Among the Labour people I’ve spoken to about their party’s shortlist for the Tower Hamlets mayoral selection, two sentiments stand out: amazement and stitch-up. That the shortlist of three, which I blogged on last night here, includes neither the current council leader Helal Abbas, nor his immediate predecessor Lutfur Rahman, is striking. It really is a statement of intent from Labour HQ: they want to clean and control.
They realise any controversy over an all-powerful directly elected Mayor in an Olympic host borough would attract national headlines. Having the crony-loving Sir Robin Wales (read more about him soon in the Sunday Express) as Mayor of Newham is one thing, but to have two controversial figures in neighbouring boroughs would be too much. It’s clear that London Labour (for which read national Labour) want London Assembly member John Biggs as mayor.
Sirajul Islam and Shiria Khatun are in the race, in most people’s eyes (although anything’s possible), to provide the semblance of a contest. In their own ways, both are engaging politicians. In the meetings I covered at Tower Hamlets council, Siraj always struck me as someone who had a heavy dose of common sense: he was both thoughtful and practical. But he was not necessarily keen to speak his mind in public. He was a supporter of Lutfur Rahman in 2008, but a year later (a year in which although he was Lutfur’s deputy, he was regularly sidelined), he changed his mind and switched to the Abbas camp. (Correction: as Rachael points out in a comment below, Siraj supported Denise Jones in 2008, but there is a question mark over who he supported in 2009.)
Abbas-supporting Shiria, on the other hand, rarely suffered, or suffers, such afflictions. She is charismatic and media savvy to the core. Sadly, her outspoken and secular outlook also attracts unwanted attention. In the run-up to the council elections in May, she went public on the odd case of stalking phone calls: I reported it in the Sunday Express here.
Whatever their credentials, neither can really boast of genuinely concrete achievements in office. John Biggs, who has spent much of his political career either in opposition or scrutinising politicians more senior to him, is going to have a similar problems. And this is why former council leader Professor Michael Keith is said to be so deeply hurt and insulted that he failed his interview, so much so that he is considering an appeal.
That’s not the case with either Lutfur or Abbas as I understand it. Abbas is said to have accepted the decision, possibly with the promise that he will become a £60,000 a year deputy mayor. Lutfur, meanwhile, has, I can confirm, been approached by Respect, but his close friends in Labour have warned him they will perform painful below-the-waist surgery if he defects.
Tower Hamlets Labour members will submit their votes in about three weeks’ time. The Lib Dems, Respect and the Tories will then follow suit. As far as the Tories are concerned, we are likely to see someone new introduced. Neither opposition leader Cllr Peter Golds nor his deputy, Cllr Tim Archer, will stand. And neither will Zak Khan, the party’s defeated parliamentary candidate for Bethnal Green and Bow.
Over the next three weeks, I’m inviting all the candidates to explain on this blog why they would like to be mayor. Shiria Khatun has promised the first contribution, which I hope to post here over the weekend.
Trial by Jeory 
Hi TbyJ, Love your blog and follow it regularly but just wanted to make a couple of points regarding this race. People seem to be talking about this selection from only a polarized view. If your supporting Biggsy/Shiria/Sirajul, you’re pleasantly surprised and happy that the Party has been so “brave” to block Lutfur and co. If you’re from the Lutfur/Abbas camps you are outraged for not selecting former leaders who have been in public office for sometime now (with subtle mumblings about race).
BUT we’re all missing the point!! I have been a card carrying member of the Tower Hamlets Labour Party for many years now and I cannot remember the last time I got the chance to vote for who I wanted to stand for me in the party. If the party deems Lutfur/Abbas as such threats to the credibility of the Party then why were they not stopped before the Council elections where the Labour candidates were imposed (another opportunity I didn’t get to have a say)?
I genuinely believed, before last night, that this process for our candidate for a Directly Elected Mayor would be a credible contest where we would have a mix of candidates, young and old, men and women, from different experiences, and all could do the job from day one. How Stupid was I?!?!
So now, I’m lumbered with three choices. Biggs, a competent and experienced man but has been leader before, not sure what freshness he could bring and he’s not exactly going to revitalize the electorate. Shiria, a token woman (and BME) who may put forward a good (rehearsed) argument but lets be honest, she would be completely out of her depth and has as much conviction as goldfish in a bowl. And then Sirajul, who I’m sure is a nice man, but ARE YOU SERIOUS?!?! So let me rephrase, I have no choice.
And THAT’S the point, there is no choice. Its not even one of those subtle stitch ups but one that just sticks two fingers up at us all. I really hope senior Labour leaders, at national level, do take note of what is happening in little old Tower Hamlets (although they’re probably a tad busy at the moment).
If we are to be the party of the future, and take back our mantle as the Party of aspiration and progression, then we must get rid of such corruption, increase transparency, allow democracy (or give my money back) and let the most talented within us grow. If we continue to fight within, block and character assassinate, then the people of Tower Hamlets will make us, as a Party, suffer. Lets learn from history, not repeat it.
(PS. I don’t know how involved our MP’s were in this process, but I refuse to believe they are ok with this shortlist, does someone know their thoughts?)
Sarah, thanks for your excellent comment. On your last point, the involvement of Jim Fitzpatrick was crucial in this process: he’s a major figure within the London regional party and it was his concerns about the IFE that changed the mindsets of many party decision-makers. That led to a determination to keep Lutfur out.
I’d imagine that party bosses found themselves in a quandary: they wanted to appear democratic and allow you and others to vote, but the control freak streak took over. Don’t forget that Tower Hamlets Labour has been in special measures for at least five years. You have to remember why: because there was evidence that selection meetings were being fiddled by the sudden arrival of newly paid up members, many of whose subscription fees were being subsidised by leading politicians. Your party leaders were then told of concerns (now, I don’t know whether they were well-founded) about the level of recently-arrived grass roots support for Lutfur.
So, that gave them added motivation to keep Lutfur off the ticket. In doing so, they probably wanted to assuage his anger by also blocking his enemies, Abbas and Michael Keith etc. However, the result is the understandable anger among members like you.
Until, Labour can root any gerrymandering of its membership (other parties have the same problem by the way), then this unsatisfactory arrangement will continue to happen.
What do you think?
Interesting stuff. I was constituency secretary for Poplar and Canning Town CLP some time back but have been out of touch with the Tower Hamlets intrigue for a good number of years (crossing the floor to the conservatives while I was a Newham councillor didn’t help).
But I can comment on the “controlling” nature of the London Region. In my experience, the Labour Party rules are not worth the ink used to print them. I recall one instance back when the selections were taking place for candidates to contest the 2002 Newham local elections. I was chairing some of the selection interviews. We had a brief from London Region to select more BME and women candidates with the proviso that the candidate had had some party involvement (i.e. campaigned and attended meetings). During one session a candidate was presented to the panel who had not been a member for the required period of time to qualify (as set out in the then rules) and who had never attended a party meeting let alone campaign for the party and he was a white male. I refused to continue with the interview as I had, that day, turned away other applicants who didn’t meet the criteria set out in the rules but had been members for over a year and had campaigned etc. I left the room (someone else took my place). I was informed by another member that the applicant in question was asked to stand by Sir Robin Wales (then leader of the council and now Mayor of Newham) and it had been approved by London Region. I called the regional director and he knew nothing of it. Long story short, I made a formal complaint as the applicant was accepted by the interviewers who decided to continue with his interview. London Region rolled over and I was told to “look at the bigger picture”.
I cannot imagine the same thing happening in Tower Hamlets re the current council leader and any applicant he may favour.
I’ll not drone on, but I’d add that an unchecked Mayor is a nightmare – I can give a whole raft of examples from here in Newham, taken from my experience as a councillor and a resident.
Ted – this does you no credit.
To describe the harrassment of Shiria Khatun as “the odd case of stalking phone calls” – rather than the criminal offence that it was and is, completely misses the point.
Why on earth would Helal Abbas or anyone else get £60,000 as deputy mayor. These two remarks – one dangerously minimised the effect of hate crime against a female politician, and one which is simply ridicolous, don’t do you, or the blog, any credit.
Eastender — if you’ve inferred some element of doubt on my part as to the veracity of the harassment, then that’s the fault of my language: it certainly wasn’t my intention.
I described the case as “odd” because from my knowledge of it, it is odd. It’s also sinister and, of course, as you say, criminal. I wouldn’t have reported it in the Sunday Express if I had doubts about it.
As for the remarks about Abbas. They reflect the views of senior Labour figures. The Labour deputy mayor and cabinet leader for Newham get about £60k…so that’s where that figure comes from. Check it out yourself in paras 5 and 7 here. Do you think Newham are overpaying their Labour politicians?
I think it’s important to correct a matter of fact in this post- Siraj did not support Lutfur in 2008, he was deputy to Denise and supported her in that AGM.
Thanks, Rachael…who did he support in the 2009 AGM?
There are plenty of other inaccuracies here, but I thought it important that one was corrected!
Don’t be shy, Rachael! Point them out…
Ted, yes I do. Abbas is a decent guy and wouldn’t claim £60k to be deputy mayor, even if it was offered, which it wouldn’t be.
Shiria’s CV also states that she’s a trustee on the LPFA – the London Pension Fund Authority, and she advised Ken Livingstone on TfL. Hardly lightweight really.
Eastender – you’re probably right about Abbas declining a £60k post…and he’ll probably agree with Lutfur’s motion on Monday…
As for CVs….jobs and posts are one thing, actual major achievements are another.
[…] though Lutfur Rahman has been dropped as a candidate by his own party, there are rumblings that there may be other routes for available for him, to this coveted […]
The commentary’s better than the post!
[…] Lutfur Rahman, the former council leader whom Labour was so keen to keep off the slate. As I wrote here last month, the selection process did have the whiff of a stitch-up…largely over worries that […]
[…] 24: as I blogged here, a Labour panel comprising London Assembly member Len Duvall, London Unison boss Linda Perks, and […]