Labour’s Elum-Smith blasts Colnbrook ‘Parish elite’ for smear campaign
Colnbrook’s Labour candidate for Slough Borough Council and Colnbrook Parish Council has hit out at the disinformation campaign against him over the past few weeks, aiming both barrels squarely at current chair of the Parish Council and fellow Peter Hood.
Talk about eleventh hour. Eddy Elum-Smith has this evening broken his silence on the smear campaign against him AND his views on a Third Runway.
The negative campaign run by current Parish Chair Peter Hood in recent weeks has focused on a claim that Mr Elum-Smith is not a “local” candidate because he neither lives nor works in Colnbrook with Poyle.
Cllr Hood’s claim has raised eyebrows since other candidates, including Cllr Laxman and his assistant Iwona Garncarek, who also live outside but work within the village are local candidates. Hood has paid for professionally produced leaflets to be distributed throughout the village discrediting Elum-Smith and three other candidates.
There will be no progress, if Parish councillors are standing for re-election, because they are using the Parish for their personal gain.
But a statement issued to Colnbrook Views Mr Elum-Smith insists that he had already confirmed to Cllr Hood that his information was incorrect before his leaflet drop was carried out.
“Before the local post card of Colnbrook’s Independent Minds attack Labour in “desperate” and “cheap” smear was printed, Peter Hood paid a visit to my house, but met my absence, and left his card for me to call him.
“I spoke to Peter giving him(Peter) my affiliation within Colnbrook, that principal or only place of work during that same 12 months period has been in the parish; what I will be bring to the residents and Colnbrook. I also advised Peter that during my door knocking, people complained about the parish council not representing local people, especially an ex Parish Cllr who I spoke to, criticised SBC and Peter Hood for Grundon’s Colnbrook incinerator.”
Elum-Smith has issued a stinging criticism of the “parish elite” for their tactics:
I don’t know how low, the elite Parish comrades (Peter & co) will go to ask residents NOT to vote for Eddy Elum-Smith, Jagjit Grewal, Naveed Rana, and Arnold Richardson because they live outside the ward.
“But it fails to point out that three of their number – Kishorbhai Laxman (Wraysbury), Iwona Garnacarek (Cippenham Green in Slough) and Mick Kinane (Speedway Farm) I personally know Mick, and if Peter tells me he lives at Speedway Farm, then I have more chances of winning the lottery.”
Mr Elum-Smith said:
I was elected to stand as one of the six Labour candidates to represent residents:
1. To participate fully in the formation and scrutiny of the Parish Council’s policies,budgets, strategies and service delivery including the ‘Parish Plan’.
2. To ensure, with other councillors, that the Parish Council is properly managed.
3. To keep up to date with significant developments affecting the Parish Council at local, regional and national levels.
4. To promote the economic, social and environmental well-being of the Parish taking account of the strategic effects on other communities and the Parish Council as a whole.
5. To represent effectively the interests of the ward for which the Councillor is elected and deal with Parishioners enquiries, representations and complaints.
6. To represent the whole electorate; listen, and then represent the views of the whole community when discussing council business and working with outside bodies
7. To attend Parish Council meetings.
8. To fulfil the statutory and locally determined requirements of an elected member of a Local Authority and the Parish Council, including compliance with all relevant codes of conduct and maintaining high ethical standards, (including not disclosing confidential information.
Not like what I read in the Windsor Observer.
As being advised by residents in Colnbrook (Sutton Lane), there will be no progress, if Parish councillors are standing for re-election, because they are using the Parish for their personally gain.
In a separate development we have learned that a leaflet in Polish is similarly being distributed throughout the village, this one calling for the Polish community to vote for nine candidates.
The leaflet, attributed to ‘Colnbrook Pharmacy’ fails to specify the names and addresses of the printer, the promoter, and the person on behalf of whom the material is being published, raising the suggestion that both councillors and Laxman may have committed offences under sections 106 and 110 of the Representation of the People Act 1983.
Who could have guessed sleepy old Colnbrook’s election campaign could become this interesting in its last few hours?