Jim Dowd: a man with his finger on the pulse.

[Eagle]

As much as I like History and was of course well aware of the anniversary .

One should also recall the anniversary's of Magna Carta , Waterloo , Gallipoli , plus many other things.

Last time I saw the chap ask a question in PMQ's I thought his hand was shaking and he did not look well.

I am sure the average burgher of West Lewisham and Ponge will be overjoyed he has asked this question and we await with baited breath for the answer. St Crispin's day awaits.

[mosy]

I've just decided to change my name to Gawwwdon Bennett and stand for election. After all, it's probably the name everyone says every day so 99% sure I'll be elected

[leenewham]

Just become a Labour candidate and it's guaranteed, irrespective of your performance as our local MP.

Why on EARTH didn't we vote for PR? I wonder if the poll was taken now if people would vote for it?

[hairybuddha]

http://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/10176/ ... _and_penge

Not exactly busy. But then perhaps he is just focusing on being an activist and committed constituency MP?

[bensonby]

/i find the Theyworkforyou website very informative:

http://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/10176/ ... _and_penge

[Tim Lund]

I don't think it's right to personalise this.

What do we actually want of him? People often talk of good constituency MPs, as a sort of local ombudsman / representative / problem solver, but this is more of an administrative job, and I don't think elections are a very good way of getting the right person. Others will disagree - e.g. those who advocate elections for positions such as Police Commissioners - but in such cases it's easier to see why elections may not be the right approach; it just extends to area of influence of local political parties even as ordinary people feel less and less connected with them. Political insiders justify this sort of thing with rhetoric about making our society more democratic, but it doesn't feel like that to me, at least.

I like to look at it as a problem of over supply of politicians, resulting in many of them having nothing really worthwhile to do. If our MP was a minister, or front bench spokesperson with some significant other workload, there would still be a constitutency office, which would cover the ombudsman / representative / problem solver roles, which illustrates how pointless much of a backbencher's life is. Inevitably, however, they will cling on, as Jim Dowd does, and vote most strongly against proposals which threaten to cut down their supernumerary numbers, such as evident from the 'TheyWorkForYou'link Bensonby posted.

In Jim Dowd's case, but many others' as well, it will be more a case of 'TheyWorkForThemselves'

[hairybuddha]

You don't think it is right to personalise a discussion about the local MP who many think to be incompetent and unfit for office? That seems like an odd body swerve to me.

I like to look at it as a problem of over supply of politicians, resulting in many of them having nothing really worthwhile to do.

If that was really the issue here then surely Dowd would not score as "well below average" on most counts of parliamentary activity?

[Tim Lund]

You don't think it is right to personalise a discussion about the local MP who many think to be incompetent and unfit for office? That seems like an odd body swerve to me.

Don't you think the best fit for the meaningless task of going through whichever lobby the whips order would be a depersonalised avatar?

[mosy]

You've got a point Tim Lund, but it seems to be a real life flesh and blood MP - ours - who tabled the question in the OP's post. I suspect even avatars would have been allowed some offline kip

[hairybuddha]

Don't you think the best fit for the meaningless task of going through whichever lobby the whips order would be a depersonalised avatar?

Don't you know that it's poor form to answer a question with a question?

[Robin Orton]

Don't you know that it's poor form to answer a question with a question?

Is it? Are you sure? Why?

[hairybuddha]

Don't you know that it's poor form to answer a question with a question?

Is it? Are you sure? Why?

What do you think?

[Tim Lund]

You've got a point Tim Lund, but it seems to be a real life flesh and blood MP - ours - who tabled the question in the OP's post. I suspect even avatars would have been allowed some offline kip

Newly coined aphorism for the day

It's better to think logically than predictably

[Tim Lund]

There's a serious point to the distinction I make between thinking logically and thinking predictably, which applies in situations where it's not obvious what to think, of which this one - what to do about the fact that we have a fairly useless MP. I think we all realise this, but it's a sterile debate, and in aggregate demanding that MPs are principally local representatives / problem solvers isn't necessarily a good thing - taken to extremes, such as in the US, it leads to pork barrel politics and a failure to solve national problems - the obvious example, for me, being the failure to build enough houses.

By accepting the framing of this sort of discussion as being about our MP's character, you will just carry on down entirely predictable lines of argument, which will have little long term impact. If instead you think logically about the structure of a problem - and not an artificial one such as set in school maths tests, but one where the answer is genuinely unknown - then by definition what you come up with will not have been anticipated in advance, hence be unpredictable.

I'm not saying that my answer is right, although I'd like to think it is, but at least it's a suggestion which has a chance of breaking the imposed frame.

[Tim Lund]

I've given it a lot of thought this morning. I can see that any post I make in future will be pointedly undermined by the fact that I am writing under a pseudonym and I'm not prepared to let that happen. However, I'm equally not prepared to write under my own name.

Unfortunately, this is my last contribution to the Sydenham Town Forum. I've enjoyed my 3 years of involvement in it; the early days of the Say No to T£sco campaign and battles with various people. Thanks very much to Admin for producing such a wonderful site - and who knows I may bump into you all at some point around Sydenham!

Best wishes,
Nick

'Nick' is not taken as a user name. Register it and come back in due course. Without your distinctive surname you're not going to be identified by anyone.

[Robin Orton]

I find Rod/Nick's departure very sad - see my posting on the Town Asylum. I'm also rather puzzled as to why he's chosen this particular time and place for announcing it. Nobody on this thread, so far as I can see, has raised issues about him posting under a pseudonym.

[Eagle]

I agree. Why cannot , whoever , continue to post under Rod Taylor ???

This is very strange.

[JRobinson]

Did Jim Dowd get an answer as to the plans for 600 year celebrations of Agincourt?

[alywin]

Anyone who votes for Jim Dowd at next year's election is simply crazy on the basis that he is a completely absent sitting MP.

Could anyone in the know please itemize Mr Dowd's achievements since he was re-elected in 2010 with a majority of 12%?

For me this is not about the party he represents but the character of the man himself.

I suspect that comfy majority is partly due to the rejigging of the constituency boundaries and dumping Penge in with Lewisham and whatever the rest of the constituency is called. Penge, despite being a predominantly Labour area, used to be part of the true-blue Beckenham constituency with its huge Conservative majority. So switching it into this constituency will simply have added more Labour voters, most of whom will know nothing at all about Dowd. I must admit, I didn't, either, but at least I was aware that his performance was .... controversial, shall we say?

I'm another one who might have considered voting Labour were it not for him.

[Psi]

On the one occasion I have ever had reason to approach him in a matter that was a “practical” option he was:
1) absent (didn’t turn up to the surgery)
2) incompetent (he entirely missed the point, just forwarding on the issue on and seemed to accept any response as an “informative” one).

I have had a number of MPs over the years but this one is the worse I have ever seen. He was luck to have survived relatively unscathed the MPs expenses:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstop ... imers.html
“She [Janet Anderson, Jim Dowd’s partner] also claimed £23,039 for her second home while living midweek with Mr Dowd at his constituency home in Lewisham, south London.
Mr Dowd claimed a London Supplement of £2,812 for the home in the capital.”

He has since been very keen on censoring the press, I wonder why… Also doesn’t quite square with his reply to Rod Taylor does it.