Trial by Jeory

Just heard from a very reliable Labour source that Lutfur went to the High Court this morning, but a judge in the last couple of hours has ruled that his petition to block the Abbas nomination was unsuccessful.

He may well appeal, but things don’t look good for him. His candidacy as an Independent looms larger…

Read Full Post »

Labour party activist Stuart Madewell last night made the following cryptic comment on this blog:

Ted,

…The real story you should be following is why Rushnara objected to Lutfur and what more is involved in that. If your half the journalist you claim to be you’ll follow that story and find a surprising answer.

Clue: who’s working on EdM campaign?

From Christine Shawcroft’s revealing account of yesterday’s meeting of the Labour NEC, we already know that Bethnal Green and Bow MP Rushanara Ali had raised serious concerns to Harriet Harman about the selection of Lutfur Rahman as candidate for Tower Hamlets mayor. There were worries that she and Jim Fitzpatrick were vulnerable to a Lutfur-inspired purge by the borough’s two constituency parties.

Rushanara had defeated Lutfur to be Labour’s choice as parliamentary candidate back in 2007 and it was generally known in Tower Hamlets that he had not taken it well. Apparently, he failed to publicly back her in May and some in her camp believed he even worked against her.

Her camp included Marcus Roberts, who was her campaign manager. He is now one of the senior organisers of Ed Miliband’s leadership campaign – his Field Director, no less.

I suspect that the Madewell theory goes something like this:

– both Rushanara and Roberts lobbied Ed M to do something. (Rushanara is friendly with Ed, but opted for brother David in the current contest.)

– NEC member and Mr Harriet Harman Jack Dromey is a prominent Ed M supporter. Shawcroft’s account reveals Dromey was pro-Abbas.

– Ed Miliband had to keep his hands clean….he could hardly be espousing the great democracy of the Labour party in his own contest, while at the same time helping to void an election and impose a candidate elsewhere.

There is of course another Miliband connection….Jim Fitzpatrick. He’s one of the leading organisers of David’s campaign and tipped to become Shadow Chief Whip if he wins. Jim’s concerns about Lutfur and his supporters are well known.

Read Full Post »

This is dynamite. It’s an account of yesterday’s meeting of Labour’s NEC from one who was there, Christine Shawcroft.

Note the alleged intervention from Harriet Harman.

For ease of reference, I’m copying Shawcroft’s account below, although I’ve deleted one sentence for legal reasons.

NEC report back

Report of the NEC meeting held on 21 September 2010

Emergency Item: The Tower Hamlets Mayoral selection

The following report is my account of an emergency item about the Mayoral selection process in Tower Hamlets that came up at September’s NEC meeting. In the near future I will give a full report about the other issues on the agenda.

This is a flavour of the “discussion” at the NEC on 21st September about the Tower Hamlets mayoralty, based on notes taken at the time. It is not a verbatim transcript, and people may not have said exactly what they are reported as saying here, which is unintentional. However, this is roughly what happened. Comments in italics are my own.

There was nothing about Tower Hamlets on the Agenda. At the beginning of the meeting, Ann Black (in the Chair) said that after the apologies and obituaries she would take an emergency item of Any Other Business about Tower Hamlets. NEC members had a large file of tabled papers waiting for them. She adjourned the meeting for fifteen minutes so that everyone could read the papers. The trade union delegates spent the fifteen minutes having a caucus meeting in another room.

After the adjournment, Ray Collins, the General Secretary, introduced the item. He said that the NEC wasn’t sitting in judgement, but had to decide if there was a prima facie case to investigate. There were three issues of concern: 1) the entitlement to vote, in the sense of the eligibility of membership; 2) people having their membership paid for them, particularly by the selected candidate; 3) the general conduct of the selected candidate, particularly in the light of the allegations that have been made, his conduct at the Labour Group, and the allegations made by the Dispatches programme and Andrew Gilligan’s blog. Ray said that he believed that there was a prima facie case for an investigation, arising from the letter of complaint dated 20^th September from Helal Abbas. The Party had taken steps to run the selection properly, but any process is open to abuse. The analysis of the voting shows that the final margin was 25 votes to Lutfur Rahman, over the combined votes of Abbas and Biggs. Given the queries about the voting, this is a very close result.

There is also the issue of intimidation, some of which happened at the Labour Group meeting. Last night, Party officers met senior party members from the Borough, including Rushanara Ali MP, who said that allegations about Lutfur’s conduct had been made before, and that during the Parliamentary campaign he had publicly refused to support her as a candidate. Whatever decision we reach today, there must be an investigation, and if there is an investigation, we have to suspend the candidate and impose a new one (this sentence makes no sense to me). The NEC could consider any of the shortlisted candidates. We could be subject to legal challenge, but the advice from our solicitors is clear.

Harriet Harman then spoke. She said that there were two questions: firstly can we suspend our selected candidate? Yes, we can. Secondly should we do it? Yes we should. It’s a difficult decision, but we should do it. This is a bottom-up process, arising from complaints on the ground. The mayoralty is a very important office, TH is an Olympic borough and will get about £1bn extra resources, under the control of the Mayor. We are in the run up to the London Mayor election, and there is the position of the two Labour MPs. Endorsement would be the easy route. There will be more allegations. We have to use our judgement. When we investigate allegations, we suspend the member concerned. We could find ourselves with a suspended candidate, or Mayor. He will go to Respect, they’ve already said they won’t stand a candidate against him. Then Rushanara Ali and Jim Fitzpatrick would be toast. The Party is more important than any individual, and the reputation of the Party is the most important. There will be a row, but better a row now than later on. I support the unanimous recommendation of the officers. (No written recommendations were ever put.)

Ann Black then opened the debate, saying that anyone who wanted to speak would be able to do so, but that she didn’t want anyone to question anyone else’s convictions or motives.

Dennis Skinner spoke first, raving on about how he was opposed to Mayors. Nothing of any relevance to this case was said. He then left the meeting.

I then said that I knew most of the people involved in this case and had done for many years, although the person I knew least well was Lutfur Rahman. I pointed out that I had met him at a restaurant several months ago, where there were Asian and white women, not wearing hijabs, and alcohol was served, so that’s how much of a Muslim fundamentalist he is! I said that all membership applications in TH were dealt with by the Regional office, have been for many years, and that the local CLPs aren’t allowed to have anything to do with them, so if there are irregularities whose fault is that? During this time, the membership in TH has halved, so if someone is buying up memberships he clearly isn’t very good at it. The voting was on 4th September, yet now we have last minute complaints dated yesterday. Complaints have come in from disappointed candidates, I understand their disappointment, but they are hardly neutral in this. Helal Abbas, who says in his letter that there has never been any complaint about him or investigation, is really Abbas Uddin, who won the Spitalfields by election by 9 votes in ’84 or ’85, I know because I was there, and later had to stand down as a councillor because he was bankrupt. He also had to be forcibly prevented from hitting Lilian Collins at a Shadwell selection in the ‘90s. We were promised an investigation by David Triesman (previously General Secretary) which never materialised, clearly the Party is selective in what it chooses to investigate in Tower Hamlets. Respect is a busted flush in TH, Respect councillors have been allowed into the Labour Group by the Regional office, with no consultation with the Labour Party, many of whom were against it. If Respect won’t stand a candidate, maybe they can’t find one! At the voting on 4th September, at which no postal votes were allowed, members had to take their cards and photographic proof of identity, eg passports, so how could there have been impersonations? The Borough Party secretary was asked to leave the room in which the voting took place, so this was all in the hands of the Region. Ken Clarke announced to the media outside the count that Lutfur was the candidate, and is on You Tube doing so. I am very concerned that Andrew Gilligan is being given a say in who the Labour candidate is. The Dispatches programme was absolute rubbish and the MP involved was censured by his GC for taking part. Lutfur is the candidate supported by the majority of the local Party, which is why the intention was to keep him off the shortlist in the first place. (I shouldn’t really have brought that up, but I was so angry). If he isn’t endorsed as the candidate we could lose the election and the Tories might win it. Then they’ll have control of a £1bn budget.

Keith Vaz then said that he was on the first panel, and had said that mistakes were being made. If allegations have been made, we should have the person in and ask them about them. I’ve had allegations made about me in the past. Anyone can make up allegations, especially if they’ve lost an election. If we let the local MPs chose a Mayoral candidate we’re on a very slippery slope. We haven’t followed procedures and now there are noises off. I gave Andrew Gilligan a job as an intern 20 years ago. [SENTENCE DELETED FOR LEGAL REASONS.] The last time this matter went to court, it cost us £70 thousand, and we were advised by the same solicitors who have given this legal opinion. I don’t accept the officers’ recommendations. Regional office is a problem. I’m happy for the officers to interview the candidate, then if they’re not happy, suspend him. We can all produce dossiers, we don’t want to get involved in a faction fight in TH. The spirit of the law is that you should put allegations to the person involved.

Pete Willsman than said that the dossier had come in right at the last minute to try and bounce the NEC, and that it was contrary to natural justice that the person had not seen, never mind had a chance to respond to, the allegations.

Norma Stephenson said that we have to act within the spirit of the Party. The report from the Labour Group meeting made my mind up. We need an investigation into this selection, and also into Regional office.

Keith Birch said he supported Norma because the allegations needed investigation.

Jeremy Beecham said that we have to sort this out and we can’t just ignore Gilligan, he will do real damage. ID doesn’t show where you live. There are serious questions about the ballot, and a prima facie case to look into, as an emergency.

Peter Wheeler said there might be problems and we might be taken to court. If we suspended Lutfur Rahman, how would we get a candidate?

Angela Eagle said I was on the second panel, and I didn’t shortlist him. It’s not right that people feel they have an entitlement to be a candidate, and take us to court (Angela was imposed as a candidate in Wallasey in the first place). There are problems with endorsing the candidate, there is a prima facie case to investigate.

Peter Kenyon said that there was a probability the candidate would stand against us anyway (not a point likely to win the NEC over). Anyone can make a case against anyone – look at the case that was made against Ken Livingstone, and look where that got us. We should investigate soon, before the nominations. I’m not confident about an investigation, I’m still waiting for the outcome of the investigation into Erith and Thamesmead. This is not a bottom-up case, not according to what I’ve heard from local members. We need a rapid investigation by people who have not been previously involved.

Jack Dromey said the London region shouldn’t investigate. There are serious allegations, Lutfur publicly refused to support Rushanara Ali. Now Respect is supporting him. There are reports this morning that he is being investigated by the electoral commission. It is not practical to have an investigation and then another NEC by Friday. We have to take the risk that he will stand.

Ray Collins then came back and said that this was not about our processes, it was about the conduct of an individual. Even Keith Vaz and Peter Kenyon admit the allegations are serious. We have to act immediately.

Harriet Harman said that there is no easy path but we have to exercise our responsibilities. We don’t want a hiatus between now and Friday. I am more concerned about Rushanara’s allegations than about Gilligan’s. We need to agree another candidate now.

Keith Vaz said that it could be unlawful, we are proposing to agree a new candidate before there has been an investigation.

Ray Collins said that was not the case. There is a prima facie case for an investigation. The suspension is an administrative action.

Ann Black then tried to clarify what we were voting on, no recommendations being written down. The first vote was that: “We believe there are allegations that require investigation, which need to be investigated outside the London region, and that therefore we take administrative action to suspend the candidate.”

There were lots of votes in favour of this, with myself, Peter Kenyon and Peter Willsman voting against, and Keith Vaz abstaining.

The second vote was put by Norma Stephenson, that the candidate be Helal Abbas. Pete Willsman moved John Biggs, as he at least came second in the ballot. There were 16 votes for Abbas, 2 for Biggs, with 5 abstentions ; myself, Peter Kenyon, Ellie Reeves, Andy Worth and Keith Vaz.

My suspicion is that they put forward Abbas so as not to leave themselves open to the charge of deselecting a Bangladeshi and replacing him with a white man. All papers in the dossier were collected in, and I left the meeting.

UPDATE – Wednesday, 12.40pm

Shawcroft has now deleted the entry from her blog, possibly for two reasons: a) it was actionable; b) she was ordered to remove it. Good job I saved a copy of it, eh…

UPDATE – Wednesday, 1pm

And now it’s back up again. Either a wobble or “computer says no” moment.

Read Full Post »

The website Socialist Unity, which has a hotline to Respect policy bods Rob Hoveman and Kevin Ovenden, has posted this article this morning:

George Galloway dramatically returned to London last night from Lyon, France, where he had been with the Viva Palestina convoy en route to Gaza. This followed the extraordinary decision by the Labour’s National Executive Committee to deselect Lutfur Rahman, the popular choice of the Labour Party membership in Tower Hamlets for mayor, and impose instead Helal Abbas, a candidate who got less than one third of Rahman’s votes. George Galloway went into a lengthy meeting with his closest adviors late last night. Following that meeting the following statement was issued by Tower Hamlets Respect.

“The Respect Party has been reviewing its decision not to stand in the Tower Hamlets mayoral election following Lutfur Rahman’s extraordinary deselection. There is a consensus in Respect that Respect will stand a candidate if Lutfur Rahman is unsuccessful in his legal action to overturn the decision to deselect him and if he does not then stand as an independent candidate. Two candidates will be considered for selection in these circumstances – George Galloway and Abjol Miah. Final decisions on a candidate will be reached in the next 36 hours and we have booked an appointment with the Returning Officer to submit papers for Respect’s candidate on Friday morning, just a few hours before nominations close.”

As Respect will leave things to the last minute before nominating (deadline is noon on Friday), it seems likely they will be in contact with Lutfur’s people about any legal action.

Does anyone know where George actually lives? Is it in the borough? Last time I looked at his Companies House files, he had signed off his address at his former marital home in Streatham. He moved out of a place in Cheshire Street three years or so ago and moved – I thought temporarily – to a flat in Hackney.

Would he rely on Respect’s office in Club Row, Bethnal Green as a business address to meet the qualifying criteria? Indeed, is that office still functioning and does GG actually work there?

UPDATE – 10.55am, Weds

Confirmed by two people who stood against Galloway in Poplar in Limehouse in May that he stated his home was in Steatham.

The criteria for standing as a candidate for elected mayor are the same as for councillors, ie:

• You are over 18 years of age
• You are a Commonwealth Citizen, a citizen of the Republic of Ireland or a citizen of another Member State of the European Community
• You are registered as a local government elector in Tower Hamlets OR you have lived or worked in Tower Hamlets for the whole of the 12 months preceding the date of nomination OR you have owned property in Tower Hamlets for the whole of the 12 months preceding the date of nomination.

I’ve asked Respect which one GG fits, but, as yet, no answer.

Read Full Post »

Before today’s events, I was going to report on the row at last night’s meeting of the Labour group at Tower Hamlets council.

In June, I wrote this post. Back then, strangely, new council leader Helal Abbas was seen as the favourite to become the Labour candidate for mayor. As a result, Lutfur Rahman and his chief lieutenant Cllr Marc Francis lobbed him and colleagues a hand grenade. They proposed a motion to their colleagues that the new mayor’s salary should be capped at about £30,000 a year. The pair said that would be a sign to voters that politicians (unlike Newham mayor Sir Robin Wales, who bags a salary of £81,000) were doing their bit for the recession.

For ease of reference, here’s the wording of that motion:

Dear colleague

As you will have seen from the agenda for Monday’s Labour Group meeting, i am bringing a motion introducing term limits on any Labour directly-elected Mayor and reducing the Special Responsibility Allowance for that post and other Cabinet positions.

This motion is itself fairly self-explanatory, but i will explain my reasoning in a little more detail on Monday.  I would obviously welcome your support for this motion, so please don’t hesitate to let me know if you any queries before then.

Yours

Lutfur

Motion – Directly-Elected Mayor

Proposed:            Cllr Lutfur Rahman

Seconded:            Cllr Marc Francis

This Labour Group notes:

• The referendum result in support of a Directly-Elected Mayor and the election for this position will be held on 21^st October;
• That in other local authorities the introduction of an Executive Mayor in place of the Council Leader has resulted in an increase in the Special Responsibility Allowance (SRA) for that position;
• That, as well as an Executive Mayor, Newham has 16 Cabinet Members and Mayoral Advisers, each in receipt of an SRA;
• That some directly-elected Mayors are now beginning their third consecutive Term of Office;
• The new Conservative / Lib Dem Coalition Government is expected to require around £10 million in “in-year” cuts from the London Borough of Tower Hamlets, as well as significant additional savings thereafter.

This Labour Group believes:

• That it is important for the Labour Party and its elected representatives to take on the burden of any necessary savings before considering imposing cuts in frontline services;
• A Mayor, Deputy Mayor and eight Cabinet members is a sufficient Executive body for the London Borough of Tower Hamlets;
• George Washington and Thomas Jefferson had it right in establishing the convention of a two-term limit for the President of the United States, now enshrined in law by the 22^nd Amendment.

This Labour Group therefore resolves:

• To peg the SRA of the Directly-Elected Mayor for 2010/11 and 2011/12 at the current level of the SRA to the Council Leader less 5 per cent;
• To peg the SRA for the Deputy Mayor for 2010/11 and 2011/12 at the current level of the SRA to the Deputy Leader less 5 per cent;
• To peg the SRA for Cabinet Members for 2010/11 and 2011/12 at the current level of the SRA to Cabinet Members less 5 per cent;
• To require that the Mayor appoint no more than one Deputy Mayor and eight Cabinet Members to serve on the Executive;
• That no Labour Mayor should seek a 3^rd Term of Office.

The motion was rejected.

At the meeting of the full council last Wednesday, politicians had another attempt to agree pay. What about £65,000, a cross-party group suggested? Er, no. Labour councillors rejected that as well.

So, last night, when it seemed certain that Lutfur would be mayor, they had another go. Incredibly, by a majority of 20 to 18, Labour’s supposedly cost-conscious public servants voted to recommend a salary of £75,000. Now, who would be so keen to see such massive pay inflation? According to one of Lutfur’s supporters, it was, er, Lutfur’s new club of supporters. They said a pay package well below that of Newham and of Hackney would “reduce the dignity” of the Tower Hamlets office.

Whereas Marc Francis showed consistency and voted against the proposal, Lutfur abstained.

Abbas, meanwhile, voted against. So, we now know one thing, at least: Abbas will not accept a £75k salary if elected on October 21.

Read Full Post »

One of the saddest aspects of Tower Hamlets politics is the view among some politicians that voters can be directed to vote along racial lines. It’s patronising, divisive and borderline racist.

Bodrul Islam was the groom at the wedding that Jim Fitzpatrick infamously walked out of last year. He subsequently joined Respect, but failed in his attempt to win a council seat in Bromley-by-Bow last May.

Here’s his Facebook take on the Lutfur Rahman/Helal Abbas saga:

Bodrul Islam The tower hamlets labour party seems to prioritise naked self interest at the expense of democracy. Abbas, that castrated prostitute has no mandate to stand as a mayoral candidate. Part of me wants to laugh at the dismantling of the labour party but the serious part of me sees the grotesque injustice against lutfur. I personally think he should do what ken livingstone did, stand as an independent. With his popularity he will win, as the block bengali vote will be activated like never before.

Sigh.

Read Full Post »

Well, that’ll teach me to go to the gym: while I’d shut myself away for a couple of hours, Labour’s NEC was doing its own bit of exercise in power.

Apologies if credit is due elsewhere, but I think [UPDATED Weds, Sep 22]Operation Black Vote broke the story that Lutfur Rahman has been suspended as Labour’s candidate for the elected mayor of Tower Hamlets.

Here’s the press release from Labour HQ:

NEWS FROM LONDON LABOUR PARTY

Following a meeting of the Labour Party’s National Executive Committee today, a spokesperson said:

“Having received a number of serious allegations concerning both the eligibility of participating voters and the conduct of  Lutfur Rahman, the NEC has decided to investigate the allegations made.

“As a result, administrative action has been taken to remove Lutfur Rahman as a candidate pending the investigation. Nominations for Tower Hamlets mayor close this week and in the circumstances the NEC had no option but to impose another candidate.

“The NEC has voted to select Helal Abbas Uddin as Labour’s candidate.”

Nominations for candidates for mayor close at noon on Friday, which leaves less than 72 hours for further developments. And there will be.

Here’s what has happened. The London Labour party recently received a lawyer’s letter on behalf of one of the losing candidates containing what a Labour source told me was a “lengthy and detailed” list of allegations about the eligibility of party members who voted for Lutfur in the selection process. I understand that one of the question marks is over a family member of Lutfur’s.

Contributions to that dossier were made by a number of the losing candidates. I can also reveal that the lawyer who presented the dossier was instructed by none other than Helal Abbas, the current council leader and the man that the party has now imposed as its candidate.

You’ll recall that Lutfur’s winning margin in the vote earlier this month was massive. In his winning fifth round, he had a margin of 182 over the second placed candidate, John Biggs. For ease of reference, that fifth round result was: Lutfur 433, Biggs 251, Abbas 157. Some of the losing candidates quite frankly did not believe the result and suspected foul play.

So how big “lengthy” exactly was the list in the Abbas dossier? According to my source, “more than 100 voters”. Which is indeed big.

The NEC considered two main things this morning:

1. The dossier and the propriety of Lutfur’s win.

2. Lutfur’s record as council leader from 2008-2010: according to one well placed source, “there were worries about the friends he kept”.

These are incredibly serious allegations and two things are highly likely (and fully expected by Labour HQ):

1. Lutfur will be consulting his lawyers right now. There is a strong chance that this will go to the High Court again.

2. If Lutfur is not a candidate he repeatedly describes as “the great Labour party”, he will run as an independent…or even Respect.

UPDATE – 6pm, Tuesday

Cllr Helal Abbas is not wasting anytime getting his new campaign into gear. He has sent this text to party members this afternoon. He’s holding a rally at 7pm tonight. Wonder if Lutfur will be going.

Dear comrades, we are inviting you to the Tower Hamlets Mayoral Campaigns meeting today the 21st Sept 2010, 7 pm @ Labour party rooms, 349 cambridge heath road, london E2. With very best regardr, Cllr Helal Abbas, Leader of the Concil

Read Full Post »

The Friendly Lefty makes has commented on my last post that Respect’s decision not to field a candidate against Labour’s Lutfur Rahman can’t in any way be described as a pact.

Here are Respect’s two statements in full:

Tower Hamlets Respect Party last night decided by an overwhelming majority not to stand a candidate in the mayoral election. Instead Tower Hamlets Respect calls on on all its members, supporters and voters to vote for Lutfur Rahman to be Tower Hamlets’ first executive mayor.

The reasons for this decision are two-fold.

Firstly, Lutfur has been the subject of a vicious witch-hunt orchestrated from within the Labour party and fuelled from without by the extreme right wing press. This has demonised both Lutfur and significant sections of the Muslim community with a thinly veiled anti-Muslim racism. We welcome the fact that Lutfur saw off the despicable attempt inside the Labour Party to keep him off Labour’s selection shortlist and then to win with a large majority over his rivals. But we have no doubt that the witch-hunting and the smears against him will continue.

Secondly, Lutfur has declared since his selection that he wishes to build a broad coalition against the terrible cuts that the Condem government wishes to impose on the less well-off, the disadvantaged and the ordinary working people in this borough. We welcome this very much and we want to be part of that coalition to help ensure that those words are turned into action when Lutfur is elected, as we are sure he will be, on October 21st.

The programme of government we want to see from Mayor Lutfur Rahman includes

– Defence of public services and jobs

– Action to end the housing crisis by breaking with Labour’s previous failed policies

– Fighting all racism and discrimination

– Better schools and community facilities and safer neighbourhoods

– Making the Olympics deliver for the people of East London

George Galloway commented: “We are proud of the crucial role Respect played in establishing a directly elected mayor in Tower Hamlets. This is a much more democratic system. I also stated that Lutfur Rahman was the kind of mayor we needed at the rally against the English Defence League three months ago. I am very pleased that he has finally been selected as Labour’s mayoral candidate. He will have my support in this election on the basis that he will lead the fight against the cuts from this terrible Condem government.”

Respect will be vigorously contesting the forthcoming by-election in Spitalfields and Banglatown that will occur as a result of Lutfur’s election, which we predict Respect will win, and the GLA elections in 2012.

And

Carole Swords, the chair of Tower Hamlets Respect, this morning spoke about the difficult decision Respect had had to make over the mayoral election. “We campaigned very hard for the referendum that Labour wanted to deny the people of Tower Hamlets and we were delighted when the people voted by a large majority for a directly elected mayor. This was never about setting something up that Respect could exploit, contrary to the smears put about by some in the Labour Party and others. It was about establishing a democratic and accountable system of governance in Tower Hamlets, unlike what has gone on here for so many years.

“As an electoral party, the members always want to contest elections wherever and whenever it is good for the people to do so. In this case, however, the overwhelming majority of Tower Hamlets Respect concluded we are dealing with unusual conditions. Lutfur Rahman has been subject to a terrible witch-hunt and yet he has shown his mettle by coming through it and convincingly winning selection. More than that, he has spoken of his determination to fight the cuts on the basis of the broadest possible coalition.

“It’s for these two reasons we are going to support him. I would emphasise we are not supporting the Labour Party which has done so much damage in Tower Hamlets, we are supporting this particular candidate, just as we supported Ken Livingstone in the London mayoral election. But we give notice that we will be voting for Lutfur on the basis he leads the fight against the Condem cuts. If he fails in that duty to the people of Tower Hamlets, we will be his fiercest critics.”

I’ve asked Respect for details of their vote last night, but so far they have declined to reply. I’ve also asked them to explain why, if they thought Lutfur was so good, they tried to oust him from his council seat in Spitalfields in May. I suppose that’s when Respect still had ambitions of being a proper player in Tower Hamlets. Those days seem to have gone.

Or have they? If Lutfur wins in October there will be a by-election in Spitalfields in which Respect will field a candidate, most likely their former town hall leader, Abjol Miah. I would not be surprised if he won, with not a little help from Lutfur’s backers. Many then predict that Respect would expect Lutfur to fulfill the pledge outlined in the statement above, ie a “determination to fight the cuts on the basis of the broadest possible coalition”.

Would that mean a cabinet seat for Abjol? Conspiracy? Perhaps, but let’s see. Funny how some of the other theories labelled conspiracy months ago are now in fact fact today.

So, while we do not have a Lib Dem/Tory coalition candidate, we do have a Labour/Respect coalition of sorts, or at least a Lutfur Camp/Respect coalition. It’s also worth noting that some of Lutfur’s leading supporters are ex-Respect councillors, Oli Rahman, Lutfa Begum and Rania Khan. They left Respect because they could no longer stand the direction Abjol seemed to be taking the party. What political somersaults they’ve been doing!

By the way, here’s the dictionary definition of ‘pact’:

Read Full Post »

The Lib Dems have just issued the following press release.

The Liberal Democrat candidate for Mayor of Tower Hamlets, John Griffiths, today called the Respect Party’s decision not to stand in the mayoral election, but instead back the controversial Labour candidate as “contemptible.”

“There has clearly been a stitch up between Respect and Lutfur Rahman’s Labour Party.  This pre-election deal shows complete disrespect for the people of Tower Hamlets.”

“Voters in the borough, including many members of the Labour Party, were already nervous at the prospect of Lutfur Rahman taking the Mayoralty and command of the Council’s £1.3bn a year budget.  They will be terrified at the prospect now, given the deal that has clearly been done.”

“It was Respect which organized the petition for the mayoral referendum and campaigned for the yes vote on 6^th May.  Not to contest the election they wanted is the strongest indication yet that, following George Galloway’s defeat and Respect’s disastrous showing in the Council Elections, the Party is in terminal decline.”

The Lib Dems have repeatedly warned of the danger of an elected mayor leading to a one-Party state in the Borough with power concentrated in one individual.

“In the wrong hands, an all-powerful Mayor, heavily backed by one section of the community, would exaggerate the worst of the Council’s recent tendencies – centralising power and removing accountability of local Councillors for the allocation of public funds.”

“As Mayor, I would build a consensus and encourage cross-community involvement in the political process.  This means devolving resources and responsibility to those bodies and  communities best placed to make use of them, including community councils, health boards, local schools, as well as tenants/residents’ associations – citizen-run organisations which can provide a check and balance on Mayoral power.”

“This election is an opportunity to reestablish Tower Hamlets as a borough of many neighbourhoods and communities – each one different, but each one contributing to the common wealth, and at the same time providing a necessary check on the power of an executive Mayor.”

Read Full Post »

As expected, it seems that the idea for for a single “Coalition Unity” candidate for mayor has been vetoed by Tory and Lib Dem HQs, which, according to one Lib Dem “says a lot about the coalition”.

It would have been seen as a stitch-up, rather like the Respect announcement today that, after years of bitterly opposing Labour and Lutfur Rahman, including when he was council leader, George Galloway’s party is now backing him for Mayor. This is exactly what many predicted all along. Disturbingly, but entirely predictably, Respect are trying to paint ALL scrutiny of Lutfur as a “thinly-veiled anti-Muslim racist witch-hunt”. More on that later.

In the meantime, I’m inviting all party candidates to outline why they want to be Mayor.

So, first off is John Griffiths, the Lib Dem candidate.

Why am I standing for Mayor? by John Griffiths

I have lived in Tower Hamlets for the last 15 years – more than a third of my lifetime.  I love this borough – its vibrancy; its diversity; its history. You only had to be here last Friday to feel the excitement as we celebrated Eid. In the same week we remembered the 70th anniversary of the Blitz when the people of this part of London showed remarkable courage to overcome the bombardment and threat of a fascist invasion.

I am proud to call myself a Liberal.  The Party has a distinguished record of social reform.  A hundred years before New Labour, it was the New Liberals of Asquith and Lloyd George who, shocked at the poverty of the East End, introduced social housing, the state pension and school meals. We have since developed a track record for protecting the individual (particularly the vulnerable), and a healthy scepticism of big government. This is the inspiration for my campaign for Mayor.

It was a Liberal Council, way ahead of its time, which first empowered local residents, giving “power to the neighbourhoods”.  As councillor for Bethnal Green North, I followed this approach, chairing my Local Area Partnership, which supported grassroots projects and enabled community organisations to take control of services – whether youth projects run out of Oxford House, or the regeneration of Arnold Circus by the friends’ group.

I led the campaign to stop the Labour council’s plans to demolish York Hall, and am proud that this remains a well-used leisure facility at the heart of our community.  As spokesman on regeneration, I helped to expose a level of fraud in the council that led to criminal prosecutions of officers and Labour councillors. These experiences taught me the dangers of unchecked power getting into the wrong hands.

The person we elect on October 21st will be responsible for a budget of £1.3billion per year and directly influence the lives of more than 200,000 people. An unchecked Mayor, heavily backed by one section of the community, would exaggerate the worst of the Council’s recent tendencies – further centralising power and weakening the accountability of your councillors for decisions over allocating hard-pressed resources.

Given the referendum in favour of a Mayoral system, the Lib Dems want to make it work (as we have already in places like Watford and Bedford), but in ways that complement Liberal values.  As a Lib Dem Mayor, I would build consensus and encourage cross-community involvement in the political process.

This means devolving responsibility and resources to those bodies and  communities best placed to use them, including community or neighbourhood councils, health boards, local schools, as well as tenants and residents’ associations; citizen organisations which can provide a check and balance on Mayoral power. It also means appointing a cabinet that brings together a representative group of the most talented of our councillors.

This election is a unique opportunity for Tower Hamlets to live up to its name, a borough of many neighbourhoods and communities – each one special; each one different, but each one contributing to the common wealth, and at the same time providing a vital check on the power of an autocratic Mayor.

Read Full Post »