Nothing, purdah only stops the council from advertising people who are planning on standing, it doesn't stop candidates.What happened to purdah?
Whilst not disagreeing or wanting to take anything away from your point. That DBS is only as good as the date it was conducted, if it is from a few years ago there is wiggle room in his point, not sure this is something you should use in this instance if it is not recent.
The Lodger has no criminal record therefore no one should go on the record claiming he is a crook.Whilst not disagreeing or wanting to take anything away from your point. That DBS is only as good as the date it was conducted, if it is from a few years ago there is wiggle room in his point, not sure this is something you should use in this instance if it is not recent.
That being said Preston is crook.
That's not what I am saying, I was just advising caution and warning of some of the possible comebacks and wiggle room it could leave Mr Preston.The Lodger has no criminal record therefore no one should go on the record claiming he is a crook.
It is plain wrong.
The Lodger has no criminal record therefore no one should go on the record claiming he is a crook.
It is plain wrong.
Eh? It was Preston calling The Lodger a "crook" not the other way round.Are you saying Mr Preston has a criminal record?
Eh? It was Preston calling The Lodger a "crook" not the other way round.
Not by me. You were addressing me.Preston has been called a crook on this thread
how very lacking in self awareness of the mayor to accuse other of "self-righteousness" and "malevolence" while erm, acting self-righteous and malevolent.
Surely it would be up to him to take action against people that claim he is a crook, rather than throw that mud at other people. If he has no evidence of it then that makes him dishonest and cowardlyIs it not also plain wrong for Mr Preston to be labelled a crook then? Unless, of course, he does have a criminal record