Impeach Blair motion falls

name and shame

Here is the list of how councillors voted. I am 99.9% certain that this is accurate,
but I will update it as soon as the Council action sheet comes out (we asked for a named
vote) if there are any errors.

This motion was particularly interesting due to a quote from Cllr Stephen Tall, Lib Dem,
who said that "No one voted for me because of the war, nor do any of my constituents
want me to discuss it". Obviously the gains in vote-share by the Lib Dems in the 2004
elections had *nothing* to do with their oft-trumpeted and headline grabbing 'anti-war'
status, then. Odd that they made it so prominent, if they think none of their voters
cared about the issue....

FOR IMPEACHMENT OF ANDREW SMITH:

Cllr Ruth Beer (LD)
Cllr Elise Benjamin (Green)
Cllr Sushila Dhall (Green)
Cllr Tia Macgregor (LD)
Cllr Sajid Malik (LD)
Cllr Patrick Murray (LD)
Cllr Claire Palmer (Green)
Cllr Sid Phelps (Green)
Cllr Sue Roaf (LD)
Cllr David Rundle (LD)
Cllr Mary Jane Sareva (Green)
Cllr Matthew Sellwood (Green)
Cllr Craig Simmons (Green)

AGAINST IMPEACHMENT OF ANDREW SMITH:

Cllr Bryan Keen (Labour and Lord Mayor)
Cllr Susanna Pressell (Labour and Deputy Lord Mayor)
Cllr Gill Sanders (Labour and Sheriff)
Cllr Alan Armitage (LD)
Cllr Bill baker (Labour)
Cllr Bill Buckingham (Labour)
Cllr Jim Campbell (LD)
Cllr Maureen Christian (labour)
Cllr Mary Clarkson (labour)
Cllr Molly Florey (Labour)
Cllr Tony Gray (Labour)
Cllr Alex Hollingsworth (Labour)
Cllr Rick Muir (Labour)
Cllr Bob Price (Labour)
Cllr Dee Sinclair (Labour)
Cllr John Tanner (Labour)
Cllr Ed Turner (Labour)

ABSTAINED:

Cllr Clark Brundin (LD)
Cllr Lee Cole (IWCA)
Cllr Stuart Craft (IWCA)
Cllr John Goddard (LD)
Cllr Tony Hollander (LD)
Cllr Clare Kent (IWCA)
Cllr Gwyneth Royce (LD)
Cllr Stephen Tall (LD)
Cllr Caroline Van Zyl (LD)

The vote for impeachment of Tony Blair was exactly the same, except that Cllr Dan
Paskins (Labour) voted against the motion.

Matt

IWCA? How come they abstained? Thought they were supposed to be against war and labour?

Sorry to hear this news Matt esp as you put so much into it. Stick in there and keep fighting the weak unprinciples twats. Lib Dems are real disappointment.

The IWCA line is that the problem with 'the Left' is that we ignore immediate local concerns of working class people to concentrate on big international politics.

Unfortunately they swing right to the other extreme, as in this case they won't even vote against the war because they say it's irrelevant to people on council estates.

Not sure how they justify that to soldiers' families though.


Military Families Against The War:
 http://www.mfaw.org.uk

no suprise, typical opportunist bastards.

an old joke.

1 tory and 1 lib dem on top of a cliff, which one do u push off?

has to be the tory, business before pleasure.

what are the IWAC up to? politically bankrupt and waste of space- just look at their website-believe it or not they support ASBOs.

IWCA- And people on Indymedia were telling others to vote IWCA ahead of Respect...tut tut. Shame on you.

Asked IWCA what they were up to, received this reply.

"Thank you for contacting us. While we of course oppose the Labour Party and are well aware of the blood on Mr Blair's hands we were unhappy with supporting the call for impeachment given that it is based a 600 year old procedure which involves the Lords sitting in judgement over the majority decision of the Commons. In addition, while we accept the good intentions of those who moved motion we don't feel that councillors should be wasting their time making what seem to be ultimately pointless gestures - everyone is all too aware that Oxford City Council's view on a matter of this nature is not going to be taken particularly seriously by anyone, let alone Parliament. For further clarification please see the text of the speech made by Cllr Stuart Craft in response to the motion, below. Regards Shan Sriharan IWCA

'We understand the strength of feeling that has inspired this motion, but as a 'can do' organisation we are troubled by its implications. We note that there is a degree of oppositional parliamentary support for the campaign; parliamentarians who would in all probability be implicated in exactly the same way as Labour now finds itself if they enjoyed the luxury of governmental power.
From a constitutional point of view we can expect the same sort of whitewash from the Lords that we saw at the Hutton and Butler enquiries. Those bodies did not believe they had a legitimate right to effectively topple a prime minister and we would argue that the same should apply to
the House of Lords. This aside, the pragmatics of bringing legal
proceedings, considering that impeachment has not been attempted for hundreds of years, will be so protracted that long before Blair and his associates would be called to account by the Lords, they will be called to account by the only body that does enjoy the legitimacy of toppling a prime minister, - the people of Britain, through a general election.
As we have no love of the Prime Minister, and believe that he is guilty as charged, we will not vote against this Motion, but for the reasons I have outlined we feel that the only correct course of action for the IWCA to take is for our councilors to abstain from the vote.'"

Amazing what you find on Google... I notice I was orginally quoted here by Matt:

'This motion was particularly interesting due to a quote from Cllr Stephen Tall, Lib Dem, who said that "No one voted for me because of the war, nor do any of my constituents want me to discuss it".'

For the record, I did not, and would never, say any such thing. Of course loads of people voted for me and the Lib Dems in June '04 because of the war and our opposition to it. I am glad Matt's comment has since been removed.

The IWCA's comments are all entirely valid. My personal reasons for abstaining were...

I was elected as an Oxford city councillor to represent the people of Headington on those issues which are the concern of local councils - I wish that my views, and my party's views, had been more widely shared by MPs. But it is MPs, including Mr Blair, who are accountable to their constituents for the war.

I am a strong supporter of central government giving local councils greater powers better to reflect local opinion. That means not interfering with the way councils conduct their business, even when they make mistakes. The only logical conclusion of this is that local councils should not try and interfere in those issues where control lies with central government.

Iraq is a more important (and impassioned) issue than recycling, leisure centres, even council housing - but it is those issues that city councils should focus on, not national issues. Oxford City Council is not, and should not be, a "shadow Westminster" (or, worse, a proto-Oxford Union) - however satisfying it might be for those of us think the real thing too often makes mistakes.

The Iraq war is, I believe, a defining issue for a generation. I petitioned against it, marched against it, gave money to organisations campaigning against it - and, at the next general election, I will work and vote for the Lib Dems, the only mainstream political party to have consistently opposed the war.