Posted by JLW on Thursday May 26, 09:36
Yesterday, John Leech made his maiden Speech in a debate on the economy and welfare reform. To compress it into some bullet points:
- Keith Bradley was forthright with his opinions and "represented his constituents with great determination and gave them 100% of his support"
- Manchester, Withington is the vibrant heart of south Manchester
- Is dissapointed that plans remain for the introduction of identity cards - would rather the money was spent on police officers
- Dismayed to have heard no mention of light rail transport in the Queen's Speech - Metrolink
- Welcomes the proposals to encourage greater participation in elections, but unsure the Government's proposals are what is required
- Welcomes the Government's assurances that they will use the presidency of the G8 to secure progress on tackling poverty in Africa and on climate change
- Just before the election a review of cancer services at Christie Hospital by the strategic health authority could threaten its future - he is delighted that the critical care beds have been approved
- Welcomes the assurance that education remains a top priority
No real suprises there then.
+ tags coming soon
( 26 Comments )
Susan
Thursday May 26, 16:47
Has John Leech got an office where he can be contacted? I would like to ask him about Christie Hospital, is he really going to claim it was under threat a few weeks ago, but not now? He made a fuss about the mobile phone thing - but how do I contact him?? I don't want to use his mobile/home number - he might accuse me of stalking.
Ian
Thursday May 26, 16:55
This week's South Manchester Reporter puts everything nicely in to a nutshell, with John's highly convincing responses.
!!
Safe to say he can't justify his closure claims with the GMSHA's factual position.
http://www.southmanchesterreporter.co.uk/news/s/200/200511_new_mp_hit_by_double_whammy.html
The City Council website doesn't give his contact details if you want to contact him as your MP.
If you want to contact him as a Cllr then it suggests.
John Leech
53B Manley Road
MANCHESTER
M16 8HP
0161 226 6542
cllr.j.leech@manchester.gov.uk
3 weeks on he has no office set up and no surgeries held other than in his council ward.
Class.
Steven
Thursday May 26, 17:01
You can click on the link "Write To Him", and send a letter by fax directly over the internet after entering your postcode.
Graham Thomas
Thursday May 26, 17:06
If the Lib Dems had broken the story about Christie's I could understand the fuss- but it was doctors who worked at Christie who were worried. Why would they pretend to be worried?
By the way am I the only one that is impressed that our new MP was one of the first new MP's to give a maiden speech. How many other MP's did he beat to it?
Alice
Friday May 27, 03:59
Surely the point is that NHS managers have to be able to have serious and open discussions about the best way to deliver services without worrying about this being hijacked by totally unscrupulous politicians. I have an elderly neighbour undergoing treatment at Christies who Leech scared the life out of and I think it's despicable.
By the way has anyone else ever wiondered where all those Lib dem petitions get sent to - or are thye just a mechanism for gathering names and addresses of potential voters?
Alan
Friday May 27, 04:33
Good point Alice, will John be releasing the petition he password protected on his website or is it all insignificant now that he has won the election?
anon
Friday May 27, 14:46
please excuse the lack of a name but my job may be on the line if my bosses realised that I had contacted you
re Christies ;the review that concerned the consultants seemed to come out of the blue and the'danger'suddenly disapeared after the election
can anyone tell me
1 who authorised the review
2 on what grounds
3 is that person a member of a polical party and if so which one
Alan
Friday May 27, 18:42
Anon, these are the questions that we are all asking. Immediately before the election John Leech claimed that doctors at Christie had informed him the hospital was under threat. At the public meeting in Ivy Lodge the question was put to John about who these doctors were, there was no response. There was never any threat of closure nor was there any threat to services at Christie. Everyone comments on how Keith Bradley 'used' Christie in his maiden speech; perhaps he did, what he didn't do was ruthlessly campaign pre election and scaremonger his potential constituents.
You pose very serious questions which require very serious explanations. Will these doctors come forward? Will John Leech explain himself in a public meeting? I certainly intend to pursue this course of questioning and if it takes four years for me to get the answers then it will be for four years that I continually ask the questions.
Again I urge all contributors to this site, regardless of what political persuasion you are to write to John Leech with regards to this matter and share any response you may receive. Perhaps this way we will find out the truth!
Witheld Name
Friday May 27, 18:51
There is a rumour that the person who authorised the review of the hospital is affiliated to, or possibly a member of, the Liberal Democrats. That would perhaps explain a lot.
Thomas Graham
Saturday May 28, 00:43
I'm not sure that that would really make sense... the review could never have closed the hospital, so it seems the lib dems just plucked that it was closing from the air
Tim
Saturday May 28, 07:51
How would you know that Thomas? You don't. But you chose the Labour view. I thought you might be reasonable, but you chose tobelieve whatever you are told by your Labour freiends. How nieve you are.
But since you set up this website it isw not a suprise you are biased.
Alan
Saturday May 28, 12:48
What does it matter who set the website up. Is it wrong, do we not live in a democracy? I think that Thomas is the least biased and by no means naive. He doesn't need to believe what his 'Labour firends' say Tim, he can see the facts for himself. Something which, with due respect, you sem to be failing to do
Tim
Saturday May 28, 19:41
The last comment under the name 'Tim' wasn't from me.
Anonymous
Saturday May 28, 19:48
People should be willing to post under their real name and not hide behind someone elses. Get the irony?
neutral
Sunday May 29, 13:25
http://www.johnleech.org.uk
I just saw this John Leech character on the tv after he had won, taking the cameras to his job - in a call centre in Stockport - to say goodbye to his colleagues. The said people didn't seem very friendly, nor did the job seem like a proper one? So who is he? What has he done?
Dominic H
Wednesday Jun 01, 03:08
You all seem so cynical of John Leech's intentions, personally I am cynical of them (like I would be with any politician) but I would still vote for him.
Why? Because he has worked harder for this constituency and his ward than any other MP or Cllr that I know of. You all say that you don't trust him (well most of you do), but you must remember that more people are willing to trust him and place their support in him than Keith Bradley.
I mean, at least give him a chance to prove himself before you all try to tear him apart. Stop being bitter that Labour lost the seat.
P.S. Shame on you Tom I thought that you were above supporting Labour.
Joe
Thursday Jun 02, 20:21
Susan you managed to find this web site how hard would it of been to find a Lib Dem Site? Sorry Labour supporter obviously!!
Jenny
Thursday Jun 02, 20:41
Joe, Sue is asking a legitimate question, is there any need for sarcasm or presumptuous comments. I think not!
Jack
Thursday Jun 02, 22:51
Unbelievable sour grapes here..
Since when did Labour or the Tories have moral highgrounds.
Pete
Thursday Jun 02, 23:44
Why do all Lib Dem supporters on this site just echo the wods of John Leech? Can't they think for themselves?
Anonymous
Sunday Jun 05, 02:49
http://www.southmanchesterreporter.co.uk/news/s/200/200511_new_mp_hit_by_double_whammy.html
And, as if that wasn't enough, a new website has been launched to keep tabs on his actions in a sort of political eye-spy. Bloggers have already used the site to fire off withering attacks on the MP's character.
Ha ha!
Tim
Sunday Jun 05, 02:50
You fail to note in the summary that John Leech raised the point that the previous MP warned services at Christie were under threat. Was he lying, scaremongering or fighting for the hospital?
As for the GMSHA, have they ruled out closure? No. They just attacked those who warn that this may happen.
I presume there was a 'review' before Withington Hospital was downgraded and lost its A&E.
Thomas Graham
Sunday Jun 05, 02:51
Is that previous comment meant to be from me? It wasn't, and in actual fact, there were quite a few new MPs that made their maiden speeches in earlier debates. With regard to Tim's comment about Keith Bradley and Withington Hospital losing it's A&E department, the decision to close the hospital was made by the conversatives and it is due to Keith's hard work we have any sort of hospital there at all. I also think that you miss the point Tim, a review may have been held about closing Withington Hospital, but the review will have been on the subject of whether it should close or not, not whether it should get an extra six intesive care beds... they are drastically different propositions, and the thought that Christie might close if it didn't get six extra intensive care beds is, in the words of chief executive of the strategic health authority, "complete and utter nonsense and wholly irresponsible".
TV EYE
Monday Jun 06, 02:55
Found this website after reading the piece in the Reporter, it's well good. I'm particularly fed up that for the next five years we are lumbered with an MP voted for, in the main, by people who aren't even from here, ie the dippy drippy students obsessed with the Iraq War. Most of these voters will be gone by the time of the next election, Iraq will have faded by the time the next crowd of scrounging students comes along and they'll spend polling day drinking themselves into a stupour as usual, so Leech's consituency will be gone. But for five years we've got to suffer this man, whose election literature seemed to imply that George Bush was responisble for Metrolink not coming to Didsbury! I was never a Labour supporter, but I voted for Bradley this time to try and keep the LibDem out. If Labour are responsible for keeping Metrolink out of Didsbury and Stockport, good luck to them! Don't you think that if it were viable, private enterprise would've *made* it happen by now?! All it would do would create two years of misery trying to get between Didsbury and Stockport by road, and for what?! The probable closure of East Didsbury railway station that takes you into town in ten minutes, to be replaced by trams that might get you there in half an hour. Metrolink is only of any use in the City Centre, it's pointless and a waste of money here, the LibDems should just shut up about it (and shame on our imported Tory for banging on about the same issue).
Keep putting the pressure on the LibDems!
Matty
Monday Jun 20, 14:34
"people who aren't even from here, ie the dippy drippy students obsessed with the Iraq War. Most of these voters will be gone by the time of the next election, Iraq will have faded by the time the next crowd of scrounging students comes along and they'll spend polling day drinking themselves into a stupour"
You are an idiot. This kind of scapegoating is only going to cover up the real reasons why the labour party lost this seat. This was in no way a sudden swing but the culmination of a gradual decline in the popularity of the Labour Party over the last few years. Remember Labour took many losses in the council elections to the Lib Dems, including places such as Burnage which being the place I was brought up came as a massive surprise to me since traditionally it has been as Labour a place as imaginable. What's more, there are no students to blame there!!! Shocking!
I just wish the labour party and their supporters would quit apportioning blame and look at how they can regain the seat next time with a real campaign (not just one leaflet per household) and popular policies (not like invading Iraq and now it seems they won't let go of the idea of ID cards even at £300 a head).
Alan
Tuesday Jun 21, 20:18
Matty,
Firstly, it has been said categorically that ID cards would not cost as much as £300, this is just the latest story that the media is pushing around and as we all know, we shouldn't believe everything that we read in the paper.
Secondly, the main reason that the Lib Dems gained so many council seats in the local elections is due to the fact that the public tend to punish government through the local elections; they recognise, as can be seen by the 2005 GE, that to vote Lib Dem (nationally) is dangerous.
Thirdly, Mr Bradley sent out, to my knowledge, 5 leaflets per household and as mentioned by Zoe, in another thread, Mr Bradley used just under his allowance for campaigning. This begs the question as to how much Mr Leech spent on the election campaign and whether or not his expenses went over the limit.
Fourthly, I completely agree that the Labour Party need to look at how they can regain the seat at the next election and work towards that goal from now onwards. However, to suggest that Mr Bradley didn't run a 'real' campaign when compared with the scaremongering tactics of Mr Leech is slightly short sighted.
These comments are owned by the person that posted them. They are not necessarily indicative of public opinion and their content has not been checked for accuracy. If you find a comment you think violates our Terms of Use please report it.
Sorry, posting on this entry is disabled to prevent comment spam.
