Elected
Tories - Bloomfield, Mayne, Clemens, Greg Fenne, Payne, Prowse, Angela Fenne, Price (8)
Independent - Linda Petherick, Terry Lowther, Almond, Foden, John Petherick, Tamlyn (6)
Lib Dem - Wrigley, Taylor (2)
Congratulations to everyone elected, and commiserations to those who were not. I'm sure all will work hard for Dawlish
A hung council! Well done to all candidates for a good clean election. Is the breakdown of votes available anywhere yet?
On the Teignbridge website - go to council and democracy section, and then to Elections
There is one misprint. They say in the declaration for Dawlish SW that all 7 candidates were elected, but there are only 6 seats in that ward
I am assuming therefore that the person with the lowest number of votes was not actually elected
Thanks. There were a lot of unmarked ballot papers! I assume that these were from those who only cast a vote in the general election and/or district election but still popped their town election ballot paper into the ballot box.
The Duchess is furious that a the Worm stood for election on 'her patch'. That will be an interesting contest! 
Brenda, can you translate please?!
The Duchess says 'he won't know what hit him'. they're both slippery characters and as bad as each other. How will they work together now both got elected?
Both put themselves first. I don't share others views on that assume all our councillors automatically and truly put the community first.
Its my view and I stand by it.
Nope...still no idea who you're talking about.
Assume - because of the 'name calling' - they must be Tory or LibDem?
Oh hang on!
Wrigley = wriggly = wriggly worm?
Very drole - if not particularly adult!
If people in an particular area come up with these names, there's often a reason or reasons for it.
Using these nicknmaes is the only way I can discuss their behaviour which I deem not to be befitting of a councillor without breaching rules on this site.
I also refuse to expose who I am discussing, so I wouldn't bother speculating. The crux of the matter is fairness and representation over and above self-interest.
I didn't invent these names, if you ever meet the Duchess she'll tell her side of the story about her opponent, some of it will be accurate, some of it will no doubt be inaccurate based on her own anger. The Worm would probably be oblivious to the idea of any wrong doing, or too arrogant to admit it.
I needn't go into detail, judge them on their time in office and their roles/behaviour in the community over the next five years and it might become apparant why some are not overjoyed at some of the appointments.
I hope they prove me wrong.
And on being 'adult', if you had first hand experiences of these characters then you would be able to make that judgement in a more balanced manner and you'd see that adult behaviour is something often lacking in those who represent us.
If I'm being provocative I have good reason, and as if elections to the differing levels of government in this country have been adult like, morally or ethically sound. Take the lampooning of Milliband or the Lib Dems manipulation of Weeks and belittling of Anne Marie Morris's non Devon background.
Why should I be told that I need to play within some vague rules which nobody else abides by.
But yes I am anti Tory and Anti Lib Dem, anti Labour too as it happens, but not much point discussing that in the SW peninsula.
Although I don't believe that we live in a democracy, free speech still exists, Doesn't it?
For now.
And on local issues, I don't know what area of Dawlish or village you live in, it's your business. However I trust that some of what said might be factual or based on the truth and that not all locals are just spouting 'bollocks', a term readily used without a second thought it seems on this site.
If you refuse to "expose" the people you are discussing, then your posts are pretty pointless.
Not really. Not when they'll do a good job of clearly distinguishing thelmselves from good councillors in office.
Wow!
Well where do I begin....
'Why should I be told by the like of you Huw Matthews that I need to play within some vague rules which nobody else abides by.' ......Err, when did I do that then?
'If you have some personal problem with me that's fine, I can take it and you don't have to give your reasons, though I expect you hate Greens as much as I hate liars and users.'......I don't even know you (I hope)!!! My wife votes Green. I don't because some of their policies are dangerous and others are unfundable.
'And face it, some people in our 'Great' nation are more than a little bit 'ticked off'. Or hadn't you realized?'.....Only when their personal preference doesn't win - then sit back and watch the fireworks! lol. Some of us are a little more magnanimous and dignified in defeat.
Bizarre.
'If you fear the Green party are the next coming of stalinism then you're pretty misguided.' ..........................What? This is now becoming a bit strange.
My point wasn't about you accepting the result. You seem to forget your/my posts before that subject was even mentioned.
I know you'll accept the result because you, like me, have no choice - and you ain't going to change that in the near future.
My point was about the 'name-calling' if you recall. I think you've fully demonstated my point in the last few posts.
What about Green policies is dangerous? Well for a start the total disregard for 'The First Role of Government'.
Who have I called names?
I have referred to nicknmaes, there is a difference.
I do have a choice, I can protest. I do not think 1st past the post is legitimate, as do many others.
The first rolke of government is to protect, correct. But as I mentioned above some threats we create ourselves. By that i refer to the environment.
I see a need for armed forces, of course I do, but war is not our only threat.
Furthermore, how do many wars begin? Over resources, oil, gas etc for example. Which Russia has and we do not, and sanctions are preventing the Russians from selling them.
So in a fossil fuel based economy that is not sufficiently investing in renewables we will havce to deal with aggressive states like Russia and meddle in areas like the middle east where jihadsm is now prevelant.
It's cause and effect.
I fear where this is going. We don't want the webmaster declaring which of 'bizarre' or 'peculiar' is acceptable. Stick with bollocks, it's safe.
Before you comment I should point out that you have already defeated your own argument.
You write that '...plenty of NATO countries do not (have?) large armies or nuclear weapons...'.
That is because NATO is a mutual defence pact based on the premise that an attack on one is considered as an attack on all.
However, the Green Party policy is that "... The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) is a military-oriented body, which imposes conflict cessation rather than encouraging peace building. As such, it is not a sustainable mechanism for maintaining peace in the world. We would take the UK out of NATO unilaterally...".
Dangerous as I said.
Maybe the near future is just war, doom and gloom, climatic chaos, resource depletion.
But some people need a positive vision. People voted Green based on hope and morals and an understanding of the biggest threats to the whole planet, not just our society, people voted Tory based on fear, money and security and a naive belief that benefits trickles down.
We disagree, that's okay, but by saying, 'I don't know you (or hope I don't) you obviously dislike more than just my politics.
I'd hope I never have the displeasure of getting to know you in person either.
And if it is because of what you call name calling, or my objection towards your own derision over the 'bollocks' comments and saying someone needs to see a Doctor because you don't agree with them, then say so.
A politcal candidate who echoes the need for a doctor sentiment and refers to a voter as needing to 'heal thyself' as if they were crazy while his party recognizes that austerity has increased mental health issues is absolutely inexcusable.
I was a nurse, believe me I see the damage this coalition has done, it's like back in the 80s under Thatcher.
And the nicknames I referred to are no different to referring to Red Ed as another poster has on here, or Teflon Tony. They are commonly used - the only difference being the MP and forner PM are well known and the others are not, being local to me. But that is what locals call them.
Maybe you could explain the diffrence.
Is it just a rehash of bollocks/idiot?
Maybe it's disrespectful to you or maybe they are deserving of such things. How would you know?
I have not disclosed who they are. Out of some respect. But I wanted to bring to people's attention that there are some sketchy characters in the council, my reasons are valid and they relate to how people I care about have been treated.
But then councillors are just like the rest of us and there are sketchy characters everywhere.
Why do you insist on putting words into my mouth?
Much of what you have written above I have not written! Nor written about even.
I haven't said 'I dislike you' neither have I said 'I wouldn't want to meet you'! We were in a debate, you were obviously becoming angry or frustrated with my comments. That is why I said that I hoped I didn't know you; because I don't like falling out with people I know - or anyone else for that matter.
I'm afraid that I can't debate with you any longer. You just make too much stuff up so it becomes pointless.
Putting words in your mouth in a written, online exchange??
Hardly.
Bizarre.
Check your inbox, then you might understand why we've fallen out. Some people are worth falling out with, such as dodgy local politicians. This is just a waste of both our time.
Good night
Just checked.
I'm sorry for your situation.
If I was in your shoes - and I really am not preaching here - I'd stay away from debating sites for a long while.
I genuinely am sorry for your situation Brenda.
Please 