LIBERAL DEMOCRATS LIBDEMS

MAY 2023 - The votes are in and the Conservatives are out. Now the victors need to take their seats out for a spin, and try to come up with reforms that might make a difference. Affordable homes and a rolling stock of land to be able to supply to self builds and flat packs. No services are required in the modern world. It is cheaper to stay off the grid, with water treatment units and boreholes for water supplies. Solar panels can supply all the energy you'll need. But renewable hydrogen could be a game changer. Supplied as green methanol, to pass through a fuel cell, via a reformer. The world is your oyster.

In a staggering turnaround, the Conservative Party hold over Wealden was trounced during the May 2023 local elections. As you can see from the roster below, the Liberal Democrats have 13 seats, closely followed by the Green Party, with 11 seats. And then another blow came in the form of 11 Independent seats, with Labour bringing up the rear, with just 2 seats.

But, has that changed anything in Wealden-Land? Not as far as we can see. At least two of the newly elected Lib-Dems, are doing a Nadine Dorries, in failing to represent the electorate in their constituencies. So, it's business as usual. With the officers putting the boot in, yet again. Prohibiting contact - and so representation.

But is a deliberate conspiracy to blank a constituent, discrimination and abandonment of the duty to protect a member of the public? For sure any form of conspiracy is a serious matter. For example, the crime of conspiracy carries a life sentence in prison. It is that serious. But what of the lack of representation?

As with Nadine Dorries, absenteeism, that is calculated, can cause harm. Voiced in a letter from Flitwick Town Council, and a 75,000 strong petition, well reported in the media. Harm, as in loss, from fraudulent malpractices that could have been prevented with proper representation. Typically, this manifests as impropriety in public office. Calculated under (or zero representation) could be seen as malfeasance in public office, if it is prolonged. Where it is the duty of every Member to protect any of the electorate from harm.

In the new Liberal Democrat Party under Wealden, officer Alison Playle said (in effect) her council were the ones who dictated who owned property. Not the owners. Using this as an excuse to fail to perform her duty. She claimed to have delayed her response to an application to rename a property correctly (postal changes of address), to obtain legal advice. The applicants have now asked to see that legal advice, which they believe will reveal flaws in the way this council interprets the law, as to their fiduciary duty to protect the interests of the applicant, rather than pursue vendettas that cost the ratepayer money. It remains to be seen what the outcome will be. Where, if this council continue to be obstructive, the matter may proceed to the Local Government Ombudsman, and from there, who knows where.

We wonder if Ms Playle might eventually consider blowing the whistle, on her council? For sure she aught to know enough to question what is alleged to be the continuation of a long standing vendetta. And a cover up of staggering proportions, of conduct unbecoming any civil servant, in a position of trust. Either way, it is probable that, Alison has earned herself a starring role in the true story of the British Bulldog. How she is portrayed, depends on her actions. Will she be one of the good or bad characters (protagonist or antagonist). That depends on her. For this is a true story, not the fiction that Wealden would have you believe. As a public interest publisher, we only record the events as they unfold. We are the watchdogs of the public purse. We show you how your tax dollars, are being used against you, if that is the case. And if taxes are spent wisely, we report on that also. As the government of the day, borrow yet more money, to maintain the lies and corruption, of leaders like Boris Johnson, and his BREXIT (Big Red Bus) fiasco.

In the long run, it is far cheaper to admit the truth. But, only if mistakes are admitted right away. When BoJo said he'd not mislead Parliament, that was of course a lie. The attempt to cover that up, was just as foolish, as officers like Ms Playle, playing along with the lies the officers before her, told the Planning Inspectorate in 1986/7 and 1997/8. Doug Moss and Ian Kay were the key players in those days. With David Phillips and Victorio Scarpa. If you like conspiracy theories, this is one for you. These officers conspired to lie to the Secretary of State many times, and umpteen High Court Judges along the way. Trevor Scott and Daniel Goodwin were key players, who negotiated to put things right. With Councillor (a former Mason) Brian West, being the only one who stood up for a short time, to tell the truth, except for failing to declare an interest. Working with the then cabinet lead; Nigel Coltman. Even he was eventually got at, seconded to the cause, when things did not quite go according to plan, and his daughter was jilted, allegedly. Though how that represents a conflict is interest, is still a matter for investigation. As we understand it. This is all a matter of record, save for investigation into the inner workings of the council at the applicable time. The public will decide for themselves who to believe. Facts are facts. Spin is spin. Show us that the allegations are untrue. We will be only too pleased to publish your version of events, by way of fair and balanced reporting. To date, there has been only silence, rather confirming the awful truth.

We are the one of the few publishers who archive the Members from year to year. Wealden, do not do that. They dare not. Nor do they publish or make available a record of their employees over the years. Their salaries, bonuses and golden parachute pensions. They dare not. Why? Because, there are hundreds of cases where they have acted illegally. They cannot afford to give evidence of those cases to you, with a record the public might access, to see who voted for what and when. The persons reading these pages will decide for themselves.

What the British council system needs is digital records of members, their declared interests, voting pattern, known associates, and investments, to avoid conflicts of interest. These records must be available 100% transparently.

The same should apply to Members of Parliament, to prevent the likes of Nadine Dorries, being paid for doing nothing for her constituents. Outside interests, such as chat shows, should attract an immediate suspension and trigger a local election. The same goes for anyone misleading Parliament. Instead of costing the taxpayer a small fortune, and bringing the nation into disrepute. MPs should be suspended, immediately they compound one lie, with another. The caselaw is R v Dytham CACD 1979.

R v DYTHAM CACD 1979

A constable was 30 yards away from the entrance to a club, from which he saw a man ejected. There was a fight involving cries and screams and the man was beaten and kicked to death in the gutter outside the club. The constable made no move to intervene. He drove away when the hubbub had died down, stating that he was due off and was going off. He demurred to the indictment on the ground that it disclosed no offence since misconduct of an officer of justice involved malfeasance or at least a misfeasance involving an element of corruption and not merely non-feasance as alleged in the indictment.

Held: The conviction of the officer for wilful neglect to perform a duty was upheld.

Lord Widgery CJ said: ‘the allegation made was not of mere non-feasance but of deliberate failure and wilful neglect . . This involves an element of culpability which is not restricted to corruption or dishonesty but which must be of such a degree that the misconduct impugned is calculated to injure the public interest so as to call for condemnation and punishment. Whether such a situation is revealed by the evidence is a matter that a jury has to decide. It puts no heavier burden upon them than when in more familiar contexts they are called upon to consider whether driving is dangerous or a publication is obscene or a place of public resort is a disorderly house’

Shaw LJ, Lord Widgery CJ, McNeill J
[1979] 1 QBD 722, (1979) 69 Crim App R 722
England and Wales

Cited – Rex v Wyat 1705
Where an officer [a constable] neglects a duty incumbent upon him, either by common law or statute, he is for his default indictable. . .

Cited – Rex v Bembridge 1783
The defendant was an accountant in the office and place of receiver and paymaster general. The court was asked whether he held a public office.
Held: A man who holds a public office is answerable criminally to the king for misbehaviour in that . .

Cited – Regina v Llewellyn-Jones CACD 1968
The Registrar of a County Court was convicted of offences of misconduct in public office. The indictment charged ‘misbehaviour in a public office, contrary to common law’ and alleged that court orders had been made ‘with the intention of gaining . .

This common law, applies to any council officer, or member of any council. Anyone in a position of trust, who should report abuses of their office, even though it is their own officers or members who may be the guilty party. And that includes, not representing any member of the public. For that is a failure of their duty of care. Or, are you intent on watching your officers kick and beat a member of the public to death. Not literally, but financially and in human rights terms, on this occasion. Though, in the case of James Ashley, it was bogus information provided by councils (presumably Wealden and Rother) to Sussex police, that led to his unlawful shooting by Chris Sherwood. In this matter, Sussex Chief Constable Paul Whitehouse "wilfully failed to tell the truth" when responding publicly to the shooting, according to a confidential report. The accusation amounts to a claim that Mr Whitehouse lied. Sussex police were involved in a cover up in 1997, where not a single allegation of wrongdoing by Wealden's officers was investigated. The caselaw here is R v Sussex Justices exparte McCarthy 1924.

November 9 1923 [1924] - KINGS BENCH DIVISION

Justices - Possibility of Bias - Justices' Clerk interested professionally in Civil Proceedings arising out of Subject Matter of Complaint.

[LORD HEWART C.J. In a recent unreported case,* this Court quashed a conviction where the chief constable, who was then prosecuting, retired with the justices]

There it was not the duty of the chief constable to retire with the justices; here it was the duty of the deputy clerk to do so in case the justices should desire to consult him upon any point of law. If, however, there was any irregularity in the proceedings, the applicant, through his solicitor; must be taken to have waived it.

*[He referred to Regina v Brakenridge (1) (1884) 48 J.P. 203]

LUSH J. I agree. It must be clearly understood that if justices allow their clerk to be present at their consultation when either he of his firm is professionally engaged in those proceedings or in other proceedings involving the same subject matter, it is irrelevant to inquire whether the clerk did or did not give advice and influence the justices.

What is objectionable is his presence at the consultation, when he is in a position necessarily make in impossible for him to give absolutely impartial advice. I have no doubt that these justices did not intend to do anything irregular or wrong, but they have placed themselves in an impossible position by allowing the clerk in those circumstances to retire with them into their consultation room. The result, there being no waiver, is that the conviction must be quashed.

SANKEY J. I agree.

Rule absolute; conviction quashed.

Solicitors for the applicant: W. C. Crocker
Solicitors for justices: Pettitt & Ramsey, for Langham Son & Douglas, Hastings.
Solicitors for police superintendent: Taylor, Willcocks & Co., for Lawson Lewis, Eastbourne.

It follows, that any matter alleging criminal behaviour by Wealden's officer/members, cannot be investigated by Sussex police, who have a close working relationship with Wealden, and are funded by Wealden's council taxes. The conflict of interest, in terms of justice being seen to be done, is clear. Any matter of corruption or malfeasance in public office, would have to be investigated by an outside force.

It appears then that if Labour want to win at the next General Election, they will have to do more to win over the public. At the moment, Prime Minister Rishi Sunack is under attack from rampant inflation that, according speculators is beyond control. As of 22nd June 2023, the Bank of England is said to be on track to kick interest rates up to their highest level in over 23 years in a bid to rein in inflation that is withstanding prior increases to borrowing costs, markets are betting.

City traders ratcheted up their bets on peak UK interest rates in response to numbers from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) this morning that showed inflation is still plaguing the economy. Market participants now think Bank Governor Andrew Bailey and the rest of the monetary policy committee (MPC) – the nine-strong group who set official UK borrowing costs – will lift rates to at least six per cent.

That would be the highest level since February 2000 and mark a huge shift in monetary policy since the financial crisis. For over a decade and up until December 2021, rates were near zero per cent. We can blame post-pandemic disruptions, Putin’s war in Ukraine, or Boris Johnson. All have played their part in creating the predicament in which the UK finds itself. Brexit is also a malign factor, and Britain’s unique misfortune.

A distinguished economist who sits on the Bank of England’s monetary policy committee as an independent, calculates that Brexit has meant prices are around 4 per cent higher than they would otherwise be thanks to the cumulative effects of the 2016 EU referendum decision, when set against comparable economies, not least because “no other country chose to unilaterally impose trade barriers on its closest trading partners.

In London, housebuilders were among the worst-performing stocks at the close on Wednesday. Barratt Developments, Persimmon and Taylor Wimpey were 3.9%, 4.1% and 3.5% lower, respectively.

The stocks came under pressure from the heat of inflation numbers, as concerns of a slowdown in the housing market gathered pace. AJ Bell's Danni Hewson said it was "no surprise" to see housebuilders among the top fallers as the prospect of higher borrowing costs "could prove damaging to the property market as affordability issues become more acute."

At a more local level, the executive housebuilding stampede championed by Wealden's planners, makes the area less viable in terms of supporting essential workers on a low income. Those already built, overloading waste treatment capacity, leading to illegal discharges and fines for , while straining the capacity of reservoirs at Arlington, that may lead to issues similar to that where at Swindon Magistrates court on 30 May 2023, Wessex Water Services Limited was fined £280,000 plus a £190 victim surcharge. Costs of £21,656.60 were agreed out of court. WWS pleaded guilty to an offence under section 70 of the Water Industry Act 1991 for the supply of water unfit for human consumption.

In 2021, Southern Water was fined a record £90 million having pleaded guilty to 51 offences reported to involve the release of between 16 and 21 billion litres of raw sewage into sensitive marine environments.

The water company appeared at Canterbury Crown Court on 9 July 2021 for sentencing, after pleading guilty to the illegal discharges of sewage which occurred between 2010 and 2015 across 17 sites in Hampshire, Kent and West Sussex. It is reported that the allegations concerned 6,971 discharges, which amounts to some 61,704 hours of releases.

The Environment Agency (EA) commenced their investigation after shellfish were found to be contaminated with E. coli, a type of faecal bacteria. The EA found that Southern Water had deliberately diverted raw sewage away from treatment works and into the environment, which was said to reduce the costs associated with maintaining and upgrading their infrastructure.

Data released by the Environment Agency show Southern Water discharged sewage into waterways 16,668 times in 2022 – lasting a total of 146,819 hours.

At Lewes, the Ham Lane pumping station released sewage into the Ouse 146 times last year (2022), lasting a total of 2,419 hours. The Environment Agency data revealed raw sewage was spilled into English rivers by water companies 824 times a day last year. Sewage was released into Newhaven, by Seaford Bay 86 times, for nearly 500 hours. Ditchling saw over 1,200 hours of sewage released into the Bevern stream with 81 spills.

All of these discharges come from planning consents for major housing developments, without the infrastructure to properly deal with the waste thus generated. In our view, that makes those granting planning consents without first obtaining confirmation of additional treatment capacity to accompany the increase if effluence, just as guilty as the water companies committing these crimes. Town and Country planners and planning committees, are party to these environmental offences. There is no other way to see it. All the more reason, for affordable housing units that are Off-Grid water and waste wise.

It is much the same with potholes and dangerously rutted highways. The roads servicing the additional traffic from new-builds, are simply not up to the task, as with water and waste shortcomings. Our little island is limited in size, and in danger of becoming one large toxic suburb of cardboard boxes. All of which, to generate CIL payments, as a quick revenue top-up, followed by the excruciating death on the nation. Shades of Maggie Thatcher's council house sell-off. And her Poll-Tax.

We hope that the Liberal Democrat party is a political group that either has, or is looking to develop policies to tackle climate change. The failure of Labour and Conservative parties to implement any kind of climate cooling reversal policies based on reliable information, or to tackle the lack of affordable housing, represents a political opportunity for any party who has the solution, or more correctly implements the policies that are needed to get the UK on track for a sustainable future.

WEALDEN IS NO LONGER CONTROLLED BY THE CONSERVATIVES

The Liberal Democrats were the overall winners with 14 seats, with the Green Party coming in second with 11.

The Conservatives saw the biggest drop, going from 28 seats to eight. There are only 8 Conservative members and now an incredible 9 Independents.

Council officers will seek to train incoming candidates and brainwash them to the Pothole Party way of thinking. In revealing their dirty laundry, you will be asked to sign a Confidentiality Agreement. That is to protect them from you when it is revealed how unlawfully/illegally a Conservative led council was conducted. Be careful not to be brainwashed. Look at what is presented against Statute, Common Law, and common sense morality. Have they acted with integrity in the past? Doubtful. Or why the need for a Non-Disclosure Agreement : ) It is so that you don't spill the beans about what you find out during your membership.

INHERITED QUAGMIRE - The problem for those newly elected, is the mess the outgoing members have left you to clear up. And it is a huge pile of poop make no mistake. Potential cures to these ails might be:

Where councils are not providing land for low cost housing (just about all of them), Wealden might prevent consents for executive housing, until developers provide low cost housing up front. Requiring statutory reform, maybe, except that the 2021 National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) provides that there should be "Entry Level Exception Sites" (Section 65 (d)). And at Section 68 (a), where they have to identify Specific Deliverable Sites - for a five year period. Wealden District is just one geographical location taking advice from Local Government Association advisers, on how to avoid meeting their obligations.

However, the simple act of retaining a register, with the get-out that they cannot provide land with services, is not a valid excuse for failing to provide the five year rolling stock of land. Simply because, once land is identified and made available by earmarking for low cost housing, flatpacks and other mobile units can be installed Stand Alone, and Off Grid. With the latest technology, water, waste, electricity and Wifi can all be provided without connecting to conventional services. Further reducing the cost of living, and pushing sustainability.

Low income earners are forced to rent at market levels, pushing vulnerable families into unaffordable debt - the rents going to overseas investors. Once again, this is a loophole that needs to be closed, and the council has compulsory purchase powers to obtain land, once it has been identified in a local plan, to be used for affordable homes, that locals can afford to buy. Making them more productive.

Money that goes to rental companies and wealthy landlords, frequently finds its way offshore, so that generated wealth (typically part housing benefits) is removed from the UK economy. Creating a loss of income, that would otherwise be spent on taxable goods in the UK. The council have purchased land, but not for affordable housing. Ask to see details of land purchases. And, while you are at it, ask where all the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) payments are going if not to provide an Infrastructure - as in Road Repairs and EV charging, etc.

In Wealden, it is alleged that at least one senior councillor has registered property offshore. It is unclear if this was to avoid registering conflicts of interest, or for tax advantage. Either way, it bears looking at.

PASSING THE BUCK - President Biden said a US default on its $31.4tn (£25tn) debt by Monday's deadline (5th June 2003) would have been "catastrophic". The ceiling was justified by a theoretical $1.5 trillion in savings. But what happens if spending creeps up again, or those savings cannot be made?

Suspending the debt limit through early 2025 takes the threat of default off the table until after next year’s presidential election. In addition to addressing the debt limit, the law caps non-defense spending, expands work requirements for some food stamp recipients and claws back some Covid-19 relief funds, among other policy provisions. The US Treasury Department had warned it would no longer be able to pay all of the nation’s obligations in full and on time – a scenario that could have triggered global economic catastrophe. What a state for any nation to get into. They are only "hoping" for fiscal stability. It is not guaranteed by any means - because they should have acted before $5.0 trillion. A Circular Economy, is where no borrowing is required. Not a country hanging out to dry.

To make better use of the free energy from offshore wind turbines, perhaps by generating hydrogen for fuel as gas for homes, and to generate electricity for fuel cell vehicles, and hydrogen for IC engines like that produced by JCB, or produce green methanol for other road cars, such as to use the existing service station infrastructure. Unfortunately, that presumes members are up to speed with such developments. It also presumes that funding development grants do not go to those already in fossil fuel businesses, with conflicts if interest. Such as investors in oil companies, or their subsidiaries.

There is no reason why Wealden might not endorse such technology, and even encourage the transition, with the right policies in place. To make it happen.

The UK could become a net exporter of energy and renewable technology. The energy cost 'crisis' would be averted. Energy companies that do not invest in renewables, could be fined, and/or lose their franchise. This might mean the enactment of urgent legislation, which the Conservative party might not support, due to their investments in fossil fuels.

We need to encourage entrepreneurs in music, films and publishing in the Wealden area. One thing we are good at is creating original scripts and songs and producing very exportable actors, music is a valuable export. The pop group Abba, was once Sweden's second largest export, after Saab vehicles. Creative people should be encouraged, to write books and illustrate comics.

We are reliant on the import of cheap goods, and much of our food. We should encourage sustainable fishing along our coasts, and the growing of vegetables and grain, to reduce as much as possible, imports. Wealden has a number of vineyards.

It is cheaper in the long term to admit mistakes. Wealden used to make a habit of it. One of the longest running cover ups, concerns the Generating Station at Herstmonceux. Several council officials bandied together to defraud the then occupier of a grant he would have been entitled to. They shared information of the history to committees, as members might see if they look at the enforcement history, but then embarked on a campaign of denial. Basically, lying to the Secretary of State at appeals, the Magistrates Court and several High Court judges. From where there was no turning back. At this time seeking to appropriate the historic complex for Peter and June Townley, a matter of Article 14 discrimination illegality. As per the European Communities Act 1972, and of course the European Convention.

In 1997, a Petition saw evidence of such malfeasance in public office, referring the cases of 11 petitioners and one latecomer, to Sussex police. Though it appears the Sussex coppers were on the payroll. For they neglected to investigate, and then conspired to present a letter of exoneration to a full council meeting, read out by the Leader of the Council, as if the police had written the letter, when in fact it was drafted by Wealden's officers, then printed on police headed paper - which the Old Bill supplied, as part of their Conspiracy to Pervert the Course of Justice. See: R v Sussex Justices, ex parte McCarthy ([1924] 1 KB 256, [1923] All ER Rep 233) as to how wrong that was.

Each time these inconvenient facts were brought to the attention of your Chief Executive, the newby resigned. Then your council tried to resolve in 2003/04, with a Consent Order, where your council would apply for permission to regularize the permission, but instead sought to discredit the protestor, to as it were eliminate his assertions from the copy book.

MARCH 2020 - Where there is no effective remedy in the United Kingdom, the affected person has a right of audience with the King (or Queen), to air their grievances. Her Majesty declined the application to her in 2019, taking some six months to respond, as part of the fending off process. See the 1689 Bill of Rights, and R V Sussex Justices ex parte McCarthy 1924. You may think it was unlawful for the Queen to do so. Time will tell.

However, that backfired and is now the subject of a draft application to the International Court of Justice. With King Charles III as the head of state responsible, along with his mother Queen Elizabeth II. Who, as you can see from the above letter, washed her hands of the matter (Pontius Pilate). As patron of the Masons, guidance from the CCRC, CPS, Attorney General, Justice Minister, or whatever influences, we do not yet know for sure, but is bound to come out in the wash.

The United Kingdom has many political parties, some of which are represented in the House of Commons and the House of Lords. Below are links to the websites of the political parties that were represented in the House of Commons after the 2015 General Election. We need another General Election, but be careful to have policies in place that the electorate en-mass can swallow. Or, you'll not get elected, and land us with another term of the Pothole Party.

ALISON ARTHUR

CROWBOROUGH SOUTH WEST

HAILSHAM SOUTH

HAILSHAM EAST

CROWBOROUGH CENTRAL

HAILSHAM CENTRAL

PEVENSEY LEVELS

HERSTMONCEUX & PEVENSEY LEVELS

HAILSHAM NORTH

POLEGATE

CROWBOROUGH NORTH

HAILSHAM NORTH

UCKFIELD EAST

CROWBOROUGH SOUTH EAST

The Liberal Democrats are a political party that joined forces with the Conservatives in 2010 following a general election revelation from voters that the public had no real preference for any of the election promises - mainly because the policies were all about nothing - or the voters believed that they would come to naught, which amounts to the same thing - and they did.

ENVIRONMENT

In pursuit of the parties' policies on creation of "a low carbon and eco-friendly economy", a range of measures would be adopted. In transport, a high speed rail network would be established, while the proposed third runway at London Heathrow Airport would be cancelled, and no new runways would be approved for London Gatwick Airport or London Stansted Airport.

The legislation required for the building of new nuclear power stations would proceed, without public subsidy for the projects. Any new coal-fired power stations would be required to implement carbon capture and storage, while the targets for energy from renewable sources would be increased, subject to the advice of the Climate Change Committee.

Other measures include a smart grid, smart meters and feed-in tariffs, a green investment bank would be created, and promotion of anaerobic digestion of waste for energy, marine energy, home energy improvement, green spaces and wildlife corridors, and electric car recharging networks. Home Information Packs would be abolished, albeit retaining the energy performance certificates. Import or export of illegal timber would be criminalized.

BUDGET DEFICIT

To tackle the budget deficit and national debt, the agreement detailed "significantly accelerated reduction in the structural deficit" over the Parliament, with £6,000,000,000 cuts to be made in the financial year 2010–11, with plans to be published in an emergency budget within fifty days.

David Cameron, the new prime minister, welcomed his deputy prime minister, Nick Clegg, to Downing Street for their first day of coalition government, but the double act was to end in tears with Brexit.

Vince Cable Leader

MP for Twickenham

Jo Swinson Deputy Leader

MP East Dunbartonshire

Tom Brake Brexit

MP Carshalton & Wallington

Alistair Carmichael Commons Whip

MP Orkney and Shetland

Ed Davey Home Affairs

MP Kingston & Surbiton

Tim Farron Environment

MP Westmorland & Lonsdale

Wera Hobhouse Food

MP for Bath

Christine Jardine - Scotland

MP Edinburgh-West

Norman Lamb Shadow Health

MP North Norfolk

Stephen Lloyd - Pensions

MP for Eastbourne

Layla Moran Education

MP Oxford West & Abingdon

Jamie Stone Defence

MP Caithness, Sutherland, Easter Ross

The Lib Dems could have insisted on a confidence and supply arrangement, supporting the Tories on a vote-by-vote basis in the vital task of salvaging the economy and refusing to compromise their principles.

Instead, they opted for the allurements of office in partnership with a party with which they disagreed about virtually everything.

What is particularly nauseating is the oft-repeated assertion by Mr Clegg and other senior Lib Dems that they were solely driven by altruistic motives to save their country.

The main reason for their humiliating defeat, I suggest, is that voters have tired of the sanctimony and moral superiority that gushes from Lib Dem politicians, who have broken promise after promise and have established an almost epic untrustworthiness.

Their biggest and most indelible betrayal was to agree to an increase in university tuition fees, for whose abolition they had enthusiastically campaigned before the 2010 election.

This was not some peripheral policy that could be quietly forgotten. It was the very cornerstone of their pitch to the electorate.

How on earth could Mr Clegg bring himself to sacrifice his pledge in the quest for power? In the immediate after-math of the 2010 election, this newspaper nicknamed him 'Madame Fifi' (after a character in a short story by the French writer Guy de Maupassant) for one minute batting his eyelids at David Cameron and the next hitching his skirt to Gordon Brown.

Mr Clegg has spent his entire political career looking in opposite directions at once and changing his mind as circumstances dictate. During the 2007 contest for the Lib Dem leadership, his opponent Chris Huhne accused him of 'flip-flopping', as well as dubbing him Calamity Clegg.

Examples are legion. In January 2009, he was cheerfully recommending that Britain should join the euro. By April 2010, with the election looming, he had decided membership of the single currency was 'not economically justified'.

In March 2010, he stated that 'there is no case for a nuclear deterrent', yet six weeks later he thought 'there are a number of [nuclear] options . . . which are not being explored'.

As Deputy Prime Minister he embraced the renewal of the Trident nuclear deterrent, albeit with three submarines rather than four.

It is a truism that people who can easily change their minds for the sake of expediency, and have little adherence to principle, are often untrustworthy, and even treacherous.

Probably the most deceitful act came in 2012 after Tory backbenchers scuppered his precious plans to reform the Lords. The Lib Dem leader spitefully reneged on an agreement to vote for reform of constituency boundaries, which place the Tories at a considerable disadvantage.

Yet he had assented to boundary change in return for being allowed to introduce a referendum on the alternative vote system the previous year, which had been roundly rejected.

Time and again over the past five years, the Lib Dems distanced themselves from policies for which they had voted, particularly over welfare, and attempted to portray themselves as being morally superior to the supposedly beastly Tories.

In this respect, the dyspeptic Vince Cable has been the worst offender. In 2013, he had the temerity to call the Conservatives — his Coalition partners — 'the nasty party'. What nice people these Lib Dem bigwigs are!

We are concerned with how the make up of the above parties and (reasonably) popular policies affects the Wealden district, because we are all brothers on two islands in the Atlantic Ocean and what we do or fail to do is likely to rebound on ourselves and our fellow man in other nations around the world. How we act today influences policies in other countries in our global community. It is not just about us and our patch.

East Sussex has five District and Borough Councils, each with a border on the coast. From west to east they are:

As near neighbours and with councils now sharing facilities and working together, these area of Sussex are included in our remit and an area where climate change and affordable housing are issues that need urgent attention. Where the coastline is a feature in every Council, Blue Growth is a food security issue, especially where this side of of our local economy is under-exploited.