Just an observation, but you would do better to proof read your vitriol before publishing. If I must be insulted, it would be far more appetising if it were at least served up in decent English. Furthermore, as Mr Ward points out, it would also be prudent to back up your hypothesis with evidence.

But come, we could trade insults forever, and while it is amusing to rile you, I’m fairly certain that the baiting of wounded creatures was outlawed in Britain in 1835.

I would second Mr Ward’s call for a retraction and apology, both to my parents and myself. Your comments are highly offensive, unnecessary and fly close to the wind, legally speaking. Were I not so amused by your foot stamping, I might actually be offended.

My own observations were far different; and I suppose I did have a broader perception than it would be reasonable to expect any individual member of the public to know, so I don’t condemn out of hand those others’ perceptions.

However, placing the boot on the other foot, would those such as Mr Finch like it if someone were to make similar unsupported allegations about him in his own field of work?

Although some might (very conveniently) claim that it is different for elected politicians ? and there is a grain of truth in that, but no more ? that is still no excuse. Only the “low lifes” such as the disgraced Damian McBride and his ilk would ever try to hide behind such a defence ? and I’m not sure even they would do so in practice?

In reality, it is a case of “sauce for the goose”, and although the Gouldens had (and have) their faults, I’d expect ? not here, as it wouldn’t accord with Alan’s comments policy, but via a link to a post elsewhere ? actual hard evidence to support S Finch’s allegations. Otherwise a retraction and public apology is in order.

While they were in the Labour Group, under the former “points system” their group at least would have had the opportunity to nominate Mayor and Deputy Mayor approximately every four years, with the then membership. In the Independent Group of three, this would be about once every twelve to fifteen years, or perhaps even longer(!)

Fortunately, that rather contrive system has now gone; but I can’t see any way that leaving the Labour Group has done anything to aid the cause of becoming mayor again for either of the Gouldens. I just can’t see how that’s an issue for them now ? they’ve both done it, and they’re surely moving on to other things.

I’m sure this “ayor” business is a red herring, folks, and is best forgotten about with regard to the subject of this thread.

As you will have realised by now, I am a lone blogger. I don’t have a team of people working for me to assist me in what I do. I don’t even have a second hand to help me.

As much as it may surprise many visitors to realise, I do have a life beyond the computer screen, so, in the absence of any help, this blog may go days without posts, and comments may go days without being approved.

Although I try my hardest to avoid the latter, the best promise I can make outside of my University terms is 48 hours to moderate.

This blog does all it can to allow for free and full comments. I have approved 1,284 comments since the blog started in December 2006 – and, to the best of my knowledge this late at night, I have not refused a single comment save for spam.

This website aims to encourage healthy debate – compared with both Sam Whittington and Gary Allanach’s websites in the Luton & Wayfield campaign, which both provided a one-way mouthpiece and no possibility of public comment on their pages.

However, I would like to remind users of this blog’s present Comment Policy – in particular Part 1 (“No offensive comments will be published … Offensive comments include sexually and racially offensive comments, personal insults and swearing”).

Whether it be against other people who have commented, or people who are being commented about, personal insults will not be tolerated. I have offered a little amount of leverage recently for users to make their point, but I would politely remind all users that there is a limit.

This blog encourages healthy, and constructive debate, and all comments are to be personally respectful of others, whether or not you agree with their comments.

Rant over!

It is something that it takes a journalist to state how hard working someone is. Where are the comments from local residents. None……

They are a none entity.

How long before they are asked to become Mayor. This will prove that you are a child just sticking up for her deviant parents.

My sympathy to you when they are ousted. I hope you come back on this compelling blog and try to defend them again. Good luck

The Gouldens have never represented constituents and Luton and Wayfield will be better off without these self obsessed glory supporters. Nice as it is to back useless parents – i think if lady Goulden stood outside Ridge Meadow School or Wayfield shops – with ‘i love my mum and dad’ eggs would be coming her way.

I wonder how long it is before the fame seeking Vally Goulden is licking ears to become Mayor. A daughter’s loyality is great but bias too the extreme.

I am told that the Goulden clan were god parents to their former disgraced Cllr Dennis’ children and were great friends. They helped him become a cllr and were big chums. I can imagine how ashamed they now feel – hopefully sharing a glass of red and discussing their failings.

As a Luton and Wayfield resident we say get rid of these two ind cllrs – and before tony the bridgewarden sells us down the river again. and maybe lady Goulden shoud submit divorce papers to separate from her disloyal parents.

Ashamed and angry constituent