and Hove City Council Penny Thompson to highlight the issue.

Green administration councillors responded by saying it was not possible to redraw constituency boundaries to change the location of the most suitable sites for development.

The Conservative MP pointed out to the council that recent projects including New Road, the Jubilee Library, London Road, The Level, Seven Dials, seafront arches and the i360 all seemed to favour Brighton while Hove had watched the slow progress of the King Alfred redevelopment.

But Green councillor Geoffrey Bowden promised that a preferred developer partner for the seafront leisure centre would be in place in the “not-too-distant future” while Toads Hole Valley will deliver 600 new homes, 900 jobs, a school and community facilities if the Government backs the council’s City Plan.

Mr Weatherley said: “Brighton and Hove is a wonderful city, but as the champion of Hove and Portslade, I am concerned that funding for our part of the city has fallen short.

“Residents often get in touch to complain that Hove and Portslade are missing out and so I wanted to convey to Brighton and Hove City Council that this has not gone unnoticed.”

Coun Bowden, chair of economic development and culture committee, said: “As an experienced politician, Mike Weatherley knows that major projects are dependent on the location of sites and the availability of partners willing to build the high quality developments that we want to see. “With the best will in the world we cannot redraw the constituency borders to enable sites such as Preston Barracks, Circus Street or Black Rock to appear in Hove to help boost the election prospects of a sitting MP. “

Comments (22)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

3:13pm Wed 18 Jun 14

Andy R says...

Oooh look...Mike Weatherley's suddenly remembered he's Hove's MP. Must be an election coming up in less than a year........
Oooh look...Mike Weatherley's suddenly remembered he's Hove's MP. Must be an election coming up in less than a year........ Andy R
  • Score: 4

3:24pm Wed 18 Jun 14

Bill in Hanover says...

My comment has nothing to do with this article but as usual the Argus is denying us the ability to comment on any article regarding travellers. Jason Kitcat and his stupid comment that the residents of Brighton don't want to see 'Fortress Brighton' shows how completely out of touch with reality are the Green Councillors. Local residents don't want travellers, either Irish, Roma or New Age, camping in our local parks. NOT because we are prejudiced against them because of their ethnicity but simply because once here they abuse the area, when they were evicted from Sheepcote Valley last year they left a striiped, wrecked car, sheets of asbestos and various other rubbish, when they were recently in Wild Park they were throwing food (from the local food bank) at passing cars. When they can learn to behave in a civilised manner and make an attempt to fit in with the local community then perhaps the drawbridge could be lowered on 'Fortress Brighton' until then they are not welcome.
My comment has nothing to do with this article but as usual the Argus is denying us the ability to comment on any article regarding travellers. Jason Kitcat and his stupid comment that the residents of Brighton don't want to see 'Fortress Brighton' shows how completely out of touch with reality are the Green Councillors. Local residents don't want travellers, either Irish, Roma or New Age, camping in our local parks. NOT because we are prejudiced against them because of their ethnicity but simply because once here they abuse the area, when they were evicted from Sheepcote Valley last year they left a striiped, wrecked car, sheets of asbestos and various other rubbish, when they were recently in Wild Park they were throwing food (from the local food bank) at passing cars. When they can learn to behave in a civilised manner and make an attempt to fit in with the local community then perhaps the drawbridge could be lowered on 'Fortress Brighton' until then they are not welcome. Bill in Hanover
  • Score: 29

3:45pm Wed 18 Jun 14

Phani Tikkala says...

Andy R wrote:
Oooh look...Mike Weatherley's suddenly remembered he's Hove's MP. Must be an election coming up in less than a year........
Oh look….another Labour/green stooge that works for the Council taking a cheap political pop at a Tory MP.

Shouldn't you be actually working given that we pay you via Council Tax?
[quote][p][bold]Andy R[/bold] wrote: Oooh look...Mike Weatherley's suddenly remembered he's Hove's MP. Must be an election coming up in less than a year........[/p][/quote]Oh look….another Labour/green stooge that works for the Council taking a cheap political pop at a Tory MP. Shouldn't you be actually working given that we pay you via Council Tax? Phani Tikkala
  • Score: 5

4:03pm Wed 18 Jun 14

john newman says...

Freedom of speech. WE DO NOT WELCOME TRAVELLERS AND WE DO NOT WANT THEM.

I PAY MY TAXES AND SO SHOULD THEY.
Freedom of speech. WE DO NOT WELCOME TRAVELLERS AND WE DO NOT WANT THEM. I PAY MY TAXES AND SO SHOULD THEY. john newman
  • Score: 22

4:15pm Wed 18 Jun 14

Man of steel says...

Dear Mr Mike Weatherley, MP for Hove and Portslade, and residents of those two boroughs, do you fancy taking over the Isore that no-one in Brighton wants?
It would be better suited in Portslade, as there are more things to look at there, such as the habour, and the airfield, even the working industries of the inner habour would be preferable to blank sea and Regency Square.
Dear Mr Mike Weatherley, MP for Hove and Portslade, and residents of those two boroughs, do you fancy taking over the Isore that no-one in Brighton wants? It would be better suited in Portslade, as there are more things to look at there, such as the habour, and the airfield, even the working industries of the inner habour would be preferable to blank sea and Regency Square. Man of steel
  • Score: 7

4:49pm Wed 18 Jun 14

wexler53 says...

Looking at what the silly greens have done to Brighton, I'm rather pleased and relieved they've kept their noses out of Hove and the west of the city!!!

Re the travellers, we know Kit Kat is a narrow minded zealot, and I guess his ideas on opening up Brighton & Hove to all and sundry are no surprise.

Stand by for new invasions of unwanted visitors in the city.

The sooner we're rid of these green idiots, the better.
Looking at what the silly greens have done to Brighton, I'm rather pleased and relieved they've kept their noses out of Hove and the west of the city!!! Re the travellers, we know Kit Kat is a narrow minded zealot, and I guess his ideas on opening up Brighton & Hove to all and sundry are no surprise. Stand by for new invasions of unwanted visitors in the city. The sooner we're rid of these green idiots, the better. wexler53
  • Score: 13

5:04pm Wed 18 Jun 14

Idontbelieveit1948 says...

Bill in Hanover wrote:
My comment has nothing to do with this article but as usual the Argus is denying us the ability to comment on any article regarding travellers. Jason Kitcat and his stupid comment that the residents of Brighton don't want to see 'Fortress Brighton' shows how completely out of touch with reality are the Green Councillors. Local residents don't want travellers, either Irish, Roma or New Age, camping in our local parks. NOT because we are prejudiced against them because of their ethnicity but simply because once here they abuse the area, when they were evicted from Sheepcote Valley last year they left a striiped, wrecked car, sheets of asbestos and various other rubbish, when they were recently in Wild Park they were throwing food (from the local food bank) at passing cars. When they can learn to behave in a civilised manner and make an attempt to fit in with the local community then perhaps the drawbridge could be lowered on 'Fortress Brighton' until then they are not welcome.
Spot on Bill, and since the Green slime wanted a local referendum earlier this year perhaps the residents could be given a say on travellers once and for all in just such a referendum.

If Kitcat and friends need reminding we do not want travellers desecrating our parks and we don't need people like Kitcat taking the p*ss out of the resident population either. The bloke's an idiot.
[quote][p][bold]Bill in Hanover[/bold] wrote: My comment has nothing to do with this article but as usual the Argus is denying us the ability to comment on any article regarding travellers. Jason Kitcat and his stupid comment that the residents of Brighton don't want to see 'Fortress Brighton' shows how completely out of touch with reality are the Green Councillors. Local residents don't want travellers, either Irish, Roma or New Age, camping in our local parks. NOT because we are prejudiced against them because of their ethnicity but simply because once here they abuse the area, when they were evicted from Sheepcote Valley last year they left a striiped, wrecked car, sheets of asbestos and various other rubbish, when they were recently in Wild Park they were throwing food (from the local food bank) at passing cars. When they can learn to behave in a civilised manner and make an attempt to fit in with the local community then perhaps the drawbridge could be lowered on 'Fortress Brighton' until then they are not welcome.[/p][/quote]Spot on Bill, and since the Green slime wanted a local referendum earlier this year perhaps the residents could be given a say on travellers once and for all in just such a referendum. If Kitcat and friends need reminding we do not want travellers desecrating our parks and we don't need people like Kitcat taking the p*ss out of the resident population either. The bloke's an idiot. Idontbelieveit1948
  • Score: 15

6:45pm Wed 18 Jun 14

Withdean-er says...

Weatherly needs to check his facts. The King Alfred redevelopment didn't happen because nearby Hove residents, and many further afield, quite rightly fought against it .... as well as the arrival of the credit crunch. That cannot be pinned on Brighton councillors.
Weatherly needs to check his facts. The King Alfred redevelopment didn't happen because nearby Hove residents, and many further afield, quite rightly fought against it .... as well as the arrival of the credit crunch. That cannot be pinned on Brighton councillors. Withdean-er
  • Score: 8

6:50pm Wed 18 Jun 14

hoveguyactually says...

And future generations will wonder how on earth such an idiot was given control over Brighton and Hove.

And isn't it time the Argus stopped being so scared of inviting comments whenever there is an article about the travellers?
And future generations will wonder how on earth such an idiot was given control over Brighton and Hove. And isn't it time the Argus stopped being so scared of inviting comments whenever there is an article about the travellers? hoveguyactually
  • Score: 11

7:01pm Wed 18 Jun 14

Maxwell's Ghost says...

If Jason wants travellers in the city they should be housed in the wards which voted Green.
They voted this council in and therefore should show support for its leader. Then let's see how Green their supporters are at the next election.
If Jason wants travellers in the city they should be housed in the wards which voted Green. They voted this council in and therefore should show support for its leader. Then let's see how Green their supporters are at the next election. Maxwell's Ghost
  • Score: 7

7:32pm Wed 18 Jun 14

rolivan says...

If you would like to comment go to the most commented section and you will see that there is the live Web chat from yesterday .For some reason they are allowing comments and they are being monitored and deleted if necessary . Perhaps the Argus are collating some comments and might present them to those concerned for a response
If you would like to comment go to the most commented section and you will see that there is the live Web chat from yesterday .For some reason they are allowing comments and they are being monitored and deleted if necessary . Perhaps the Argus are collating some comments and might present them to those concerned for a response rolivan
  • Score: 0

7:54pm Wed 18 Jun 14

HJarrs says...

So, I can only assume from the comments above that there is great support for Weatherley's view particlarly with regard to investing in a new travellers park in Hove.
So, I can only assume from the comments above that there is great support for Weatherley's view particlarly with regard to investing in a new travellers park in Hove. HJarrs
  • Score: -5

7:55pm Wed 18 Jun 14

We love Red Billy says...

Bill in Hanover wrote:
My comment has nothing to do with this article but as usual the Argus is denying us the ability to comment on any article regarding travellers. Jason Kitcat and his stupid comment that the residents of Brighton don't want to see 'Fortress Brighton' shows how completely out of touch with reality are the Green Councillors. Local residents don't want travellers, either Irish, Roma or New Age, camping in our local parks. NOT because we are prejudiced against them because of their ethnicity but simply because once here they abuse the area, when they were evicted from Sheepcote Valley last year they left a striiped, wrecked car, sheets of asbestos and various other rubbish, when they were recently in Wild Park they were throwing food (from the local food bank) at passing cars. When they can learn to behave in a civilised manner and make an attempt to fit in with the local community then perhaps the drawbridge could be lowered on 'Fortress Brighton' until then they are not welcome.
Check out Jasons Twitter feed. Hopping mad and demanding answers fron the editor. Jogg on Jason. #politicalchamberpot
s
[quote][p][bold]Bill in Hanover[/bold] wrote: My comment has nothing to do with this article but as usual the Argus is denying us the ability to comment on any article regarding travellers. Jason Kitcat and his stupid comment that the residents of Brighton don't want to see 'Fortress Brighton' shows how completely out of touch with reality are the Green Councillors. Local residents don't want travellers, either Irish, Roma or New Age, camping in our local parks. NOT because we are prejudiced against them because of their ethnicity but simply because once here they abuse the area, when they were evicted from Sheepcote Valley last year they left a striiped, wrecked car, sheets of asbestos and various other rubbish, when they were recently in Wild Park they were throwing food (from the local food bank) at passing cars. When they can learn to behave in a civilised manner and make an attempt to fit in with the local community then perhaps the drawbridge could be lowered on 'Fortress Brighton' until then they are not welcome.[/p][/quote]Check out Jasons Twitter feed. Hopping mad and demanding answers fron the editor. Jogg on Jason. #politicalchamberpot s We love Red Billy
  • Score: 0

7:57pm Wed 18 Jun 14

We love Red Billy says...

Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
If Jason wants travellers in the city they should be housed in the wards which voted Green.
They voted this council in and therefore should show support for its leader. Then let's see how Green their supporters are at the next election.
Hove lawns, Queens Park, Withdean Stadium. Good idea Max.
[quote][p][bold]Maxwell's Ghost[/bold] wrote: If Jason wants travellers in the city they should be housed in the wards which voted Green. They voted this council in and therefore should show support for its leader. Then let's see how Green their supporters are at the next election.[/p][/quote]Hove lawns, Queens Park, Withdean Stadium. Good idea Max. We love Red Billy
  • Score: 1

9:44pm Wed 18 Jun 14

Maxwell's Ghost says...

I also believe that anyone who gets a parking ticket in areas where other groups of people ie hippy vans, traveller vans etc, are not being ticketed should challenge their ticket under the equal opportunities legislation.
Travellers were on Madeira Drive last week and not being ticketed but you can bet anyone who over ran on their parking ticket in a legal bay got a fine.
It's time this council was challenged by all groups to be treated equally.
This council is particularly poor with equal rights.
I also believe that anyone who gets a parking ticket in areas where other groups of people ie hippy vans, traveller vans etc, are not being ticketed should challenge their ticket under the equal opportunities legislation. Travellers were on Madeira Drive last week and not being ticketed but you can bet anyone who over ran on their parking ticket in a legal bay got a fine. It's time this council was challenged by all groups to be treated equally. This council is particularly poor with equal rights. Maxwell's Ghost
  • Score: 3

10:17pm Wed 18 Jun 14

HJarrs says...

We love Red Billy wrote:
Bill in Hanover wrote:
My comment has nothing to do with this article but as usual the Argus is denying us the ability to comment on any article regarding travellers. Jason Kitcat and his stupid comment that the residents of Brighton don't want to see 'Fortress Brighton' shows how completely out of touch with reality are the Green Councillors. Local residents don't want travellers, either Irish, Roma or New Age, camping in our local parks. NOT because we are prejudiced against them because of their ethnicity but simply because once here they abuse the area, when they were evicted from Sheepcote Valley last year they left a striiped, wrecked car, sheets of asbestos and various other rubbish, when they were recently in Wild Park they were throwing food (from the local food bank) at passing cars. When they can learn to behave in a civilised manner and make an attempt to fit in with the local community then perhaps the drawbridge could be lowered on 'Fortress Brighton' until then they are not welcome.
Check out Jasons Twitter feed. Hopping mad and demanding answers fron the editor. Jogg on Jason. #politicalchamberpot

s
Thanks. Checked it out. Looks like the Argus did a typical set up and hatchet job on JK. Very sad that the Argus is continuing with its political agenda. This type of article has lead to it losing a large chunk (all?) of its politically progressive paper customers and a precipitous decline in circulation.

That said, I still support those striking Argus employees trying to protect their jobs and to keep as much of the Argus production in the city as possible. We need a strong local paper despite their editorially conservative bias. We also need a paper that represents the diverse view of those in the city an not the narrow establishment view constantly peddled.
[quote][p][bold]We love Red Billy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Bill in Hanover[/bold] wrote: My comment has nothing to do with this article but as usual the Argus is denying us the ability to comment on any article regarding travellers. Jason Kitcat and his stupid comment that the residents of Brighton don't want to see 'Fortress Brighton' shows how completely out of touch with reality are the Green Councillors. Local residents don't want travellers, either Irish, Roma or New Age, camping in our local parks. NOT because we are prejudiced against them because of their ethnicity but simply because once here they abuse the area, when they were evicted from Sheepcote Valley last year they left a striiped, wrecked car, sheets of asbestos and various other rubbish, when they were recently in Wild Park they were throwing food (from the local food bank) at passing cars. When they can learn to behave in a civilised manner and make an attempt to fit in with the local community then perhaps the drawbridge could be lowered on 'Fortress Brighton' until then they are not welcome.[/p][/quote]Check out Jasons Twitter feed. Hopping mad and demanding answers fron the editor. Jogg on Jason. #politicalchamberpot s[/p][/quote]Thanks. Checked it out. Looks like the Argus did a typical set up and hatchet job on JK. Very sad that the Argus is continuing with its political agenda. This type of article has lead to it losing a large chunk (all?) of its politically progressive paper customers and a precipitous decline in circulation. That said, I still support those striking Argus employees trying to protect their jobs and to keep as much of the Argus production in the city as possible. We need a strong local paper despite their editorially conservative bias. We also need a paper that represents the diverse view of those in the city an not the narrow establishment view constantly peddled. HJarrs
  • Score: -5

11:18pm Wed 18 Jun 14

Andy R says...

Phani Tikkala wrote:
Andy R wrote:
Oooh look...Mike Weatherley's suddenly remembered he's Hove's MP. Must be an election coming up in less than a year........
Oh look….another Labour/green stooge that works for the Council taking a cheap political pop at a Tory MP.

Shouldn't you be actually working given that we pay you via Council Tax?
Touchy......
[quote][p][bold]Phani Tikkala[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Andy R[/bold] wrote: Oooh look...Mike Weatherley's suddenly remembered he's Hove's MP. Must be an election coming up in less than a year........[/p][/quote]Oh look….another Labour/green stooge that works for the Council taking a cheap political pop at a Tory MP. Shouldn't you be actually working given that we pay you via Council Tax?[/p][/quote]Touchy...... Andy R
  • Score: 3

12:00am Thu 19 Jun 14

stevo!! says...

Why does Hove need 'developing'?

It looked fine to me this afternoon.
Why does Hove need 'developing'? It looked fine to me this afternoon. stevo!!
  • Score: -1

8:37am Thu 19 Jun 14

localboy78 says...

We all knew this would happen back in the mid 90's when our Hove Borough Council was earmarked for abolishment. The options were to join Adur district, or join with Brighton to form a new 'Brighton & Hove' authority. The latter was the least preferred for obvious reasons as we knew Brighton would get preferential treatment.

However, despite the vast majority of Hove and Portslade residents vehemently against jumping into bed with Brighton, it happened.

Then came city status, yet again 78% of Hove and Portslade residents voted against this as we knew that the 'city' would basically be a Brighton-centric entity..which has proved to be correct.

So, despite the VAST majority of Hove and Portslade residents exercising their right to SELF-DETERMINATION, we were completely IGNORED!

Many residents have been saying year after year that we do not want to be part of 'Brighton & Hove' and we would prefer one of the following:

1. Reinstatement of Hove Borough Council (possibly renamed Hove and Portslade Borough Council), with higher level council functions the responsibility of East Sussex County Council.

2. Absorbed into Lewes District, with higher level council functions the responsibility of East Sussex County Council.

3. Absorbed into Adur District, with higher level council functions the responsibility of West Sussex County Council.

4. Create a new 'Hove and Portslade' district, with higher level council functions the responsibility of East Sussex County Council.

5. Become our own unitary authority (doubtful as the population is not large enough to pre-qualify).

WE HAVE NEVER WANTED TO PART OF BRIGHTON & HOVE! NOW IS THE TIME FOR OUR RIGHT TO SELF-DETERMINATION TO BE HONOURED SO WE CAN GET RID OF BRIGHTON AND IT'S ANTI-HOVE & PORTSLADE COUNCIL!

LISTEN TO THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE!
We all knew this would happen back in the mid 90's when our Hove Borough Council was earmarked for abolishment. The options were to join Adur district, or join with Brighton to form a new 'Brighton & Hove' authority. The latter was the least preferred for obvious reasons as we knew Brighton would get preferential treatment. However, despite the vast majority of Hove and Portslade residents vehemently against jumping into bed with Brighton, it happened. Then came city status, yet again 78% of Hove and Portslade residents voted against this as we knew that the 'city' would basically be a Brighton-centric entity..which has proved to be correct. So, despite the VAST majority of Hove and Portslade residents exercising their right to SELF-DETERMINATION, we were completely IGNORED! Many residents have been saying year after year that we do not want to be part of 'Brighton & Hove' and we would prefer one of the following: 1. Reinstatement of Hove Borough Council (possibly renamed Hove and Portslade Borough Council), with higher level council functions the responsibility of East Sussex County Council. 2. Absorbed into Lewes District, with higher level council functions the responsibility of East Sussex County Council. 3. Absorbed into Adur District, with higher level council functions the responsibility of West Sussex County Council. 4. Create a new 'Hove and Portslade' district, with higher level council functions the responsibility of East Sussex County Council. 5. Become our own unitary authority (doubtful as the population is not large enough to pre-qualify). WE HAVE NEVER WANTED TO PART OF BRIGHTON & HOVE! NOW IS THE TIME FOR OUR RIGHT TO SELF-DETERMINATION TO BE HONOURED SO WE CAN GET RID OF BRIGHTON AND IT'S ANTI-HOVE & PORTSLADE COUNCIL! LISTEN TO THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE! localboy78
  • Score: 1

9:55am Thu 19 Jun 14

Andy R says...

localboy78 wrote:
We all knew this would happen back in the mid 90's when our Hove Borough Council was earmarked for abolishment. The options were to join Adur district, or join with Brighton to form a new 'Brighton & Hove' authority. The latter was the least preferred for obvious reasons as we knew Brighton would get preferential treatment.

However, despite the vast majority of Hove and Portslade residents vehemently against jumping into bed with Brighton, it happened.

Then came city status, yet again 78% of Hove and Portslade residents voted against this as we knew that the 'city' would basically be a Brighton-centric entity..which has proved to be correct.

So, despite the VAST majority of Hove and Portslade residents exercising their right to SELF-DETERMINATION, we were completely IGNORED!

Many residents have been saying year after year that we do not want to be part of 'Brighton & Hove' and we would prefer one of the following:

1. Reinstatement of Hove Borough Council (possibly renamed Hove and Portslade Borough Council), with higher level council functions the responsibility of East Sussex County Council.

2. Absorbed into Lewes District, with higher level council functions the responsibility of East Sussex County Council.

3. Absorbed into Adur District, with higher level council functions the responsibility of West Sussex County Council.

4. Create a new 'Hove and Portslade' district, with higher level council functions the responsibility of East Sussex County Council.

5. Become our own unitary authority (doubtful as the population is not large enough to pre-qualify).

WE HAVE NEVER WANTED TO PART OF BRIGHTON & HOVE! NOW IS THE TIME FOR OUR RIGHT TO SELF-DETERMINATION TO BE HONOURED SO WE CAN GET RID OF BRIGHTON AND IT'S ANTI-HOVE & PORTSLADE COUNCIL!

LISTEN TO THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE!
There were no popular votes on either the creation of the unitary council or of city status, so how do you know what people want? The creation of the Brighton and Hove unitary council was a decision made by John Major's government in 1995. You can argue that the lack of a vote was wrong but your grievance is somewhat undermined by your own claim to be the "voice of the people". Based on what? Who are you? Who elected you? Who is the "we" who like all these "options" you're putting forward? In what way is "self-determination for Hove" enhanced by giving away control of the main services to Lewes or Chichester?

Here's an idea....there's local elections next year, so why don't you run for office, based on these ideas? A perfect test of popular opinion.......
[quote][p][bold]localboy78[/bold] wrote: We all knew this would happen back in the mid 90's when our Hove Borough Council was earmarked for abolishment. The options were to join Adur district, or join with Brighton to form a new 'Brighton & Hove' authority. The latter was the least preferred for obvious reasons as we knew Brighton would get preferential treatment. However, despite the vast majority of Hove and Portslade residents vehemently against jumping into bed with Brighton, it happened. Then came city status, yet again 78% of Hove and Portslade residents voted against this as we knew that the 'city' would basically be a Brighton-centric entity..which has proved to be correct. So, despite the VAST majority of Hove and Portslade residents exercising their right to SELF-DETERMINATION, we were completely IGNORED! Many residents have been saying year after year that we do not want to be part of 'Brighton & Hove' and we would prefer one of the following: 1. Reinstatement of Hove Borough Council (possibly renamed Hove and Portslade Borough Council), with higher level council functions the responsibility of East Sussex County Council. 2. Absorbed into Lewes District, with higher level council functions the responsibility of East Sussex County Council. 3. Absorbed into Adur District, with higher level council functions the responsibility of West Sussex County Council. 4. Create a new 'Hove and Portslade' district, with higher level council functions the responsibility of East Sussex County Council. 5. Become our own unitary authority (doubtful as the population is not large enough to pre-qualify). WE HAVE NEVER WANTED TO PART OF BRIGHTON & HOVE! NOW IS THE TIME FOR OUR RIGHT TO SELF-DETERMINATION TO BE HONOURED SO WE CAN GET RID OF BRIGHTON AND IT'S ANTI-HOVE & PORTSLADE COUNCIL! LISTEN TO THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE![/p][/quote]There were no popular votes on either the creation of the unitary council or of city status, so how do you know what people want? The creation of the Brighton and Hove unitary council was a decision made by John Major's government in 1995. You can argue that the lack of a vote was wrong but your grievance is somewhat undermined by your own claim to be the "voice of the people". Based on what? Who are you? Who elected you? Who is the "we" who like all these "options" you're putting forward? In what way is "self-determination for Hove" enhanced by giving away control of the main services to Lewes or Chichester? Here's an idea....there's local elections next year, so why don't you run for office, based on these ideas? A perfect test of popular opinion....... Andy R
  • Score: 0

11:09am Thu 19 Jun 14

Hove marauder says...

Bill in Hanover wrote:
My comment has nothing to do with this article but as usual the Argus is denying us the ability to comment on any article regarding travellers. Jason Kitcat and his stupid comment that the residents of Brighton don't want to see 'Fortress Brighton' shows how completely out of touch with reality are the Green Councillors. Local residents don't want travellers, either Irish, Roma or New Age, camping in our local parks. NOT because we are prejudiced against them because of their ethnicity but simply because once here they abuse the area, when they were evicted from Sheepcote Valley last year they left a striiped, wrecked car, sheets of asbestos and various other rubbish, when they were recently in Wild Park they were throwing food (from the local food bank) at passing cars. When they can learn to behave in a civilised manner and make an attempt to fit in with the local community then perhaps the drawbridge could be lowered on 'Fortress Brighton' until then they are not welcome.
Quite so Bill.
[quote][p][bold]Bill in Hanover[/bold] wrote: My comment has nothing to do with this article but as usual the Argus is denying us the ability to comment on any article regarding travellers. Jason Kitcat and his stupid comment that the residents of Brighton don't want to see 'Fortress Brighton' shows how completely out of touch with reality are the Green Councillors. Local residents don't want travellers, either Irish, Roma or New Age, camping in our local parks. NOT because we are prejudiced against them because of their ethnicity but simply because once here they abuse the area, when they were evicted from Sheepcote Valley last year they left a striiped, wrecked car, sheets of asbestos and various other rubbish, when they were recently in Wild Park they were throwing food (from the local food bank) at passing cars. When they can learn to behave in a civilised manner and make an attempt to fit in with the local community then perhaps the drawbridge could be lowered on 'Fortress Brighton' until then they are not welcome.[/p][/quote]Quite so Bill. Hove marauder
  • Score: 1

12:50pm Thu 19 Jun 14

localboy78 says...

Andy R wrote:
localboy78 wrote:
We all knew this would happen back in the mid 90's when our Hove Borough Council was earmarked for abolishment. The options were to join Adur district, or join with Brighton to form a new 'Brighton & Hove' authority. The latter was the least preferred for obvious reasons as we knew Brighton would get preferential treatment.

However, despite the vast majority of Hove and Portslade residents vehemently against jumping into bed with Brighton, it happened.

Then came city status, yet again 78% of Hove and Portslade residents voted against this as we knew that the 'city' would basically be a Brighton-centric entity..which has proved to be correct.

So, despite the VAST majority of Hove and Portslade residents exercising their right to SELF-DETERMINATION, we were completely IGNORED!

Many residents have been saying year after year that we do not want to be part of 'Brighton & Hove' and we would prefer one of the following:

1. Reinstatement of Hove Borough Council (possibly renamed Hove and Portslade Borough Council), with higher level council functions the responsibility of East Sussex County Council.

2. Absorbed into Lewes District, with higher level council functions the responsibility of East Sussex County Council.

3. Absorbed into Adur District, with higher level council functions the responsibility of West Sussex County Council.

4. Create a new 'Hove and Portslade' district, with higher level council functions the responsibility of East Sussex County Council.

5. Become our own unitary authority (doubtful as the population is not large enough to pre-qualify).

WE HAVE NEVER WANTED TO PART OF BRIGHTON & HOVE! NOW IS THE TIME FOR OUR RIGHT TO SELF-DETERMINATION TO BE HONOURED SO WE CAN GET RID OF BRIGHTON AND IT'S ANTI-HOVE & PORTSLADE COUNCIL!

LISTEN TO THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE!
There were no popular votes on either the creation of the unitary council or of city status, so how do you know what people want? The creation of the Brighton and Hove unitary council was a decision made by John Major's government in 1995. You can argue that the lack of a vote was wrong but your grievance is somewhat undermined by your own claim to be the "voice of the people". Based on what? Who are you? Who elected you? Who is the "we" who like all these "options" you're putting forward? In what way is "self-determination for Hove" enhanced by giving away control of the main services to Lewes or Chichester?

Here's an idea....there's local elections next year, so why don't you run for office, based on these ideas? A perfect test of popular opinion.......
Exactly - there was no popular vote so people weren't asked their opinion in an official capacity. You obviously didn't live in Hove during the 90's otherwise you would know that there was a massive public outcry in Hove and many residents lobbied their Hove Borough ward councillors to oppose the merger with Brighton (I was one of them). The councillors did indeed protest and there was a majority who opposed, but, it went ahead anyway. Over the years there has been a vociferous majority asking for the proposals for Hove to be re-considered, and in fact about five years ago there were a series of articles in this very newspaper to this effect, which attracted a large amount of comments in support of a divorce from Brighton.

The point of my comment was to highlight the ongoing bias towards Brighton by the council, and it's seeming lack of interest it anything that doesn't have Brighton splashed all over it. It 's as a result of this that I referred back to the Hove Borough debate as I very clearly remember everyone saying that joining with Brighton would result in Hove being overlooked, and the ultimate 'city' being constantly referred to as 'Brighton' rather than 'Brighton & Hove'. I think the phrase "I told you so" might be appropriate.

All I am asking for is an honest and open debate about the future of Hove within the district of 'Brighton & Hove' and that we should be afforded the basic human right of self-determination so we can choose how Hove is governed - whether with Brighton or without. Simple.
[quote][p][bold]Andy R[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]localboy78[/bold] wrote: We all knew this would happen back in the mid 90's when our Hove Borough Council was earmarked for abolishment. The options were to join Adur district, or join with Brighton to form a new 'Brighton & Hove' authority. The latter was the least preferred for obvious reasons as we knew Brighton would get preferential treatment. However, despite the vast majority of Hove and Portslade residents vehemently against jumping into bed with Brighton, it happened. Then came city status, yet again 78% of Hove and Portslade residents voted against this as we knew that the 'city' would basically be a Brighton-centric entity..which has proved to be correct. So, despite the VAST majority of Hove and Portslade residents exercising their right to SELF-DETERMINATION, we were completely IGNORED! Many residents have been saying year after year that we do not want to be part of 'Brighton & Hove' and we would prefer one of the following: 1. Reinstatement of Hove Borough Council (possibly renamed Hove and Portslade Borough Council), with higher level council functions the responsibility of East Sussex County Council. 2. Absorbed into Lewes District, with higher level council functions the responsibility of East Sussex County Council. 3. Absorbed into Adur District, with higher level council functions the responsibility of West Sussex County Council. 4. Create a new 'Hove and Portslade' district, with higher level council functions the responsibility of East Sussex County Council. 5. Become our own unitary authority (doubtful as the population is not large enough to pre-qualify). WE HAVE NEVER WANTED TO PART OF BRIGHTON & HOVE! NOW IS THE TIME FOR OUR RIGHT TO SELF-DETERMINATION TO BE HONOURED SO WE CAN GET RID OF BRIGHTON AND IT'S ANTI-HOVE & PORTSLADE COUNCIL! LISTEN TO THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE![/p][/quote]There were no popular votes on either the creation of the unitary council or of city status, so how do you know what people want? The creation of the Brighton and Hove unitary council was a decision made by John Major's government in 1995. You can argue that the lack of a vote was wrong but your grievance is somewhat undermined by your own claim to be the "voice of the people". Based on what? Who are you? Who elected you? Who is the "we" who like all these "options" you're putting forward? In what way is "self-determination for Hove" enhanced by giving away control of the main services to Lewes or Chichester? Here's an idea....there's local elections next year, so why don't you run for office, based on these ideas? A perfect test of popular opinion.......[/p][/quote]Exactly - there was no popular vote so people weren't asked their opinion in an official capacity. You obviously didn't live in Hove during the 90's otherwise you would know that there was a massive public outcry in Hove and many residents lobbied their Hove Borough ward councillors to oppose the merger with Brighton (I was one of them). The councillors did indeed protest and there was a majority who opposed, but, it went ahead anyway. Over the years there has been a vociferous majority asking for the proposals for Hove to be re-considered, and in fact about five years ago there were a series of articles in this very newspaper to this effect, which attracted a large amount of comments in support of a divorce from Brighton. The point of my comment was to highlight the ongoing bias towards Brighton by the council, and it's seeming lack of interest it anything that doesn't have Brighton splashed all over it. It 's as a result of this that I referred back to the Hove Borough debate as I very clearly remember everyone saying that joining with Brighton would result in Hove being overlooked, and the ultimate 'city' being constantly referred to as 'Brighton' rather than 'Brighton & Hove'. I think the phrase "I told you so" might be appropriate. All I am asking for is an honest and open debate about the future of Hove within the district of 'Brighton & Hove' and that we should be afforded the basic human right of self-determination so we can choose how Hove is governed - whether with Brighton or without. Simple. localboy78
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree