Monday, February 04, 2008

REVEALED AMAZING NEW CURE FOR STRESS - ATTENDING AT COUNCIL MEETINGS!


WHAT are we to make, dear Gossipers, of the appearance of accused law-breaker, Councillor Steve Hurst, at last week's full council meeting?

We only ask because, sadly, Hurst is currently on sick leave from the fire service with stress, pending his forthcoming and keenly awaited trial next month.

Hurst, the Lib Dem Chief Whip responsible for internal Party discipline, is, you will all vividly recall, accused of breaking election law by delivering a disgusting and thoroughly nasty little smear leaflet against the Labour candidate and her fireman husband through the letterboxes of houses in Belle Vale.

His understandable stress at the prospect of facing a trial with 10 witnesses ranged against him, seemed to miraculously disappear last Wednesday when he was able to take his seat in the council chamber, without any apparent ill-effects.

(Sadly, many public spectators were in need of emergency treatment after listening to Fireman Bradley, eds)

Even more astonishing was Hurst's appearance the week before at a day-long Planning Committee meeting.

Again, Hurst appeared to demonstrate remarkable resilience and good health.

Perhaps he finds attending boring council meetings an effective therapy for the terrible curse of stress-related illnesses?

If so, perhaps Hurst has unwittingly discovered a cure - and we should therefore make compulsory attendance at council meetings now immediately available on the National Health Service?

Any appalling suggestion that, in fact, Hurst is swinging the lead from the fire service and thereby ripping off the public who pay his wages, is of course, without any foundation, whatsoever.

For what could his motive for that possibly be?

Some suspicious people would suggest that perhaps Hurst was going to use his illness in mitigation to try to win a sympathy vote. Or even, perhaps, it would make him unfit to stand trial?

If the outrageous suggestion that Hurst was swinging the lead were true, it would then also have to be true that Hurst suddenly went on the sick when he was tipped off by an insider that Fire Chief Tony McGurk was about to suspend him, pending his criminal trial.

That couldn't possibly be true. For it would mean that Hurst did not want to attract more damaging publicity and increase interest in his trial through being officially suspended by the fire service.

And that would be an outrageous slur on a fine and upstanding public servant - rather in the mould of the beyond-reproach Fireman Bradley.

Meanwhile Fireman Bradley, who is obviously a far better judge than Fire Chief McGurk on what is appropriate behaviour (and is clearly better able to judge Hurst's innocence ahead of a trial), is still refusing to suspend Hurst from the Lib Dem group pending the outcome of the prosecution.

And nor has Cover Up yet launched a council investigation.

6 comments:

Warren Bradley said...

Quick get the cheque book time for another swift and copious payoff

Anonymous said...

I am sure we've lost a posting here!

Tori Blare said...

Does Hurst also get paid for his attendance at his council meetings?!
I am sure he is actually blatantly breaking the law and committing fraud!

scum hunter said...

Firemen enjoy well-deserved public respect in most cities. Most of them deserve the same in Liverpool.

But in Liverpool, the fire service has been poisoned by a small gang of corrupt and intimidating thugs. Hurst is one of this scum. He should be jailed

Radiorogerside said...

This same gang of upstanding Lib/Dem hypocrites, not so long ago made a case for disciplinary action against a council employee. Who was away from the work place with a stress! related condition, but was attending Merseyside Police Authority committee meetings and Sefton Council meetings. The charges were levelled on the basis, whilst unfit for normal council employment was undertaking renummerative duties elsewhere!

(This is not a precedent because the person belonged to a political party..other than Lib/Dems...who are beyond repproach!)

Anonymous said...

His excuse, one believes, is that he was in fact "removing" the offending items - err... so that'll be theft from people's letterboxes then?!!?!