#Medway2011: Gillingham North Independents’ pledge to waive members’ allowance

Gillingham North’s Independent candidates for May’s local elections have pledged to put “people before politics”, beginning with waiving the councillors’ allowance for the first year.

Former Liberal Democrats Pat Cooper, Dan McDonald and incumbent Councillor Andy Stamp have spent the past few months blitzing the ward with large glossy leaflets and canvassing voters.

They have pledged to serve the residents of Gillingham North first – and have vowed not to claim the councillors’ allowance for the first year, instead saying that they will request that the council diverts the funds directly into the ward.

“We are not happy to accept the allowance during the first year while everybody else in the community is suffering from rocketing fuel, VAT and food bills,” Mr McDonald said on a recent leaflet.

“We want to be more accessible to residents and as your Councillors we’ll put local people before party politics,” Mrs Cooper added.

If all three are elected that could provide an extra ?19,000 for projects in Gillingham North.

It is a token gesture, but one, they hope, which shows residents that they are seeking election to serve the community and not themselves.

The trio face an uphill struggle in the hotly-contested ward, though indications suggest that the ward is now a three-way marginal between the Lib Dems, Labour and the Independents.

With Cllr Stamp having already left the Lib Dems and Cllr Maureen Ruparel standing down from the council next month, only Cllr Cathy Sutton is re-standing from the original slate that won the seat from Labour in 2007, any work put in by those councillors could go unnoticed.

And with a bleak national standing for the Lib Dems, Cllr Sutton and her two new running mates could face disapproval from voters on election day.

Alan W Collins has now established more sources in the ward than almost any other in Medway, though they all have differing opinions (and none) on local politics.

When put to them the pledge by the Independents, though, they all believed that it would be good for Gillingham North. Most said that it would make them more likely to vote for them, but some remained sceptical.

“If you’re standing for election as an Independent, you don’t have the weight of a party machine behind you, so you’ve got to find different ways to court support,” one said.

“They seem to be seasoned politicians, so how do I know that they’re not going to say one thing now and do another if elected?”

Another who voted for Andy Stamp in 2007 was unimpressed when he left the Lib Dems and is equally as unimpressed now.

“He seems to have retained the same principles he had when I voted Liberal in 2007,” they said. “What’s the difference between them and the Lib Dems locally?”

Others were more upbeat.

“The problem with politics is that it is dominated by parties,” another said.

“Individuals can vote independently based on what we think, not what their parties tell them to think.”

The general feeling across the ward, though, is that the Lib Dems have lost their support in Gillingham North. Some residents believe they have given up already, claiming not to have seen the show of force they saw in 2007.

“I have not had a single knock on the door from the Lib Dems or Labour,” another former Liberal Democrat voter said. “I have had a couple of leaflets from Labour, but only one that I can recall in the past year from the Lib Dems.

“They obviously can’t want my support again much.”

The Gillingham North result could play a huge role in deciding who runs Medway for the next four years if the Tories lose overall control next month.

Labour are keen to stress that they have been working hard in the ward over the past few months, “but where have been for the past four years?” a concerned Labour voter asked. “They only seemed to start appearing when the Lib Dems joined the Tories in government.”

The mood in the three camps is mixed, and though all appreciate that tactical voting from Conservatives will probably be important in deciding the winners, none can say for certain who they will vote for, and no one is risking complacency.

And with a result too close to call, the election could be won, or lost, on the basis of a pledge by three people not to claim allowances for one year.