‘Are you serious?’ MP Sir Bob Russell asks constituent (From Essex County Standard)
Get involved: send your pictures, video, news and views by texting ECS to 80360, or email »
‘Are you serious?’ MP Sir Bob Russell asks constituent
8:30am Friday 3rd February 2012 in News By James Calnan
Angry - Mr Bell with Sir Bob's letter
A COLCHESTER man says he was shocked to get an “insulting” letter from Sir Bob Russell after he wrote to his MP about the call for a new Royal yacht to be built.
Dominic Bell e-mailed the Lib Dem asking why he had supported a Parliamentary motion calling on the Government to commission a £60million replacement for the Royal yacht, Britannia, to mark the Queen’s Diamond Jubilee.
Mr Bell’s e-mail made it clear he understood the MPs had insisted public money would not be spent on a new yacht.
However the civil servant raised concerns about what would happen if sufficient sponsorship and donations could not be raised and also about the running costs of a new yacht.
The MP’s reply asked Mr Bell: “Are you serious? Don’t you have more important things in your life to be worried about without bothering me with this?
“I have pride in our nation’s history and its maritime heritage. A new Royal yacht would be in Britain’s national and international interests.
“Are you not capable of understanding this?”
Mr Bell, 39, of Castle Road, Colchester, said he was insulted by his MP’s reply.
He said: “This is me engaging in the democratic process, by holding an elected member to account. He’s a public servant as well, but it seems as if he thinks he’s unaccountable.”
Mr Bell, who says he belongs to no political party, described the MP’s reply as rude and dismissive.
He said: “I’ve shown the letter to a few people and they have been flabbergasted.”
However, Sir Bob was unrepentant. He said: “If people write seeking my views, I give my views. If he wants to think it’s insulting, that’s his point of view.”
The proposed yacht has been the subject of headlines after a letter written by Education Secretary Michael Gove, suggesting the estimated £60million cost could come from the public purse was leaked.
This is the second time a constituent has complained about a bluntly-worded letter.
In December 2010, the MP told Garry Burbage, of Canterbury Road, Colchester, to get a life and stop whingeing after he asked if taxpayers’ money would be spent on Prince William’s wedding to Kate Middleton.
Sir Bob later claimed the letter had been a “Labour Party stitch-up”
Comments(59)
Falcon2366
says...
9:51am Fri 3 Feb 12
I therefore understand your frustration and to some extent it answers why Mr Russel needs eighty two toilet rolls as I understand that was an issue that was identified during the expenses row. Since his dealings with my request I now refer to him as my O'Grady in that O'Grady says this and that but does nothing and to boot he is a member of an unelected party currently in government, it cannot get much worse.
Say It As It Is OK?
says...
9:51am Fri 3 Feb 12
So I would have thought Bob would understand that and also to have learnt to understand that not all his constituents are in favour of agreeing to his own personal preferences.
Bob doesn't have to agree with opposing opinions but to dismiss them like he has with this letter can only be described as a basic error, perhaps his knighthood has gone to his head and he now thinks he can say what he likes!
micksmercs
says...
10:23am Fri 3 Feb 12
vinny100
says...
10:29am Fri 3 Feb 12
RobWalker
says...
10:33am Fri 3 Feb 12
Personally I think it lowers standards and is a bit embarrassing.
The MP is supposed to work for the constituents; he is not supposed to insult them, even if he disagrees with them.
szandor
says...
10:48am Fri 3 Feb 12
A Royal Yacht is a very effective marketing tool for UK plc. Get real!
Not only should we have one but we should have the maturity and honesty to pay for it out of tax payer's money.
As for Bob's straightforward replies. Judging by the standard of grammar and punctuation in the above comments I'm surprised any of the recipients had the literary skills to read them!
Say It As It Is OK?
says...
12:40pm Fri 3 Feb 12
Awww ,,, my heart bleeds for you all!
szandor
says...
1:14pm Fri 3 Feb 12
Boris
says...
2:17pm Fri 3 Feb 12
Of course she doesn't need another royal yacht.
Mr. Bell's enquiry was perfectly reasonable, and Sir Bob's reply was indeed rude. He should delegate letters like that to his staff, who would use more diplomatic language.
It is also a good idea when someone winds you up (as in this case) to wait 48 hours before replying.
Bob's dedication to a Stakhanovite work rate has once again let him down.
Sidney Harbour-Bridge
says...
3:53pm Fri 3 Feb 12
Im_Like_HELLO
says...
4:14pm Fri 3 Feb 12
Smouldering Ewok
says...
5:44pm Fri 3 Feb 12
He is weak and a suck up!
Sdapeze
says...
6:05pm Fri 3 Feb 12
Yendor says
says...
7:17pm Fri 3 Feb 12
The bloke is an idiot and has simply proved it once again with this letter. Mr Bell had every right to ask him these questions and to receive an answer.
As for his knighthood, don't get me started. I have met so many people who do more for others on a voluntary unpaid basis and have done so over a much longer time period who would be far more deserving recipients than him. But that is not how the system works is it .....
Wake up Russell and do your job - you have enough staff after all !!!
StopLookListen
says...
7:27pm Fri 3 Feb 12
.
The whole point here is the sheer rudeness and "putting down" of another person, a most ungracious action and unworthy of someone who represents the whole town, not just those who rush to agree with our MP.
.
It's not the first time, as we all know, that he has been so boorish. However tempting it may be to lash out when we're tired and feeling over-burdened, it is as someone above as remarked, an occasion for pausing for a while to consider the feelings of the respondent, who has had enough faith in the fairmindedness and consideration of the local MP to voice his views to that official - a well paid person who, after all, has chosen to be such a representative.
.
A bit of grace would not come amiss, Bad-tempered-Bob.
Sidney Harbour-Bridge
says...
7:31pm Fri 3 Feb 12
6079 Smith W
says...
7:40pm Fri 3 Feb 12
szandor wrote:Not sure whether it's your inability with grammar or arithmetic, but I'm pretty sure there's more than one tax payer. Your patronising and somewhat hypocritical post was as bad an idea as a royal yacht when Mr Russell and his sick government are taking benefits away from those undergoing chemotherapy.
Awww ,,, my heart bleeds for you all!
A Royal Yacht is a very effective marketing tool for UK plc. Get real!
Not only should we have one but we should have the maturity and honesty to pay for it out of tax payer's money.
As for Bob's straightforward replies. Judging by the standard of grammar and punctuation in the above comments I'm surprised any of the recipients had the literary skills to read them!
Feisty CBC
says...
10:09pm Fri 3 Feb 12
Chatty_me!
says...
12:29am Sat 4 Feb 12
As for the yacht, whatever your feelings over the monarchy, such expense doesn't sit well in poor economy when we are all seeing cuts. He may well have just lost my vote.
notuagen
says...
8:34am Sat 4 Feb 12
Cliff
says...
10:15am Sat 4 Feb 12
jacklumber1
says...
10:40am Sat 4 Feb 12
jut1972
says...
2:44pm Sat 4 Feb 12
Regardless of Bob's opinion there is a way to respond without causing offence.
It's not the first time Bob has done this, but I am sure once Nick Clegg hears of this latest episode it will be the last.
(I'm all in favour of a royal yacht as long as it has an Italian captain).
Yendor says
says...
3:33pm Sat 4 Feb 12
It would soon end up in the National press and I suspect Mr Russell would soon end up on the rubbish heap where he belongs.
He has shown (once again !) he simply is unable to do the job and he should be made to step down.
6079 Smith W
says...
6:09pm Sat 4 Feb 12
jut1972 wrote:Whether it's snow alerts or Italian captains, you're on fire today Jut!
StopLookListen has this spot on.
Regardless of Bob's opinion there is a way to respond without causing offence.
It's not the first time Bob has done this, but I am sure once Nick Clegg hears of this latest episode it will be the last.
(I'm all in favour of a royal yacht as long as it has an Italian captain).
No! I am Spartacus
says...
10:48am Sun 5 Feb 12
The simple fact is, he is elected by all of us, and can be unelected BY all of us. The only problem is, based on the policies currently offered in Parliament, there is very little alternative to the 'centre'.
RobWalker
says...
12:00pm Sun 5 Feb 12
There are countless examples where he is met with incredulity and lampooned for his behaviour. It's not a great advert for us.
6079 Smith W
says...
12:17pm Sun 5 Feb 12
No! I am Spartacus wrote:While I largely agree with your point, surely the classic 'centre' position is Keynesian Liberalism? Unfortunately they're all obsessed with Milton (Friedman), not Keynes.
Doesn't matter whether you agree with either point of view, Bob Russell was rude and unprofessional. No question.
The simple fact is, he is elected by all of us, and can be unelected BY all of us. The only problem is, based on the policies currently offered in Parliament, there is very little alternative to the 'centre'.
6079 Smith W
says...
12:28pm Sun 5 Feb 12
nt.co.uk/news/uk/pol
itics/britains-first
-benefit-refugees-63
58954.html?fb_action
_ids=101512350085303
28&fb_action_types=n
ews.reads&fb_source=
other_multiline
So here are the true results of Bob's government's policy, one that chose to cap benefits rather than the amount landlords charge tenants. One that chooses to take benefits away from those undergoing chemotherapy. And one that at the same time can suggest we should be paying for a new royal yacht. Sick, amoral, quite frankly words seem to fail to sum Bob's lot up. And to respond to a constituent like this (the Con-Dems might have pulled back on it being entirely tax funded, but what about any shortfall, what about running costs?) shows just how out of touch Bob really is. The guy has finally lost it, and should get medical help as soon as possible.
Sdapeze
says...
4:40pm Sun 5 Feb 12
6079 Smith W
says...
5:24pm Sun 5 Feb 12
Sdapeze wrote:Do we really know it was a 'Labour stitch-up'? And if it was, Bob's only proved he's both mad enough and stupid enough to walk into it (I actually discussed over a pint Bob's ability to walk into any ambush with his former agent, he was pretty despairing).
You too Anna! This was an attempt at a Labour stitch-up and we all know it. Why they bother I do not know as you are more likely to get poo from a rocking horse than a Labour MP for Colchester. Well done Sir Bob for an honest reply to an irritating constituent.
Yendor says
says...
6:47pm Sun 5 Feb 12
StopLookListen
says...
6:23am Mon 6 Feb 12
.
They are a means for humankind to associate comfortably without strife and discomfort, and to live day to day in as much harmony as may be possible.
.
Arrogance of any kind is unpleasant and unnecessary.
.
Whatever their political allegiances, Lord Alport and, long ago, Mr Smith, were MPs who truly cared about people and had the grace and energy to personalise their approaches, helping not just those who agreed with their political views. They were also, to my belief and knowledge, not quick to abandon a cause in which they had previously expressed interest and concern.
notuagen
says...
8:36am Mon 6 Feb 12
Sdapeze
says...
9:20am Mon 6 Feb 12
wellnow
says...
9:30am Mon 6 Feb 12
Say It As It Is OK?
says...
10:33am Mon 6 Feb 12
Well said StopLookListen....Th
e same can't be said for Bob Russell. I have first hand experience of his admirable ability to abandon a cause that he had supported and had expressed an interest in!
RobWalker
says...
11:07am Mon 6 Feb 12
Sdapeze wrote:Sir Bob always claims people are smearing him whenever he gets in trouble. It annoys everybody concerned, mostly because of the disbelief that people keep voting for someone who behaves so childishly.
My support for Sir Bob is based on the fact that he claimed this was an attack by Labour. He wouldn't lie would he? I don't know Mr Bell's credentials but assume Bob does. Otherwise, why make the comment? Why hasn't the Gazette followed this interesting avenue to find the truth? Why should Bob bother with attempts at political smears against him?
Even though you obviously like him, all people are not perfect and he regularly behaves in ways that are not acceptable. By not acknowledging this he will keep behaving this way.
network driver
says...
11:48am Mon 6 Feb 12
Sdapeze
says...
12:45pm Mon 6 Feb 12
romantic
says...
1:14pm Mon 6 Feb 12
Bob Russell will get judged by the electorate at the next election, and I think has rather blown it. While he was a thorn in the side of the coalition, there was some respect for him, but he does seem to have turned into a rather compliant little foot soldier. He has taken the nice bauble of knighthood and I expect will stand down at the next election. Chances are we then end up with a Tory.
I´m not really into the monarchy that much, but I think for the next few months, republicans such as myself are just going to have to accept all the jubilee stuff going on, and I´m sure the royal yacht will get sneaked through at some point in the time between today (actual anniversary) and June (coronation anniversary). It should probably be paid for by the companies who benefit from it in some way, but not convinced that it really will be.
wellnow
says...
1:58pm Mon 6 Feb 12
RobWalker
says...
2:26pm Mon 6 Feb 12
Sir Bob may stand at the next election, but whether it's fair on him is another matter - he would have to make a commitment to be an MP in to his mid-70s.
Sdapeze
says...
3:00pm Mon 6 Feb 12
RobWalker
says...
3:36pm Mon 6 Feb 12
I reckon we should do away with the Royal Family and become part of Greater Euro Land.
Only old fuddy duddies think we would be destroying something that actually works and we would be in fact flushing down the toilet thousands of years of history that define us and make us who we are.
Or maybe not ;)
Sdapeze
says...
4:05pm Mon 6 Feb 12
RobWalker
says...
4:25pm Mon 6 Feb 12
Sdapeze wrote:Yes please. There should be far more politicians and we should pay them more while cutting everybody else's standard of living.
So, RobWalker would replace the Queen with politicians. Words fail me.
I don't think so somehow.
StopLookListen
says...
5:28pm Mon 6 Feb 12
.
However, the point of the article is that Sir Bob was gratuitously and unbecomingly rude to a constituent.
.
Marvellous how the mind wanders......
6079 Smith W
says...
6:20pm Mon 6 Feb 12
Sdapeze wrote:You seem unable to spot sarcasm.
So, RobWalker would replace the Queen with politicians. Words fail me.
6079 Smith W
says...
6:22pm Mon 6 Feb 12
RobWalker wrote:Being this seems to be Tory policy, it rather proves the old one about many a true word spoken in jest.
Sdapeze wrote:Yes please. There should be far more politicians and we should pay them more while cutting everybody else's standard of living.
So, RobWalker would replace the Queen with politicians. Words fail me.
I don't think so somehow.
6079 Smith W
says...
6:27pm Mon 6 Feb 12
RobWalker wrote:A Tory did win, he just happened to run as a Lib-Dem!
romantic, I note in your comment, like several other posters on this website, that you feel a Conservative may win in Colchester if Sir Bob retires. Much as I would like that to be true, I think the outcome depends greatly on the standard of candidate the Lib Dems can field. Fortunately I don't see any suitable candidate locally at the moment and Colchestrians don't tend to like non-local candidates.
Sir Bob may stand at the next election, but whether it's fair on him is another matter - he would have to make a commitment to be an MP in to his mid-70s.
And that's why one running as a Tory will probably win next time around. The Tories won't need to increase their vote, merely rely on the fact that all us ex-Bob voters will either be putting our cross in a different box, or simply not bother voting at all.
jut1972
says...
10:37pm Mon 6 Feb 12
Sdapeze wrote:Sdapeze, I wouldnt mind which politician it is as long as they get rid of those leeches who live off the state and have huge rent free houses.
My money is on Bob winning the next election, if he stands. As to the anti-monarchist republicans, a plague on them all. Not one of them can name a head of state that they would want to see replace the Queen. Prove me wrong!
Windsors I think they are called.
romantic
says...
11:33pm Mon 6 Feb 12
jut1972 wrote:Saxe-Coburg-Gothas, really. Great PR team around them over the years, though, which makes people like sdapeze think they're quintessentially British.
Sdapeze wrote: My money is on Bob winning the next election, if he stands. As to the anti-monarchist republicans, a plague on them all. Not one of them can name a head of state that they would want to see replace the Queen. Prove me wrong!Sdapeze, I wouldnt mind which politician it is as long as they get rid of those leeches who live off the state and have huge rent free houses. Windsors I think they are called.
Sdapeze
says...
11:48pm Mon 6 Feb 12
jut1972
says...
11:22am Tue 7 Feb 12
Sdapeze wrote:Genuine laugh out loud moment..
You're all trying to upset me. It's cyber-bullying. You all just hate me because I have ginger hair and a limp.
Boris
says...
11:38am Tue 7 Feb 12
Ritchie_Hicks
says...
1:46pm Tue 7 Feb 12
Canvey visitor
says...
11:41pm Wed 8 Feb 12
Cliff says...
8:52am Fri 3 Feb 12