Nick Raynsford
Kate sent me this, and I thought I'd throw it out to the floor. Indoor language, now, please...
"I was pleased to read your post on Cllr. Mary Mills - and agree with all the comments about what an asset she is to Greenwich.
Can I ask what your (and your readers) experience of Nick Raynsford is please? I don't want to get into party-political stuff, but I've been disappointed by his failure to respond to three separate queries in three years - A 100% non-response rate on issues which a junior assistant should be able to draft a response on.
Is this just my experience and he's actually a good constituency MP or is he taking a relatively safe seat for granted? Please advise!"
Nick Raynsford is a puzzle to me.
I always thought that MPs were obliged to answer letters sent to them (not sure about emails)but if he hasn't managed one response in three that's pretty poor going. On the one occasion I actually wrote to him, he did respond, with answers to each of my questions, albeit cut-and-pasted party-line from various government policies, rather than with any personal or local thoughts. In my naivety I had hoped I might get some kind of personal opinion out of him - something that might individualise him. No chance. No cracks in that public persona.
On the plus side, he does at least live in the borough, and he does seem to occasionally open things or unveil plaques. Someone's got to do that. ;-)
His rather annoying 'newsletter,' which I'm sure irritates more people than endears him, gives us a glossy PR view of his year, in which he's seen picking up litter on the Thames (not knocking him for that, of course, but it's hardly cutting-edge) and smiling with carefully-chosen pensioners. On the back page he has a diary in which he lists every time he spoke in Parliament. It's not a terribly edifying read - he doesn't seem to have much to say. (A friend of mine gets SMS alerts every time Nick speaks in parliament; I keep meaning to sign up for that too. It would seem from the newsletter that my friend doesn't get bothered too often.)
Now, I know that all MPs create these newsletters, but I disapprove in virtually every way. It's money that could be spent better on practically anything. All these newsletters do is show off what these guys have done and how wonderful they are. They're glossy, tree-killing wastes of cash and time and they all end up in the bin.
But back to Our Nick. I guess see him as a bland party man, rarely prepared to raise his head above the parapet. Which is a shame as I think there is more to him than we ever get to see. I don't see him as a bad man - or even, really, a bad politician. Just - insipid.
I think he could be a very good constituency MP - a sort of MP version of the exemplary Mary Mills. I think he has it in him - he's just buried it.
I've only actually seen him in the flesh once - when I was walking to Sainsbury's on a Friday night and passing the Labour Party shop in Woolwich Rd. It was surgery time, but he didn't have any customers, so was lounging with his feet up on the desk chatting on the phone. I confess I'd always assumed that surgeries would be full, and I can't believe that there are no problems in Greenwich worth sorting out. Having said that, it sort of gave him a kind of 'human' element - it's the sort of thing I might find myself doing. I'm sure most people would disapprove, but it made me smile. I almost went in just to keep him company...
"I was pleased to read your post on Cllr. Mary Mills - and agree with all the comments about what an asset she is to Greenwich.
Can I ask what your (and your readers) experience of Nick Raynsford is please? I don't want to get into party-political stuff, but I've been disappointed by his failure to respond to three separate queries in three years - A 100% non-response rate on issues which a junior assistant should be able to draft a response on.
Is this just my experience and he's actually a good constituency MP or is he taking a relatively safe seat for granted? Please advise!"
Nick Raynsford is a puzzle to me.
I always thought that MPs were obliged to answer letters sent to them (not sure about emails)but if he hasn't managed one response in three that's pretty poor going. On the one occasion I actually wrote to him, he did respond, with answers to each of my questions, albeit cut-and-pasted party-line from various government policies, rather than with any personal or local thoughts. In my naivety I had hoped I might get some kind of personal opinion out of him - something that might individualise him. No chance. No cracks in that public persona.
On the plus side, he does at least live in the borough, and he does seem to occasionally open things or unveil plaques. Someone's got to do that. ;-)
His rather annoying 'newsletter,' which I'm sure irritates more people than endears him, gives us a glossy PR view of his year, in which he's seen picking up litter on the Thames (not knocking him for that, of course, but it's hardly cutting-edge) and smiling with carefully-chosen pensioners. On the back page he has a diary in which he lists every time he spoke in Parliament. It's not a terribly edifying read - he doesn't seem to have much to say. (A friend of mine gets SMS alerts every time Nick speaks in parliament; I keep meaning to sign up for that too. It would seem from the newsletter that my friend doesn't get bothered too often.)
Now, I know that all MPs create these newsletters, but I disapprove in virtually every way. It's money that could be spent better on practically anything. All these newsletters do is show off what these guys have done and how wonderful they are. They're glossy, tree-killing wastes of cash and time and they all end up in the bin.
But back to Our Nick. I guess see him as a bland party man, rarely prepared to raise his head above the parapet. Which is a shame as I think there is more to him than we ever get to see. I don't see him as a bad man - or even, really, a bad politician. Just - insipid.
I think he could be a very good constituency MP - a sort of MP version of the exemplary Mary Mills. I think he has it in him - he's just buried it.
I've only actually seen him in the flesh once - when I was walking to Sainsbury's on a Friday night and passing the Labour Party shop in Woolwich Rd. It was surgery time, but he didn't have any customers, so was lounging with his feet up on the desk chatting on the phone. I confess I'd always assumed that surgeries would be full, and I can't believe that there are no problems in Greenwich worth sorting out. Having said that, it sort of gave him a kind of 'human' element - it's the sort of thing I might find myself doing. I'm sure most people would disapprove, but it made me smile. I almost went in just to keep him company...
Labels: Ask The Phantom, Debates, Greenwich People
posted by The Greenwich Phantom at
08:30
10 Comments:
Well, he was passed over as Labour's choice for London mayor first time around, then he flounced out of Government in a huff in 2005 after he wasn't given the sort of role he thought he deserved.
At this time he started to reinvent himself as a conscientious rebel - voting against 90 day detainment, for example - but it didn't last. He's now back to being a boring NuLab drone who is now often so invisible that Efford has to step in to open supermarkets on his behalf.
His website has been as dead as a dodo for months now. He doesn't respond to e-mails or letters (yeah, it's happened to me too). He's been accumulating a lot of tidy little company directorships.
Looks like he's feathering his nest for retirement to me. A pity he's had to bow out on such a sour note.
GreenwichWatch has a whole theory on how the succession post-Raynsford will work.
Yeah - I do vaguely remember him being a bit of a man-to-watch in the 80s and early 90s, which was why I was suprised when I moved here some years ago and he appeared to do virutually bugger-all. He's into the whole housebuilding/development lobby, I understand, which presumably means that he's not entirely objective when it comes to intensive development in Greenwich.
Yes, I thinkyou're right, he's bowing out as unobtrusively as possible, leaving us with an empty sleeve.
I looked at the "futures market." Heaven preserve us from Chris Roberts as MP. Nah... surely not...
Kate who asked original question here:
It must be sod's law but the morning after I "asked the Phantom" I DID get a Raynsford response... So I apologise in this case. HOWEVER I do feel we're abit short-changed. The only times I've see him out and about is at General Election time.
I suspect there's a wider problem that MP's in Safe seats are less attentive than those in marginal ones. It's a shame Greenwich seems to be taken for granted... but then I'm old enough to remember Rosie Barnes (SDP).
I agree. Maybe Andrekabu's right and Our Nick's lost the will to live. I remember him being a bit of a rebel, but he just looks old and tired now. There's something that leaves a bad taste in the mouth that he's spending his last days here making sure he's got some nice cushy jobs to go to instead of working with his constituents...
Up until a few months ago, I used to work in the House of Commons, and I have to say, I don't think he's retiring anytime soon.
Whenever I see him, he's always in animated conversation over a drink or a large lunch, and seems to be loving every minute of being an MP. He may not spend much time in Greenwich, but he certainly puts a lot of time in in the house's cafes, bars and restaurants.
His speeches have been less impressive, though - I too have signed up to the rolling updates emails, and not only are his contributions very infrequent, but a few months back I was hardly impressed to be emailed that he'd made a speech, only to find that his entire contribution was to ask the words, "Why not?" (and as part of a joke).
And try to look at it from his position, why shouldn't he stick around? He's got a pretty safe seat for as long as he wants, and one that's in easy commuting distance of Westminster. I think he'll want to go on longer than many people think. And no-one will stop him from taking all those directorships - he picked up another new one with a headhunting firm just a couple of months ago.
sounds as though he's lining up behind all the other Labour yes men in supporting the John Roan move to the peninsula too. Why bother representing the interests of your constituents when there are a few developers to suck up too?
I am a journalism student, and Nick Raynsford has agreed to be interview in person tomorrow afternoon, so I can't complain.
I am writing about how the relegation of Charlton Athletic will affect the surrounding areas.
My crystal ball predicts that he will say that the relegation will mean that more building is needed...
Yes, I too emailed Nick Raynsford and was surprised not even to get a standard acknowledgement (rarely an excuse with email being so quick and labour free), He doesn't even seem to crop up in the local rag that much.
I too have seen him shopping in Sainsburys though that's hardly an automatic 'man of the people' qualification, despite the late Alan Coren's quip about the chain's main benefit being that it keeps the riff raff out of Waitrose!
Emailed him before and got nothing back, he did reply to a letter I sent though. I was complaining about housing being unaffordable and I got about half a kilo in photocopies about shared ownership schemes and an affable but not very helpful letter.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home