A number of councillors and former councillors were sent the following email this morning:
Dear Sir,
It is unacceptable that the Labour and Tory party are refusing to work with the new democratic elected mayor of Tower Hamlet!
Either they accept the Democratic Process and listen to wishes of of the voters and work with new Mayor or All the Labour and Tory Councillors should resign and let the people of Tower Hamlets decide whether they want these Traitors who refuse to accept the democratic process and will of the people, be elected again!
Dara Miah
A Concerned Citizen!
Dear old Dara seems to think Lutfur should be the Great Dictator. But his email does raise a couple of interesting points. As I reported in this post, Lutfur’s business backer Shiraj Haque has been trying to persuade opposition councillors to accept roles within the new administration. The sole Lib Dem councillor Stephanie Eaton has indicated she will decline a cabinet position and tomorrow night, Tory members will decide whether to take up an offer made to Peter Golds. Quite what that offer is, not even Peter seems sure. However, I understand that it too will be rejected. It does appear very likely that the “people of Tower Hamlets” will be governed by one of the weakest line-ups in the borough’s history.
The second point raised by our Concerned Citizen is not only how the “will of the people” at the forthcoming by-election in Spitalfields and Banglatown. As yet, the required two letters from residents of that ward requesting a by-election have not arrived at the town hall. If they’re received this week, the election will be on December 9, otherwise it will be December 16. As for the candidates, none of the parties have decided who will stand. As it is Lutfur’s former ward (he had to stand down as councillor once he was elected mayor), he will have a major influence over who wins.
So does he try to ingratiate himself with his former party and back the Labour candidate, who will take the party whip and oppose him, or support the person to be put up by Respect (they’re meeting tomorrow night to decide if they will run and if so, who), or, even more intriguingly, does he encourage an “independent” to stand?
What do you think he should do?
Trial by Jeory 
It appears Dara Miah is unfamiliar with the notion that the will of the people can also be expressed through a failure to turn up at the ballot box!
I’ve met a lot of people who said there was nobody standing that they wanted to vote for and/or nobody standing who deserved their vote. One could easily make an argument for saying that the will of the people was that they didn’t want anything to do with the mayoralty!
After all only 13% of the electorate actually voted for the new Mayor – while many more voted for the existing Councillors.
There has also never been any situation in history – with the possible exception of war – that has required politicians to co-operate. (That’s if you exclude the dictators!)
Dara needs to “get real” and understand this is the way politics works. All the Councillors are going to be around for the next few years – they’re not going anywhere and Lutfur Rahman is going to have to work within that context.
I’m left wondering whether the current situation says rather more about how much Rahman and his backers actually thought through what they were doing – and what the implications were – when they opted for an Independent lifestyle choice!? Maybe they are also now learning that not everybody can be bought?
It seems to me that it’s looking increasingly likely that:
– whoever opts to be in the Cabinet is going to either be absolutely worn out by an incredible amount of responsibility and work
– alternatively, this borough is going to be governed by an incredibly weak Cabinet.
As to the Councillor for the Spitalfields ward – it’s irrelevant. Whoever gets elected is absolutely immaterial. It doesn’t resolve the bigger problem of how this borough is to be managed.
Concillors were also elected in their own right, and have a mandate to act in accordance with the policies of the parties which they represent. They are under no obligation whatsoever to join the cabinet of a mayor with opposing views.
We in the Green Party canvassed heavily in Spitalfields and Banglatown in the Mayor elections, and found extreme unhappiness with the whole idea of the Exececutive Mayor there, just as we did everywhere else. I agree with ‘you couldnt make it up’. The people of Tower Hamlets did speak at the election: by staying at home.
Currently the two remaining Councillors in this ward are at war with each other: one is Helal Abbas or course, and other is Shelina Aktar, one of the ex-Labour Councillors who backed Lutfur Rahman and got kicked out the party as a result.
We will be standing a great candidate in the upcoming by-election. I just hope the voters support a candidate who is interested in fighting for them, rather than fighting each other.
I do not agree with your comment about two cuncillor fighting in spitalfield ward. Cllr shelina was fighting aganist the labour injustice.Abbas was fighting to get on the top. She did not kicked out,all the culcillor came out from the party to support lutfor.Come on you have seen the result. As a new councillor she is doing great job for the community.
Well it’s a view i suppose.
sorry i meant to say councillor
Good luck Greens, but this maybe a tough one to crack. I doubt you would have complained if the Greens or Labour won the mayoralty.
I’m afraid I don’t get the last comment by Labourman – the Greens haven’t complained! GreenAli just made some observations about what was happening in the ward – none of which comes as any surprise I have to say.
Dara Miah is the person who is complaining……..
Ha! Lutfur is left with responsibility for his obligations without the power to carry them out! (At the same time, the various parties on the council have power without responsibility which, as Rudyard Kipling once said, has been the prerogative of the harlot through the ages). I saw this one coming from the minute he decided to stand as independent and I agree with Youcouldn’t make it up that he should have taken 10 seconds to work out how he was going to deliver on his own.
Outside London there are two independent elected mayors – Stuart Drummond (aka H’Angus the Monkey) in Hartlepool and Ray Mallon (aka Robocop for his zero-tolerance policies when he was in the police) in Middlesbrough.
Both areas are heavily Labour and also the north-east is a deprived area. And there the resemblance ends. Both these areas are governed by a cabinet that is drawn from Labour (with one or two independent councillors).
Because in neither area has the mayoral candidate been tarnished with such accusations that nobody wants to be associated with him. And in neither area (to the best of my knowledge) has the mayor run a relentlesly negative, untruthful, divisive, campaign aimed at his personal aggrandisement (vote for me cos I’m a victim) rather than what they can deliver for the area. (And remember, Labour certainly did not want H’Angus the Monkey to win the first time so they will have been campaigning strongly against him). Nor did either candidate run a campaign that has been so malicious towards other candidates.
If there had been less animosity and more of a focus on delivery then possibly Lutfur could have started building alliances once elected as these other independent Mayors have done successfully. The examples of Hartlepool and Middlesbrough show that it can be done. But Lutfur’s blown it from the start. Now deal with the consequences of your actions!
Actually, Lutfur has all the executive power. All full council can actually do is delay his budget once a year. The only reason he and his backers want him to have a cross party cabinet is to share the blame for cuts.
Let’s not forget that Drummond also achieved the feat of being re-elected for a third term of office in May last year.
It just goes to show Independent Mayors can work and also be very effective and popular – if they approach the job from the right perspective.
Which is not what has happened in Tower Hamlets so far.
Completely agree.
Ted can you delete the previous comment please. It should read like this. (I do wish there were a preview button – I forgot to do the closing code!)
Let’s not forget that Drummond also achieved the feat of being re-elected for a third term of office in 2009.
It just goes to show Independent Mayors can work and also be very effective and popular – if they approach the job from the right perspective.
Which is not what has happened in Tower Hamlets so far.
I say Oona King should stand as a councillor what say others? Any suggestions?
Why on earth would Oona stand as a Councillor?
She’ll be the Labour Candidate for the Mayor of London if Livingstone gets kicked out of the Labour Party because of his behaviour during the Mayoral election
Whether or not Oona should stand as a councillor, putting her up in Spitalfields (which was the centre of the campaign to get rid of her as MP) is possibly not the best option either for her or the Labour party.
Let me be controversial for a change. By-elections are only held on Thursdays by custom and practice. Since the returning officer obviously thought better of custom and practice by not informing parties of the number of people voting in the mayoral ballot (btw that worked well and really raised turnout didn’t it?), he may choose to have the by election not on a Thursday, just to be perverse.
Gilligan continues to unload on this shower of IFE supporters with admirable vigour. They have made themselves a very bad enemy, his latest piece keeps up the momentum –
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/andrewgilligan/100061920/east-london-mosque-the-terrorist-connection-and-the-lies/
Gilligan been up to more lies??:
http://blog.islamicforumeurope.com/2010/10/29/andrew-gilligans-lie-the-definitive-proof/
Where does the community fit into all this?
What community? Shahanara’s furtive I’m-a-member-of-the-IFE-actually-no-I-am-not-community or the “other community” that stayed at home and has been written out of East End politics for the past ten years.
Whoever can re-engage with the silent majority in LBTH will win the next vote hands down.
You took the words out of my mouth
ditto
Two letters were delivered to the Town Hall yesterday.
The election could and should be on 9 December – but the Returning Officer has delayed it to 16 December – to give Luthfer and Respect enough time to see what Labour are doing and then decide whether to run an independent or Respect candidate.
Can he do that? Sounds very partial (ie NOT ‘independent’ – in the proper sense of the word – and impartial) if it’s true.
Sorry – should add a further comment
I know elections can be delayed. That’s not the issue.
However I thought this was usually only done with the agreement of all the involved political parties so that it can’t be said to be favouring one party over another.
So the question is – do all the political parties agree to the delay?
What evidence is there that what you say is the reason for the delay is true? A quick look at the TH website doesn’t give any date for the by-election. The latest East London Advertiser has landed with me and says that the by-election will be on 16th but no reason given for that.
I have no doubt that Lutfur and Respect will assess what to do in light of Labour’s choices but I don’t think it’s fair to suggest that the Returning Officer is involved in the shenanigans.
I had a little dig around on the Electoral Commission website.
Section 3.22 and Tables 2 and 3 in “Managing a local government election in England and Wales: guidance for Returning Officers – Part A – Context (PDF)” provide a precise timetable as to the date when a vacancy is deemed to have occurred – which is determined by the reason a casual vacancy occurred.
I’m not clear which of the reasons would be the one which applies in this set of circumstances. Did Rahman resign or was he otherwise disqualified by reason of his election to Mayor?
It then goes on to say what should happen in relation to the publication of a notice which declares the vacancy in paras 3.26-3.30
Notice of vacancy
3.26 The local authority is required to publish a public notice whenever there is a casual vacancy.16 There is no prescribed form for the notice and so the authority has some discretion as to how the notice is actually worded; however, it should state the local authority and ward in which the vacancy has arisen, how a by-election can be requested and the date of the notice, along with any other appropriate information.
3.27 The notice of vacancy must be published immediately when the authority has declared the seat vacant because of a failure to attend meetings or because a councillor has become disqualified or has ceased to be qualified.17
3.28 In all other cases, the notice has to be published as soon as practicable after the date on which the vacancy is deemed to have arisen.18
3.29 A notice of vacancy is still published even where the six-month rule means that the vacancy will not be filled before the next ordinary election (see sixth-month rule below).
3.30 There is no need for electors to wait for the notice of vacancy to be published by the relevant authority before submitting a request for a by- election to be held.
The next section deals with the timing of the election
Timing of by-elections
3.31 The timing of a by-election to fill a casual vacancy depends on whether the seat has been declared vacant by the local authority or the High Court or if the vacancy has been in any other way. A declaration of a vacancy is not the same as a notice of vacancy; for example, the local authority does not declare a vacancy when a councillor resigns or dies but does publish a notice of vacancy as soon as practicable after being notified of the death or receiving the resignation.
3.32 If a seat has been declared vacant by the local authority, for example because the councillor has failed to accept their office or attend meetings, the by-election must (subject to the six-month rule) be held within 35 working days of the date of the declaration.19
3.33 In all other cases, for example following the death or resignation of a councillor, a by-election is only triggered by local government electors
16 Section 87(2), LGA 1972. 17 Section 87(2)(a), LGA 1972. 18 Section 87(2)(b), LGA 1972. 19 Section 89(1)(a), LGA 1972.
Part A, page 10, December 2009
requesting a by-election to take place.20 This requires two local government electors within a principal local authority (not just from the ward) giving notice to the proper officer of the authority.
3.34 Once the requests from the electors are received (see ‘Requests to hold an election’ below), the polling day for the by-election must be set at the Returning Officer’s discretion for within 35 working days of the date of receipt of the requests. There is no time limit for receipt of the requests, but, if requests are not received, the seat will remain vacant until the seat would normally be up for election.
3.35 If the two requests arrive before or after the notice of vacancy is published, these trigger the 35 working days within which the Returning Officer must set the day of the poll.
and this is what it says in “Managing a local government election in England and Wales: guidance for Returning Officers – Part B – Action before the poll (PDF)” on the Electoral Commission website.
The publication of the notice of election triggers the start of the nomination period. For a local government election, the notice of election has to be published by not later than the twenty-fifth working day before the poll.19 However, the Returning Officer may publish the notice earlier, thus giving a longer period for the receipt of nominations. It is a matter for the Returning Officer to consider whether they wish to publish the notice of election before the final deadline.
So that’s clear isn’t it? 😉
The Electoral Commission website is http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk
In relation to the flawed selection process ie imposition for choosing the Labour candidate for the Spitalfields and Banglatown by-election on 16 December, the question people should be really asking is will Ed Miliband ever intervene in Tower Hamlets to give back party members their democratic rights or is he prepared to lose Labour seats here due to ill decisions made by the London Labour Party Director, Ken Clark and Tower Hamlets Party Treasurer Chris Weavers and by the likes of losers like the current Labour group leader Cllr Helal Abbas, who has taken the Party into Opposition after nearly 20 years in Power??? If Ken Livingstone loses London mayoral election because of problems caused by Cllr Abbas and Ken Clark in Tower Hamlets, Ed Miliband wouldn’t have a hope in hell of becoming Prime Minister…There is evidence Region didn’t do anything to involve local party members. There is evidence that the candidate even knew he is getting ‘imposed’ as he apparently told a few people he got a call from a senior party boss who asked for his CV. If there is sufficient evidence of such nature that it was a ‘fix’ by Region, there will be a lot more coming in the next few weeks…the wise thing to do is allow members to choose candidate from the approved panel/list of experienced candidates rather than lose in humiliation because local ward party members veto support. Ken Clark and THLP chair, Graham Taylor, must re-run the selection process or RESIGN from their positions if Labour loses this by-election in Spitalfields and Banglatown. And Cllr Abbas must resign anyway for taking Party into Opposition, undoing John Biggs’ work to take the Labour party into Power from the Liberals 16 years ago!