Blogpost: Mr Perrin’s not impressed with Labour’s Aveley By-election candidate

Screenshot 2019-03-11 at 17.04.27

Mr. Perrin’s blog: “A Word in Your Ear”.

“Why Charlie is NOT My Darling”.

IS the Thurrock Labour Party so limited in its choice of candidates it has to “resurrect” Charles Curtis?

I do not presume to instruct the people of Aveley & Uplands to vote for a particular candidate but I do feel obligated to inform them of the history of Charles Curtis when he was a two term Labour Councillor for the Belhus Ward. A ward in which I live in.

HEAVY GOODS VEHICLES (HGVs).

Some years ago Aveley, Belhus and South Ockendon were badly affected by HGVs rumbling along streets close to their homes, schools and shops. The damage caused to properties, the noise, that went on day and night on a daily basis and the dangers presented by such vehicles driven through streets such as Aveley High Street, Stifford Clays Road, Daiglen Drive and South Road, South Ockendon seems not to have concerned Mr. Curtis in the slightest, along with the other two Belhus Councillors at the time, Wendy Curtis and Sue Gray, but then why. should they be? They were not affected by the misery caused, on the contrary Charles Curtis strenuously opposed a plan by Howard Tenens, who operate a business in Stifford Clays Road which involves the coming and going of a large number of HGVs throughout the day and night, which would have reduced the problems considerably. He attended two meetings at which he spoke in support of Thurrock Council’s objection to the Howard Tenens plan, mainly on the grounds of the perceived detrimental effect it would have on ”green belt” land, i.e. “Hangman’s Wood”. Some will say Mr. Curtis should be applauded for his concern to protect “green belt” land, and I would agree were it not for the fact that Mr, Curtis lives on a nice estate built on “green belt” land, his safety and environment is not blighted by HGVs. It could be that there was an ulterior reason why Mr. Curtis was so opposed to the Howard Tenens plan which had nothing whatsoever to do with protecting “green belt” land when he declared at one of the meetings; “as you know Chair, you and I have plans for this site”. It appears he believed that if Howard Tenens lost their appeal they would move their buisness elsewhere, thus leaving the site in Stifford Clays Road vacant and available for development. Guess what, the plans referred to by Mr. Curtis involved the building of a large number of houses on the site and the Company seeking planning permission was Violia Waste Disposal, a Company to which Mr. Curtis had an indirect connection as Chair of Violia Trust Fund and was, conveniently, a member of the Council’s Planning Committee. I have no evidence that Mr. Curtis was guilty of any wrongdoing but I believe his conduct and motives were disappointing.

DAMP AND MOULD IN COUNCIL RENTED HOUSING.

It is officially acknowledged at the highest level that mould in houses, caused mainly by damp, is a Category 1 Hazard and, at the very least, is a serious threat to the health and well being of those living with it in their homes and at worst can be life threatening, especially to infants, the old and those already suffering another illness. Not so for Charlie, Wendy and Sue, they said it is a Category 4 Hazard being no risk at all to health and well being and is certainly not life threatening, and those who say otherwise are scaremongering or using it as an excuse to be rehoused. Mr. Curtis is scornful of those who complain about the standard of council houses and says they should be grateful that they have a roof over their heads, even though it may be a leaky one.

THE ARMED FORCES/ THE VETERANS CHARTER.

Mr. Curtis believes that ex-members of the Armed Forces settling in Thurrock should not be given special consideration when it comes to housing, they should be placed on the waiting list and wait their turn. He says why should they be given special treatment, they are only doing the job they are paid to do, if injured, they knew what they were letting themselves in for. He says he is far more concerned about the plight of the single mum with three kids living on the top floor of a high rise building. The single mum does have a roof over her head, however unsuitable Mr. Curtis believes it to be whilst the ex-soldier does not. Mr. Curtis says as an ex-soldier himself he never sought nor expected special treatment, I was just doing a job. It is sheer effrontery for Mr. Curtis to compare his military service to that of the likes of L/cpl Nicky Mason, who was killed serving his country in a theatre of war.

As the Mayor of Thurrock Mr. Curtis signed the Council’s “Veterans Charter”, as he did so, what was he really thinking and did he do so with gritted teeth?

If you ask the people of Belhus, or for that matter, the whole of Thurrock what they believe Mr. Curtis achieved during eight years as a Councillor, I think they would be hard put to name a single issue, apart from the residents of Humber Avenue, an upmarket area of Belhus whose residents tend to be more affluent and much more appealing to Charlie, Wendy and Sue than tenants of houses on Council estates. They enthusiastically supported Humber Avenue residents complaints about the temporary disturbance to their tranquillity, caused by noise resulting from road works 150 yards away. Never mind the endless disturbance suffered by residents elsewhere as a result of HGVs thundering past their homes a mere few feet away.

To the voters of Aveley and Uplands, I have informed you of the past record of Charles Curtis, make of it what you will. On 21st March, 2019 the choice is yours.

Maybe there is one thing Mr Curtis will be remembered for, he was an affable Mayor of Thurrock.

7 Responses to "Blogpost: Mr Perrin’s not impressed with Labour’s Aveley By-election candidate"

  1. Catching the Bus (Ant Auger)   March 11, 2019 at 5:46 pm

    As for the first part of the article why does this not shock me about politicians and the land.
    surprised he didnt make a financial killing. 🙂

    “he was an affable Mayor of Thurrock.”
    Was that affable or feeble?

    Alan Field: Thurrock Independent
    David Van Day: Conservative Party
    Charlie Curtis: Labour Party
    Tomas Pilvelis: Liberal Democrat

    Well the Tories and Labour are dead wood.
    So two to choose from Peter?

  2. Catching the Bus (Ant Auger)   March 11, 2019 at 6:48 pm

    Armed Forces.
    “they are only doing the job they are paid to do, if injured, they knew what they were letting themselves in for.”

    This guy is a Muppet.
    That should be the new British Army’s recruitment poster.
    When I joined in 1992 the slogan was we’ve got our countries back and our country has our back.

    No one will join up with this guy around. Why would they?

    Don’t let him write press releases.

  3. thurrocksgonedownhill   March 12, 2019 at 2:14 pm

    Cookie.

    Calling for someone to die on here is low even by your sub-standards.

    You may feel hard done by being on benefits but we have all been there at one time or another.

    Pull your self together man, get a job and be of some use to society instead of demand apologies, calling for people to die and sponging of society. The trouble with you is you think your right and attack anyone who disagrees. I see a worrying pattern forming here. Do you listen..NO.

    Like you have quoted before – everyone is entitled to their opinion. Well so is this guy!

  4. Valen (Myles) Cook   March 12, 2019 at 6:56 pm

    thurrocksgonedownhill – “Calling for someone to die on here is low even by your sub-standards.” – Exactly where did I call for Perrin to die? Nowhere but then you like to misrepresent people, don’t you? I said that I would continue to remind him of the apology he owes me until he gives me the apology or he dies and that whichever comes first is OK with me. That is not calling for him to die, just telling him that I won’t let him forget that he owes me an apology.

    “You may feel hard done by being on benefits but we have all been there at one time or another.” – Oh, so now you say that you have been on benefits? That makes you a parasite then, doesn’t it? Doesn’t matter how long you were on them for because YOU still lived off of the State at one time. Hypocrite. Why were you on benefits, you Tory-voting parasite? What possible reason could possibly make someone who believes he’s better than everyone else and that people who claim benefits are parasites lower himself to claim benefits? Hypocrite.

    “Pull your self together man” – You keep saying that you have family members that have mental ill-health and yet you can say something that has been universally condemned as not only unhelpful but downright harmful to someone with mental ill-health. Hypocrite.

    “get a job and be of some use to society” – 1) I’ve tried to get a job, you arrogant pig, and didn’t get past the interview stage despite being given good reports back from the employers I had interviews with. I only failed to get the jobs because I didn’t have as much experience in the job as the successful candidate. How am I supposed to get experience if I can’t get a job, you ignorant moron? Of course, you don’t give a crap about the circumstances, you just like to attack people without a thought to what has transpired in their life. 2) A person can be of some use to society without being in paid employment and while I was able to I was doing lots of voluntary work and taking courses to improve my job prospects, none of which helped.

    “demand apologies” – I am owed an apology by Perrin because he attacked me in his last column and broke journalistic ethics in doing so. He referred to you as well but you don’t use your real name because you’re a lowdown stinking Tory-voting arrogant coward so you don’t deserve an apology as you hide in anonymity. People can actually identify me.

    “calling for people to die” – I didn’t but then let’s not let accuracy get in the way of a personal attack.

    “sponging of society” – I am collecting on the National Insurance payments I made when I was working just like you did when you claimed benefits (or so you claim). So don’t have a go at me for doing what you once did despite the fact that you have always looked down on claiming benefits. Hypocrite.

    “The trouble with you is you think your right and attack anyone who disagrees. ” – When I’m wrong I actually admit it and accept the corrective comments that proved my error. The fact is I have given expert testimony and facts to back up my arguments in the past and it is YOU who have failed to provide any proof to back up your arguments therefore you have failed in your duty to prove me incorrect in my views. YOU are the one who attacks people who don’t agree with him and you do so spouting nothing but empty opinions and vicious bile. Hypocrite.

    “I see a worrying pattern forming here.” – I see a pattern too. A pattern of you losing arguments to me who you believe is your inferior when the opposite is the truth.

    “Do you listen..NO.” – Again, you’re projecting. I listen and I’m willing to accept admitting to be in error when I’m given evidence that proves that I’m in error. YOU are the one who isn’t listening. On the subject of depression that we clashed on (and I won, I might add), I provided expert testimony and scientifically backed facts and you still ignored them. You’re just an ignorant arrogant hypocrite who’s wrong more than he’s right and can’t accept that fact.

    “Like you have quoted before – everyone is entitled to their opinion. Well so is this guy!” – I’m not stopping Perrin from having an opinion but when he uses his privileged position as a journalist (amateur hack or not) to attack someone in an identifiable way then he has broken the most precious duty of a journalist – that of writing in an ethical way. If he attacked me as a fellow journalist, that would have been ethical. If he had attacked me as a public figure, that would have been ethical. However, I am not acting as a journalist or a public figure when I post comments on YT articles, I am acting as a member of the general public and, as such, am deserving of the same respect every member of the general public should expect from journalists – even you. Perrin used my name in his article which is a contravention of journalistic ethics and he had the opportunity to use Catching The Bus’ real name as he has included it on his screen name but he didn’t which makes what he did a personal attack on my good self. Everyone has the right to an opinion but journalists (even amateur hacks like Perrin) have to act within certain parameters congruent with their journalistic responsibilities. Not that an ignorant moron like you would understand concepts like ethics, responsibilities, duty, honour or integrity. You don’t even have a passing understanding of facts (or grammar, punctuation, or intellectual rigor in arguments). I didn’t think anyone was as stupid as you appear to be but it appears that, on this occasion, I was absolutely wrong and I’m happy to admit that error.

  5. Catching the Bus (Ant Auger)   March 12, 2019 at 9:33 pm

    thurrocksgonedownhill
    “Calling for someone to die on here is low even by your sub-standards.”

    A bit hypocritical for you to post that of all the posters on here. You’ve called for countless people to die. So have I crinimals of which you attacked me for going to far. I also add Blair, politicians and banksters in that as well.
    But you always make an exception for certain parasites.

  6. Valen (Myles) Cook   March 12, 2019 at 11:31 pm

    Catching the Bus – TGDH is a low-life scumbag who delights in double standards. It’s one rule for him and one rule for everyone else. He’s an elitist who isn’t part of the elite and lacks the breeding, intellect or social status of a dung beetle. Of course, that’s my opinion and as, TGDH has so rightly pointed out, “everyone is entitled to their opinion”.

  7. horndon   March 15, 2019 at 11:15 pm

    If the Lord himself came down and handed out lottery wins to the residents of the borough and found a cure for all illnesses Peter Perrin would still be “unimpressed”.

You must be logged in to post a comment Login