Jonathan Reynolds speaks about Tesco - at last - and calls traffic concerns a 'Red Herring'

As part of all the mewling and puking from the roads lobby last week surrounding the government decision to cut the Mottram Bypass, the Stalybridge and Hyde MP, Jonathan Reynolds, saw an opportunity to burnish his pro-bypass credentials with his disillusioned electorate. He issued a press release and appeared on BBC Radio Manchester's 'Beswick at Breakfast' show last Thursday.

Now we've been lambasting Reynolds over his failure to address the concerns of his electorate regarding the Hattersley Tesco Extra for a while now. For months now, there has been a perfect silence about the issue from him, even through the General Election campaign. But his appearance on Alan Beswick's show left him vulnerable to being asked any question, and the astute Beswick took the opportunity to corner him on Tesco.

You can listen to the segment of the show and read a full transcript of the interview after the 'read more' link below. But what interests us are Reynolds' comments about Tesco, and these need to be highlighted here.

Firstly, Reynolds admits that the store "will have an impact on traffic". But later, he seeks to dilute this admission, by saying that "there won't be that different a change to the traffic flows ... in the area". It seems to us that he can't have it both ways. As Beswick implies, Tesco have chosen this site because of the proximity to the motorway and trunk road network, in order to maximise access and thereby profit. As we've always stated, the plan for the store anticipated the Bypass, but with the Bypass now on hold for an indeterminate length of time, it will now seek to precipitate it. All Reynolds can do is to state that the traffic problems of the A628/A57/M67 exist in a bubble, and that development in Tameside cannot make any difference. Isn't it funny that Roy Oldham's refrain was always that 'development in Glossop and High Peak' was responsible for increased traffic on this road? Not Tameside though, just Glossop and High Peak.

Secondly, Reynolds seeks to differentiate the store from the Bypass by stating that the Tesco is part of the 'regeneration' of Hattersley. 'Regeneration' in this context is code for the furtherance of the goals of sectors of private capital over social considerations. So the maintenance of existing housing can only be brought about by awarding massive concessions to a private company. We've seen another example of this today with the revelation that Tesco are secretly funding public infrastructure in Salford in return for being given the go-ahead on massive planning projects.

Thirdly, Reynolds seeks to downplay the scale of the Tesco store. The 525 car parking spaces go unmentioned, and Reynolds says, ridiculously, "There's a lot of controversy as to whether it would be described as a Tesco Extra - the size of the site is not comparable to some of the Tesco Extras we have seen in other parts of the country". There is no controversy - the artists impression of the store shows quite plainly the Tesco Extra logo emblazoned upon it! In addition, the Tesco Extra is the largest type of store that Tesco construct - at 95,000 square feet, the Hattersley store will be only 15% smaller than the store at Portwood in Stockport.

But Reynolds can afford to be blase - because Tesco seem to have won. With that twat Eric Pickles ignoring this issue, it seems the group set up to oppose the store plan have surrendered (at least if the disappearance of their website is anything to go by). With Siege upping their profile again, it seems that the future belongs to Tesco, if not the responsibility for the traffic, and Tameside MBC's silence regarding the road funding announcement is ominous: perhaps Tesco have thrown some money at reviving Bypass 2.0 behind the scenes?

Have the pro-bypass lobby snatched victory from the jaws of defeat? Unfortunately, it now seems that only time will tell.

Reynolds rants about Bypass 2.0 in Parliament - and threatens civil disobedience!

Last Tuesday, the new Stalybridge and Hyde MP Jonathan 'Jonny' Reynolds saw his opportunity to once again raise the profile of the doomed Mottram Bypass, this time in the House of Commons. The occasion was the Summer Adjournment of Parliament. The full text of his speech can be read at the link above, or by clicking through to the 'read more' link below.

We've taken some time to study what he's said, and here's our potted response:

This speech is the kind of 'debate' that a politician loves - because it's not a proper debate. Indeed, as far as we know, Reynolds has never taken part in any real, open debate about either the Longdendale Bypass, Glossop Spur or the new Bypass 2.0. Like many other politicians, Reynolds can rely on parliamentary privilege to effectively say what he likes in the House of Commons, without granting those whose opinions differ the opportunity to hold him to account.

As we remarked upon nearly 2 and a half years ago, Reynolds failed to put in an appearance at the Public Inquiry at the time (along with every other local politician who supported the Bypass). It would therefore be difficult for him to credibly point to his 'support' for this scheme at that time, for he didn't take an opportunity to speak up for it, and face questions from objectors. This is extraordinary - all the more so for the fact that no other politician took the opportunity to do so either, which would have put in ahead in the credibility stakes were he to have taken to opportunity to speak.

And for that matter, neither did the members of the Longdendale Siege Committee that he namechecks in his speech: neither Mike Flynn, Bob Haycock, nor David Moore could be arsed to speak in favour of the road that will remain forever 'virtual', and left it to other members of Longdendale Siege to stand up and be counted, individuals who are not among those that he points out. We're reliably informed that Siege are so disappointed with Reynolds performance, they're threatening to link up with the local Tories.

Longdendale Siege did not submit a petition with 9,000 signatures to Downing Street. By the counts conducted by our contacts who have viewed the petition, the number was just under 7,600, and a large proportion of those were from people outside of the area. This means that Reynolds has consciously inflated the figures by more than 15%. Furthermore, as he points out, the petition was submitted to Number 10 Downing Street in what was a public relations exercise, which also means that it is not available for public scrutiny, unlike petitions presented to Parliament. We blogged before on the yo-yo nature of the numbers for this petition.

We're wondering exactly what kind of statistical survey Reynolds has undertaken to support his bold statement "many objections were also raised by people who had never visited the area"? As far as we know, no-one has ever said that before, and it is utter crap. It may well be the case that a fair number of people do not live in the immediate area, but that is not the same thing as having never visited the area.

We stand to be corrected if we are wrong, but our recollection is that the PI did not fall on the fact that the Highways Agency (HA) had miscalculated the length of the Stocksbridge Bypass. The fact is that the HA's traffic figures and basic mathematics were an utter mess, a point rumbled by Save Swallows Wood in a devastating submission very early on. In any case, the PI remained adjourned for months on end, enough time for them to get it right one would have thought. The fact of the matter is that the promoters of this road simply failed to make a case for the bypass - they presented their case to the Inquiry and then admitted the plans were at fault, not even allowing objectors to state their case.

Mr Reynolds would do well to remember that the Longdendale Integrated Transport System - that he seems to think is only about a road, thanks for reminding everyone - is still a consultation exercise. Tameside MBC is asking for people's views, and Reynolds is effectively attempting to prejudice the consultation with his invitations to a Minister to come and view the congestion. And if he did that at the moment, it would be the wrong time from his point of view, for the fact is that now is a good illustration of the effect the 'school run' has on traffic, and the roads are very quiet indeed.

The most hilarious bit though is where Reynolds threatens civil disobedience if a new road is not forthcoming. Let’s be clear about this – he has threatened it, not merely intimated that some of his constituents (i.e. the three he mentions plus assorted hangers-on) may take part in it. If any of us were to have threatened civil disobedience in objecting to the road, no doubt the authorities will have come down on us like a ton of bricks. Yet Reynolds’ tough talk is possibly shielded by his parliamentary privilege.

Ultimately, as we have recently pointed out, this is all just politricks. Reynolds is well aware that he was returned with the smallest majority in his constituency for many years. He is eager to show that he has done all that he can to keep the Bypass alive, knowing full well that a Labour government would have had to have killed it off, as the Tories are about to do. By seemingly taking up Roy Oldham’s mantle as the political flag bearer for the Bypass, he thinks this may boost his popularity, at least among the few people left that both take politicians seriously and do not view them with contempt.

Jonathan Reynolds snubbed by Transport Minister over Bypass plea

Actually, that's the Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Transport, Norman Baker. Stalybridge & Hyde MP, Jonathan Reynolds, submitted a written question to him recently:

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will visit the villages of Hollingworth and Mottram-in-Longdendale in Stalybridge and Hyde constituency to observe traffic congestion on the A59 (sic).

Norman Baker's reply yesterday was just about the biggest snub it was possible to deliver:

I understand Tameside metropolitan borough council is currently looking at options to address congestion in the villages of Hollingworth and Mottram-in-Longdendale in the constituency of Stalybridge and Hyde. I do not think it would be appropriate for me or the Secretary of State for Transport to visit the area to observe traffic congestion whilst this work is ongoing.

This is in stark contrast with the likes of Alistair Darling who visited the area to show support for the Bypass when he was Secretary of State for Transport . Putting aside Norman Baker's record in the past over environmental concerns (he turned up at at least one Climate Camp in the past few years), the signals are clear - the axemen at the DfT are not ruling anything out for the cuts, and to turn up to essentially show support for a possible road to then later on 'down the road' cut future funding for it would be a huge own goal.

Now all of this suits the likes of 'Jonny' Reynolds, who's been very busy since he was elected desperately trying to look like he's doing something about the bypass. So if a Con-Dem government nix it, then he's able to blame it on his political rivals and 'Con-Dem' them...

Politricks, politricks, politricks.

Jonathan 'Jonny' Reynolds wins in Stalybridge & Hyde - lock up your virgin daughters...

No surprises here - Jonathan 'Jonny' Reynolds wins in Stalybridge & Hyde. We've heard that James Purnell didn't even stick around to congratulate his successor and is already hanging out in London, but the son of Dracula now holds his safe seat after all kinds of dubious shenanigans to get him there and attempts on his political life from pipsqueaks in the same Party, albeit with a vastly reduced majority (hardly a massive endorsement).

Jonny Reynolds interviewed about Bypass 2.0

Whilst it seems that any public pronouncements backing the Bypass in print from the Stalybridge and Hyde candidates are thin on the ground, the Saddleworth News website has been carrying interviews where it has been mentioned. Most interesting is their interview with Jonathan 'Jonny' Reynolds which appeared on their site recently.

Now the sound file for this interview is rather large, so we hope the editor of the site doesn't mind that we've altered it to save our readers/listeners the hassle of downloading it and wading through the other bilge to get to the relevant bit - the edited mp3 can be heard on the player below, along with our transcription of Reynolds' words.

But what's really fascinating about this interview is how much Reynolds gives away about the true reasons for this road. He makes a pitch aimed at the local electorate using the conventional justification about 'relieving locals of traffic' (although Bypass 2 is now only 'helping' Mottram), and wraps this around the true aim: that the bypass is part of a strategic route improvement, ultimately aimed at facilitating the motorway network, as part of a trans-European route (you may remember that we have written extensively in the past about the plans Tameside had for a North European Trade Axis).

Other interesting points are:

• How Reynolds corrects himself when talking about opposition to the original bypass plan - changing it to the well-worn myth propogated by the local roads lobby that it was "opposition outside the area".
• How Reynolds calls the new Bypass proposal 'Bypass 2' - a term first used on this website which now seems to have entered the official lexicon.
• How thoroughly middle class Reynolds is (and likely to become ruling class by May 7th if he's elected).

Interviewer:

Now one other erm issue that's been rumbling on here for er em really rather a long time is the issue of the Bypass, erm, where do you stand on that?

Reynolds:

I used to live on Mottram Moor in Hollingworth, I'm the Longdendale Councillor, so you won't be surprised to know I'm very much in favour of the Bypass. You know I'm not someone who believes that building roads is always the answer to traffic problems but if you look at the unique situation that we have with two motorways pointing towards each other, everything that I've seen, you know, there's not an easy public transport solution to this, and some of the more sort of, erm, distinctive ideas like a roll-on roll-off railway don't seem to have been a starter at all, er, in order to solve the traffic problem.

What annoys me the most as a Longdendale Councillor is the way that, you know, the funding allocations have come about in such a way as to, you know, be assigned in a way at a regional level, and I understand why across the North West for certain transport projects that makes sense, but really this is, you know, an essential piece of road infrastructure on the edge of a region - it's a national project because it links two regions together and it's something which has come about really through the National motorway network, creating the unique problems that we've got in Longdendale, and I think the government - all governments - going back many, many years should have recognised this and given us the funding, and we've got the busiest A-road in the country and we've got levels of pollution in Hollingworth outside the primary school which are in excess of anything that's recommended by, you know, the medical experts.

So, the funding should be given - I appreciate the original Bypass plan caused a lot of opposition because of, sorry a lot of opposition outside the area, because of what was perceived to be some sort of damage to the Peak Park as it came through at the end, that was a small piece of the, er, wider bypass that was proposed. At the minute what we're looking at is really what's been called Bypass 2 or a smaller initial option that would just bypass Mottram and come back across and use the Glossop Spur back to Woolley Bridge from the M67. That's still going to require a solution for Hollingworth, and road calming and maybe an HGV ban can be part of that, but I need to know in terms of being both a local Councillor and, er, a possible MP for the area that Hollingworth's going to get a solution as well as Mottram, and I'm very much committed as someone who lives in the area as well to getting, er you know, a system in place which relieves the residents of the traffic because what they're being asked to put up with at the minute is not acceptable at all.

A future free from the Bypass?

Now we don't pretend to have done a full survey of all the election literature circulating both Longdendale and the High Peak, but from what we have seen so far, it seems remarkably free of mention of Bypass 2.0.

In the High Peak, in leaflets mailed and posted by the successor to Tom 'Shiteman' Levitt - Caitlin Bisknell - there's no mention the Bypass anywhere. This is also the case in the examples of literature delivered on behalf of Andrew 'Tweedledumber' Bingham (we will try to post scans of these leaflets when we have time).

But the most interesting case is that of the Labour PPC in Stalybridge & Hyde, Jonathan Reynolds. A website has been erected for his campaign this week, by the looks of it in a rather hasty fashion. Here's what we noticed on a cursory glance:

1. It seems to contain rather a lot of press releases about James Purnell - in fact, it appears to be Purnell's website with a makeover - a bit like Reynolds himself.
2. Reynolds 'About me' spiel on the website makes no mention of Bypass 2.0, although there's plenty of talk about 'better transport by road and rail'.
3. Politicians and other folk publicly backing Reynolds on the site DO NOT include fellow Councillor Sean Parker-Perry (wonder why?) and, crucially, Tameside Council leader Roy Oldham.
4. As we've already said, this website appears to be James Purnell's redirected to a new domain name, and in the haste to get it online, Reynolds seems to have overlooked the fact that it does not contain his agent's details*, but does contain those of the General Sectretary of the Labour Party (Ray Collins) at the bottom (as a Labour MP's website often does). Those more well-versed in electoral law than ourselves may want to see if anything illegal is taking place.

Whilst we haven't seen Reynolds campaign literature yet, it seems clear that many of the major political parties in the area do not consider the Bypass to be a campaigning issue. How long this lasts for after the election remains to be seen.

*UPDATE, 22/04/2010: a recent article in Tribune magazine carries a description of what seems like internecine civil war within Stalybridge and Hyde Labour Party, being heavily critical of Reynolds and his 'backers'. It makes clear that Reynolds was struggling to find an election agent, but has now secured Mike Kane, who some may remember replaced Mike Doherty as James Purnell's Office Manager when Doherty was sacked for writing to the press to back Purnell without declaring that he worked for him. Reynolds website now names Kane as his agent, although bizarrely he seems to have been  re-named 'Michel'.

Jonny Reynolds - entering a world of pain...

Tameside Eye and Tameside Mafia are both breaking with the news that Councillor Jonathan 'Jonny' Reynolds has been selected as the Labour PPC for Stalybridge & Hyde. Just over a week ago, we reported how Reynolds' campaign was promising to deliver Bypass 2.0 for Longdendale.

In the words of Walter Sobchak, we'd like to say to Jonny that he's about to enter a 'world of pain'. Our advice: drop Bypass 2.0.

Jonny Reynolds as Stalybridge & Hyde MP? - all mouth, no trousers...

Since we last blogged, there's been a lot of bad blood flowing around Tameside Labour Party. Our old friend, the supreme fuckwit that is Sean Parker-Perry, has been doing his best to smear his rival, fellow Councillor Jonathan Reynolds. We'd have loved to have had the scoop on this story, and we would have thought that Parker-Perry would have learned something from his stupid little games on the internet which lost him his job some time ago. Nevertheless, his accusations look interesting and deserve to be followed up...

In the meantime, reports of the struggle facing Reynolds to get himself onto the local PPC candidate list have reached a national level. The Times has reported that Peter Mandelson intervened to ensure Reynolds was re-admitted to the candidate list, after initially being excluded, which provoked accusations of this being a breach of the rules.

So for the Stalybridge and Hyde Labour Party, now there's a choice between a self-publicist GP with some wacky views about the NHS, a think-tanker, a Blairite, a racist former immigration minister and little Jonny, the local (from the North East) wanabee lawyer, a party hack.

And now look what the wind has blown into our hands. Above you'll see Reynolds' campaign leaflet for the PPC post. Look more closely and you'll find the following:

Local Transport - we need significant investment in transport in Stalybridge and Hyde, and especially in the Mottram Bypass.

Should anyone take Reynolds seriously on this issue? We think not. After all, as we pointed out at the time, Reynolds joined both his fellow Councillors in Longdendale in utterly failing to make an appearance at the Public Inquiry. He clearly does not have the courage of his convictions, failing those in favour of a bypass in his constituency who were looking to him to represent their views. But he now expects them to take him seriously again!

Regular readers will know better than to expect us to show the time of day to any politicians, of any political stripe (even those campaigning against the bypass, who don't stand a cat in hells chance anyway) . We're not going to go into why, as there's plenty of other articles we've posted that expound our politics. But clearly, an outsider would be a more effective choice for Stalybridge and Hyde Labour Party - because they wouldn't have a track record of utter failure in representing them over the Bypass.

**UPDATE - the Times is now claiming that the think-tanker and the racist have pulled out, because of Mandelson's intervention.

Purnell quits: exit Faction Man - enter Action Man?

This blog is the last place you'll hear it today, but the big news is the announcement from James Purnell that he will be standing down as an MP at the next General Election.

There's not much we can say about this that hasn't been said already all over the internet anyway. We're wholly unsurprised that this southern chancer has decided to duck out now before Labour take a beating next time.

But who will replace him? Well, the talk is that it's likely that the Longdendale Councillor Jonathan 'Jonny' Reynolds will be chosen by the CLP as a candidate, and we all know his track record regarding the bypass. But then there's also another factor: Reynolds is the Secretary of the Tameside Co-operative Labour Party, a faction which is backing Kieran Quinn to be the new leader of TMBC and led the revolt against Roy Oldham.

If Reynolds is chosen as the PPC for Stalybridge and Hyde, it's inconceivable that he won't publicly back the bypass, particularly as the Tory PPC has already done so. But like all politicians, what these people say in public is not necessarily the same as what's going on behind the scenes.

Reynolds can be assured that if he does stand for MP and wins, we'll be paying very close attention to him in future.

Sean Parker-Perry - no Bypass Mandate

Sean Parker-Perry - along with the other Longdendale Labour candidates that support the Bypass - have always made much of their 'mandate' in the area. They trot out the typical refrain of politicians, that they 'campaigned on the bypass issue' and therefore they were also elected on the back of it, as if it is the only point in their manifesto, and as though the electorate have a huge choice to vote for those who oppose it (or at least actively oppose it, eh Green Party? - NOT).

Indeed, both Johnathan Reynolds and Parker-Perry have made their views known to the Inspector at the Public Inquiry, as has Roy Oldham (although rather oddly, his evidence has yet to appear online, though it is available for all to see in the library). So let's take a look at what they say.

First Reynolds. You can read his letter here. The best bit reads:

"...In addition, I would like to make a point about the democratically expressed wishes of the people of Longdendale. As a newly elected Councillor in 2007, who had until very recently lived on Mottram Moor, I made clear my unequivocal support for the bypass during my election campaign and the reasons for this. My support for the Bypass was the subject of a specific leaflet I produced and distributed in Hollingworth and Mottram. Despite claims from the organised opposition that local opinion is not in favour of the project going ahead, I received more votes than all the opposing candidates combined. If local people are against the bypass, as some would claim, then they are certainly not registering this view through the ballot box. In fact, quite the opposite is true."

Of course, as we've pointed out before, most people in Longdendale don't vote, and since most of the candidates are for the bypass, there's not really any choice if you don't support it. No doubt Reynolds would point out that if you don't take part then 'tough', but you can't crow about a 'mandate' if the majority of a minority of the total population voted for you.

And then we come to Sean's letter to John Watson, which you can read here. He doesn't waffle and come over all pro like Johnny, but here's his bit:

"The elected members of TMBC who represent the Longdendale Ward have done so on a mandate from the electorate of supporting the bypass. Both I and my ward colleagues have run campaigns of clear support for the Bypass at each election and we have been returned with increasing majorities." (our emphasis)

Well, it seems that isn't the case this time. Because we've had Sean's leaflet through our letterbox. We've looked high and low, and there's no sign of any mention of the Bypass, let alone transport. Most of it is about how low the Council Tax is and it brags about vile crap like ASBOs and IKEA, as if they are laudable achievements. If you want to scrutinise it, we've produced scans below (click through for larger versions).
















No doubt a lot of canvassing is going on, but you can bet that most of it is concentrated on known Labour voters. So if Sean wins this time, he won't be able to talk about a mandate, at least not with a straight face. We''ll be there to remind him - and everyone else at every opportunity...

Op-Ed: Sean & Johnny - come on down

What follows is a post from the alternative Active Longdendale blog that has been set up to shadow the posts from Sean Parker-Perry's 'Environmental Clean-Up' and/or 'Community Tool Hire' official blog:

"... Just what is the point of Active Longdendale? What is its role or raison d'etre? What values and/or aspirations underpin its foundation? More intriguingly, how does it differ to already existing groups that provide a similar service?

Trawling the Internet in an attempt to find some answers reveals that information on Active Longdendale is very thin on the ground. What little information that is available tends to be somewhat contradictory.

Nevertheless, buried in the Minutes (paragraph 42) of the Longdendale and District Assembly, which was chaired by Cllr Sean Parker Perry (Labour) held on 07/12/2006, lies the following nugget in which the Town Manager appears to provide a succinct definition of its aims and purpose:

(Active Longdendale is a) "project that provides an opportunity for community groups and members of the public to participate in clean ups in the area". He qualifies this by quoting an example of their alleged work at Hurst Clough on 18/11/2006 which he states was "successful in dealing with undergrowth and flytipping". In a nutshell it's a tidy campaign group.

So far so good. This all seems to be innocent and innocuous enough - in fact it appears to be positively praiseworthy. Unless and until one realises that the local council (Tameside MBC) already provides a Countryside Ranger Service which is responsible for the management of the Borough's countryside and helps the local community and visitors alike to appreciate, enjoy and care for the natural environment.

Moreover, the Countryside Service comprises not only of full time rangers, information officers, admin support and an estate team but also has an additional 60 Voluntary Rangers that provide invaluable support and assistance to the Service.

The work of the Voluntary Rangers is of particular interest since the type and scale of the projects they tackle is quite comprehensive and usually of high conservation or amenity value. This link to the official Tameside MBC website lists many of these projects and explains the scope of their work more fully.

Suffice to say that it includes:

* Litter picking and rubbish collection
* Footpath and bridleway clearance and improvement

...which in itself appears to nullify any reason for the creation of Active Longdendale.

In fact it rather begs the question as to why its only known members Councillor Sean Parker-Perry (Labour) and Councilor. Johnny Reynolds (Labour) don't just simply join the Volunteer Ranger Service where, throughout the year, there is an opportunity to participate in conservation tasks with the countryside rangers and their team of dedicated volunteers (as opposed to showboaters).

If SEAN or JOHNNY would like to get involved they can apply online here or by phoning 0161 330 9613. Alternatively they can snail mail to:

Chief Rangers Office
Park Bridge Heritage Centre
The Stables
Park Bridge
Ashton-u-Lyne
Tameside
OL6 8AG

Yes, that's right, they have their own premises (and tools) so no need to lease expensive railway arches or to tap up the lottery for funds! ..."

We have our own take on this, with a little more background info. Firstly, below is a photo of a poster promoting one of AL's clean-ups in July 2006 (click for bigger version):

With this poster, Sean displays for all to see the somewhat contradictory nature of this organisation that scrutineer has identified above. Firstly, as a volunteer you are reassured that you don't need to join, there is "no joining fee or reason to commit to anything", you just register your interest and turn up on the day (that you will presumably be notified of beforehand). In other words, you do as you are told. But when one looks at the poster to find out "who organises the event", we're told "...the volunteers" - is this the same people who "don't have to join" and "just have to turn up"? How will they be able to organise anything in this way?

None of this is transparent. There's no suggestion you can participate in any other way than to simply come along and dig when you are told to do so.

Whether or not anyone turns up is another matter. In fact, we've been told by a reliable source that AL's work to clear Himalayan Balsam from Lymefield was actually carried out by contractors, who were paid for the work they did. Was this because not enough volunteers showed up? And who paid for the work to be done? It can't have been cheap. Or was this activity that was being done by TMBC anyway, and Sean decided to stick his 'Active Longdendale' badge on it? At the time, this work was fêted by Sean's boss, James Purnell, on his website. So he's implicated too.

Watch this space for more articles this month...

What's in Action Man's pants?

Chronicle & Reporter readers had a rare treat last week from one of Longdendale's seemingly shyest councillors. 'Our friend from the North' Jonathan Reynolds - a trainee solicitor and seemingly a career politician in the making - clearly feels he has to do his bit to calm the troops in the pro-bypass lobby:

















His use of the term "unanswerable case" demonstrates his contempt for those who dare to dissent - something he has in common with his fellow Councillors and the Labour Party in general.

He clearly feels so strongly about this that he feels no need to put his "unanswerable case" before the Public Inquiry. He feels there in no case against the road, so much so that he doesn't need to answer any difficult questions. Or rather, that he doesn't want to. It seems he's a slimy as his former boss, James Purnell. He's been trained well. You'd have thought that a trainee solicitor would relish the opportunity - but not this one, it seems he's yellow.

Pro-bypass people of Longdendale - your councillors sold you out. After years of preaching the case for their bypass, they do not have the courage of their convictions. They deserve your contempt and outrage.

It seems that Councillor Reynolds has much more in common with Action Man than simply his looks. Yes, he has the dead eyes and thug haircut, if not the scar (which we've added using Photoshop skills much better than Purnell's), but he also clearly has no balls.