Today’s East London Advertiser hits the bull’s eye. It adds more detail to the story broken here yesterday that Cllr Shelina Akhtar is a benefit fraudster. So we learn from the ELA that:
- the alleged fraud for which was arrested on November 9 was supposedly sub-letting her housing association property
- she denies any wrongdoing, saying, “I’m clean. Let’s wait until the investigation.”
- her conviction for benefit fraud in July included false claims for Jobseeker’s allowance, Housing Benefit and Council Tax Benefit while she had in fact been working
- Mayor Lutfur Rahman has said: “Everyone who seeks to represent the interests of this community must abide by the highest standards of personal conduct.”
As the ELA says, she can only be chucked off the council at this stage after an investigation by the council’s Standards Committee. I understand that another councillor has already made a formal complaint.
The local government code of conduct states that councillors must not behave “in a manner which could reasonably be regarded as bringing your office or the authority into disrepute”. I would have thought defrauding the very council taxpayers whom you are meant to be representing falls well within the “disrepute” category.
And here’s another interesting little thing. At the full meeting of Tower Hamlets council on July 14 – just 13 unlucky days before she was convicted for benefit fraud at Thames Magistrates’ Court – Cllr Akhtar tabled a question to then finance chief, Cllr David Edgar. The question was number 7.27 on page 40 of this pdf.
But as it’s so good, I’ll just copy it here as well:
7.27 Question from Councillor Shelina Akhtar to the Lead Member for Resources, Councillor David Edgar
“What are the likely effects of the coalition government’s plans to make £11bn in cuts to Welfare including cutting housing benefit, tax credits, Disability Living Allowance and freeze Child Benefit on residents in Tower Hamlets?”
Quite some front, don’t you think? I wonder what her Lutfurite colleague Cllr Oli Rahman makes of it all: his day job is in a Job Centre helping to detect benefits cheats.
Trial by Jeory 
Nice timing Ted, while I was posting on your previous post about the question she asked in july, i then see u posted this.
Yes, I’ve literally just seen your other comment! Needless to say, it’s being approved.
There is never a dull day in Tower Hamlets!
people, do not make he he ha out of this small issue. people make geniune mistake. listen what if that was you in this situation and it was a genuine mistake. in life shit happen it does not mean that you should stop live your life. people who make big deal out of this little issue then they have real problem and those people are the most crupted people. Who does not lie man,you all do all time. many Mp has been suspended and many under investigation, so what she made mistake and she got panished. Who are we to judge other people, with out knowing any one don’t make comment. people make one mistake and you making big issue out of it. This women did not murderd any one man. look at fola uddin she got suspended, so what? in politicesthis things happen. Why was andrew sucked from bbc.
Ria Begum, would you mind emailing me on the contact address at the top of this blog? I’d just like to check a couple of things with you. Thanks.
What ordinary people choose to do is one thing. We might not like the way they behave – but there’s no rule which says they cannot lie or cheat.
That is, unless they break the law – which this woman has clearly done in relation to benefits fraud. If you do that then in this country you have to pay the price for lying and cheating and breaking the law.
What a councillor or anybody else elected to represent the community does is subject to a code of conduct which is mandatory. That means they have to observe the highest standard of conduct – and that is NOT optional.
If a councillor gets caught breaking the rules, then it’s up to the Council to sort them out. There is a step beyond that but let’s hope we don’t have to go there…..
Any councillors who think that the rules about conduct do not apply to them could be in for a very rude awakening very soon.
In most Councils any Councillor caught lying (about matters liable to bring the party into disrepute) and cheating the taxpayers (through benefits fraud) in this way would be asked to stand down as a Councillor by their own Party. That’s a euphemism for “you can walk or we can give you the order of the boot!”. I would assume if she had still been a member of the Labour Party that’s probably what would have happened.
A Councillor who is an Independent has the opportunity to do the honourable thing and resign.
But is Cllr Shelina Akhtar an honourable woman? It would appear not on the evidence to date.
Hey Cllr Josh (you couldn’t make it up) every opportunity you get, you take digs at Mayor Lutfur Rahman, what has cllr Shelina’s personal problems got to do with the Mayor? What about your candidate Abdal Alim who is standing in Spitalields, he has
@ Real Labour – Nope I’m not Cllr Peck either – I’m me. Keep guessing!
I’m commenting on ANY aspect of political process by ANY party which is not as it should be – according to the law, the Council’s Constitution and the Members Code of Conduct (the latter being obligatory and not optional for ALL councillors whatever their status or party).
If that means you think I’m taking pot shots at somebody you support then maybe they should look at how they do things…..
For the record, when a candidate for office turns out to be somebody who has been defrauding the public purse, I think ORDINARY PEOPLE are entitled to ask how good are the quality controls which allowed this person to stand as a representative of the people. For example:
– who nominated her as a candifate on the ballot papers?
– who seconded her?
– who gave her a reference as to her character?
– did they really know her or were they just going through the motions and behaving like puppets?
Do you want somebody representing you who is a convicted fraudster? Really?
I know that’s something which a lot of people do NOT want. They want an honourable and honest person who will protect the public purse and make sure that it is always used to benefit the people of the borough not the politicans.
SHELINAGATE SCANDAL: Mayor Rahman’s integrity will be tested by how he deals with the situation. The honorable thing for him to do is to ask Cllr Shelina Ak(h)tar to resign honorably without hesitation. Or be forced to resign shamefully.
Just means another by-election though with a cost of £18,000 for taxpayers to fork out but equally worse will be Labour’s third consecutive defeat since October this year (Abbass, Alim and whoever else is imposed next, eg Duros Ullah)! Hehehilarious…gets funnier in Tower Hamlets everyday
Can someone tell me why is the Labour party entertaining fraudsters or convicted criminals so much in Spitalfields? Must be the hot curry in Brick Lane!
Theres hot curry everwhere. Which law claims that she must resign? And accrding to many people she should be given anther chance. Also a chance to explain herself.
Cllr Shelina Akhtar has already had an opportunity to explain herself in the Thames Magistrates Court when she was tried for benefits fraud.
Whatever her explanation about the allegation of benefits fraud it’s very evident that the magistrates did not find it convincing because they convicted her and she has been sentenced.
On the matter currently under investigation, the evidence available to date must be good enough to enable the police to issue an arrest warrant. See earlier post where I explained that there is a high burden of proof before that can happen.
Of course she must be given a chance to explain matters. If she is charged with an offence then she will get that chance again in Court.
Ria Begum, how can you defend a benefit fraud? She’s a thief! She should be hung out to dry. She deserves all the condemnation and deserves all the reprimands that will come her way. The audacity of the woman is beyond belief!!
However, that said, I don’t think the actions of this fraud should be any reflection on Lutfur’s mayoralty.
How can she be a thief? The case is called Benefit fraud doesn’t mean she is a thief. u don’t really know how or why this happened! this could be a geneunine mistake, which everyone makes in life.
i totally agree with you Ria Begum. Are you from Spitalfields ward, or are you related to anyone from spitalfields? How much do you know about this situation?
Err, okay she’s not a thief but she’s a fraud, which is worse. She consciously, deceived the authorities to make a gain. Deception implies thought, implies trickery, implies cunningness.
It’s not like it was something she did in her youth, which can be forgiven. She did it as a grown woman in not the distanct past. She can’t stand in a public post, representing the people of the area she defrauded! How ridiculous.
Bangalir ijoth rakhseh nah and you are sitting there trying to defend the indefensible.
She got caught working while she was signing on. No mistake. Criminal fraud.
We all have expectations of politicians in British democracy. One of them is for them to have moral high grounds in areas of ethical judgement. In Spitalfields however they are now naturally expected to have the moral low ground!
Could somebody explain to all the taxpayers who fund benefits how dipping your hand in the public purse to take money to which you are not entitled is in any way different to stealing a mother’s purse when she is out shopping.
Both actions have a very bad impact on families.
The government says they lose £900 million each year to benefit fraudsters. That’s money which could be much better spent on housing and other services for people who really need help.
People who claim benefits which they should not get are cheating their neighbours.
Councillors who claim benefits which they should not get are actually cheating their constituents.
In my eyes such individuals are not fit to serve when we could have an honest and upright person instead.
Labour has messed up big time in towerhamlets and I think heads should roll. I suggest a change in Labour leadership in towerhamlets as last leader was uncapable of uniting and winning an election with majority of councillors & Labour backing. I welcome fresh leadership and new councillors. Out with old in with new.
Hold your horses on fraud! It may be she claimed a week or two over the limit. Technically that’s still fraud. However My guess is it was minor otherwise she would have been sentenced to prison.
Do read Ted’s posts! See the previous post – Arrested councillor and benefit fraud
Her conviction states that “she failed to notify of a change in circumstances, namely that she was working between July 22, 2008 and April 5, 2009″. That is, she was wrongly claiming benefits for a period of nine months.
That’s NINE MONTHS! This is NOT a question of a small slip up or a little bit of forgetfulness or a teeny weeny mistake.
There’s only one thing you have to remember if you claim benefits and that’s if your circumstances change – such as if if you start working – then your entitlement may well change as well. Lots of people who work get benefits – they just don’t typically get as much as those who don’t work.
Which bit of that very simple concept do you think was completely beyond the grasp of Cllr Shelina Akhtar?
If that was too difficult for her, how on earth can she be a good candidate to be a representative of the people?
The Labour party application form for would-be candidates asks for details of any potentially embarrassing history. I don’t know yet when the DWP first collared Shelina Akhtar, but it is possible that it was after she was elected in May.
The Alim case is different. The commenter TH Sauce says that all he did was to omit an “honourable” and spent crime from his CV.
I’d like Alim to tell us more about this incident. I’d like to know what actually happened.
I’d like to understand why no one I’ve spoken to remembers any such anti-BNP/NF beatings so close to Altab Ali park (it may well have not been reported because his conviction could have been through the Youth Court, but surely there would have been some folklore outrage and he would have become some kind of martyr).
I’d also like to know why the judge seemingly did not take much account of this supposed provocation and mitigation when sentencing him to six months inside.
And I’d like to understand better why he served a full term.
Yes, the years move on and people learn from mistakes, but one of the fundamental requirements for elected politicians in my view is to be honest and transparent when pressed.
Frankly, I’d be amazed if all these questions weren’t asked by the Labour selection panel when they found out they’d been lied to first time around.
So, over to the panel and Alim to enlighten us all here…
It sounds to me ria and Ibrahim are none other than shalina and olluir disguise or just misguided lutfurrites twits, it is those people who supported lutfur in the so called fair candidate and cried bloody Mary about the way Abbas is a wife beater and how justice is not done properly with lutfur and now they talk about how everyone makes mistake- fraud is fraud no one is saying shalina is a murderer but she is a theif she took money that has no right to her that is called theft in islam, I’m sure your supreme IFE will tell you the same.. Oh are they going to say she made a mistake because of course if it’s one of their supporters they can never be wrong, if shalina was one of Abbas’s ally I would love to see how IFE/lutfurites/respect make about this situation no doubt it would have been all over London bangla the mediocre free paper and don’t get me started on that awful Channel s
as u can see whole things happened before she was even elected but she got convicted in july 2010, if she convicted again then it will be a different issue. i have not issue with alim as candated because it happened before not after he’s been elected.
I do hope Oliur isn’t defending benefit fraudsters. Doesn’t he work for the DWP?
Actually wouldn’t he have known all about this?
To those who allege that Lutfur is related in some way to Shelina Akhtar, he has strongly denied it.
Similar comments will not be approved and I suggest instead that you direct any evidence you may have to the council’s legal head Isabella Freeman, who is investigating the Akhtar affair.
Any good journalist would know how to ascertain facts committed by a youth offender. Try contacting the Ministry of Justice or even the Home Office or the local courts/CPS. Labour must make his conviction details available to the public, as it’s unlikely for any convict to write the truth about his past on a blog so his opponent can criticise him prior to an election. One finds it staggeringly unbelievable that Labour members fail to demand answers from the local party chair behind the scenes apart from Graham Taylor (Chris Weavers) who imposed both Ms Ak[H]tar and Mr Alim, whom they hail as some form of forgotten hero who no one has heard of let alone remember to pay their tribute…Perhaps Abbass can elaborate or the Labour group’s chief Whip Cllr Rachel Soundars???
Try and check your facts a biot more. At least you’re beginning to spell some names correctly.
We have expectations of appointed and elected people in public office to uphold certain ethical standards around acting in the public interest and being principled and leading by example. We also have the enshrined notion of innocence until proven guilty. Shelina Akhtar is a convicted fraudster and she has failed in being upstanding and therefore deserves the vitriol directed at her. Lutfor to date has not been convicted of a crime nor convicted of any misconduct! So why do we have him being castigated based on association, conjecture and innuendo? I don’t see the justice in that. I like many people I know voted Lutfor in because of the media witch hunt by sewer journos like Gillian who not only wrote off Lutfor but an entire community.
Don’t get me wrong, Lutfor is on trial not just by you Mr Jeory, but those who voted him in! In these difficult times if he fails to deliver, or if he is convicted of any impropriety, it will be the Bengali community he will face the backlash from! Think Saddam’s statue after the fall of Iraq and the sandals and shoes! He’ll get some metaphorical sandal slaps for being a disgrace!
We have expectations of appointed and elected people in public office to uphold certain ethical standards around acting in the public interest and being principled and leading by example. We also have the enshrined notion of innocence until proven guilty. Shelina Akhtar is a convicted fraudster and she has failed in being upstanding and therefore deserves the vitriol directed at her. Lutfor to date has not been convicted of a crime nor convicted of any misconduct! So why do we have him being castigated based on association, conjecture and innuendo? I don’t see the justice in that. I like many people I know voted Lutfor in because of the media witch hunt by sewer journos like Gillian who not only wrote off Lutfor but an entire community.
Don’t get me wrong, Lutfor is on trial not just by you Mr Jeory, but those who voted him in! In these difficult times if he fails to deliver, or if he is convicted of any impropriety, it will be the Bengali community he will face the backlash from. Think Saddam’s statue after the fall of Iraq and the sandals and shoes! He’ll get some metaphorical sandal slaps for being a disgrace…and that will be reflected in the ballots.
The Swadhinata Trust and the oral histories they have online from the original SBT community activists is a great source on SBT politics and personalities and may give some background to all this. It was in the oral history of Sunahwar Ali that Abbas Uddin is referenced – still do not know though if he has now become “Helal Abbas.” Anyway, good background while we wait to hear officially from the two SBT people involved in the current crisis.
What on earth has this to do with a post about a woman who has been convicted of fraud and who is still a councillor?
Please can some one outline and explain why Helal Abbas changed his surname from Uddin
Ted do you know why Abbas changed his surname?
Perhaps he is trying to say that Cllr Aktar got the inspiration to change her name by following the example set by Cllr Abbas back in 1985 when she was an innocent 7 year old recipient of child benefit and knew nothing abt scamming DWP?!
Councillor Abbas did not set the example in 1985. He set it some time after 1985 and now – if indeed ‘Helal Abbas’ and ‘Abbas Uddin’ are the same man.
Perhaps you can tell us?
(And please ‘You couldn’t’, before ‘you do’ criticise – we will remain concerned as to the name change while we are not being told if it is true – and why.)
So sorry ‘You couldn’t make it up!’….just responding to #3:
“Can someone tell me why is the Labour party entertaining fraudsters or convicted criminals so much in Spitalfields?”
Thought there was a Spitalfields connection between all the people being mentioned here? Also the oral histories document the anti-racist movement in SBT and Ted did ask about the past NF/BNP incident concerning Mr Alim.
Sorry that you personally do not think the contribution worthwhile or relevant. Just hope it may be to others.
@ “Not from SBT”
It’s not about not having a discussion. It’s about having a discussion in the most helpful way to people reading this blog.
The point I’m making is
1) it’s normal on ANY blog to stay “on topic” with the original subject of the post.
2) by trying to introduce a completely different line into this story (eg stuff to do with Helal Abbas or the Labour candidate for the upcoming by-election) it makes it confusing to read through the comments – as they then become about two (or three) completely different stories
Why not just ask Ted to start a new post about councillors from Spitalfields – and then any comments about “what is it about Spitalfields councilors??” can be attached to that post?
That then makes it very easy for people to stay “on topic” with that topic rather than making it look like people are trying to divert attention away from the subject of this post – which is what it looks like at present.
Wonder whether people are going a bit bonkers over this? People unfortunately lie. They lie to family, friends, colleagues and to political parties. Parties have the luxury of expelling people who lie, if they judge the omission sufficiently damning. The mayor shouldn’t appoint her to anything – but then he hasn’t so far so no problem. She should probably resign – it’s hard to see how she could advise anyone on benefits for example. But hey, bigger issues at play here.
Do you remember the politicians initial reaction to the parliamentary expenses scandal? They didn’t think it was too much of a big deal – one of those things / these things happen etc etc
For example, Baronness Uddin of Bethnal Green defended what she had done with her expenses claims. However last month the House of Lords Privileges and Conduct Committee ruled that Baroness Uddin had ‘acted in bad faith’and ordered her to repay £125,349. Other politicians are going to be prosecuted.
It’s very clear that the British public do think that the way politicians conduct themselves in relation to their claims on the public purse is of utmost importance. Major changes have been introduced in Parliament and MPs lost their seats at selection time and/or in the election as a result.
Now Cllr Akhtar may be just one example of a councillor in Tower Hamlets who has been defrauding the public purse and who has been convicted. The important point here is that the fraud involved taking money from the public purse – which is why it is so very important that all relevant “parties” not only “do the right thing” but are very clearly seen to be doing the right thing.
If they don’t then one can only surmise that they don’t think this is at all important. BIG mistake!
Mindful of the inevitable whip-crack from ‘You couldn’t make it up!’ – thought it not too off topic to mention the Rich Mix. I wouldn’t presume to ask Ted as a journalist to create a post for this or for “councillors from Spitalfields” – as you dictate. You say you are not Ted (as Fighting Dan ventured) and Ted remains the owner and the moderator here. Ted also has posted on the Rich Mix so he’ll be interested to see John Newbigin on the list of Swadhinata SBT community activist contributors – who went on to be part of the 26M Rich Mix. What with the news that Oona King is to be made a lady, the Rich Mix is back on the agenda.
Oh, Ted might just have to create a post on the topic of Lady King as Ray Collins also got the nod. Weren’t both Oona King and Ray Collins mentioned a few times by Ted in his work here on his blog?
Sorry if this comment makes it “confusing” for you to read through other comments ‘You couldn’t make it up!’….I can hear the swish of your bullwhip….
Perhaps the Labour Party would like to explain:
1) On what date did they find out about Shelina Akhtar’s conviction for benefits fraudon July 27th 2010
2) In particular, was that date prior to the date of Cllr Akhtar’s decision to withdraw from the Labour whip
3) What action have they taken since the date they found out and now – in relation to:
– the councillor;
– those who nominated/seconded/selected her etc
– their own internal processes for ensuring that candidates in general are of good character and will not bring the party into disrepute
You could not make it up (Cllr Josh)! It appears you really have got it in for Cllr Shelina. As you are fully aware, she has been punished for her wrong doing and I think it is now time for you to stop the witch hunt and move on. As a Councillor, try and utilise yourself for proactive community development work rather then waste time in negative campaigning.
I’m not a councillor.
I’m a member of the electorate who is exasperated and outraged at:
– the way politics is conducted in Tower Hamlets
– the quality and integrity of some of the people put up to represent us – and who continue to be councillors
– the fact that political parties and politicians remain, as yet, unaccountable for their actions.
I’m reminding other citizens and members of the electorate that we have a right to ask questions, make complaints and get answers.
So “Real_Labour” do you have a problem with members of the electorate exercising their democratic rights?
Shows your ignorance of politics here. Every question is nonsense.
Both Cllr Abbas and Graham taylor have answered this in full in the statement Ted produced ibn the previous post.
@ TH Sauce
You think so?
Both said they didn’t know about it. Fair enough. Only one (Abbas) said when he found out (16th Nov.) Both are saying that Cllr Akhtar never made any declaration to them about any prosecution.
Neither said anything about what they are doing now to make sure the truth is ascertained. I’m guessing that maybe the fact she has defected means that they think they don’t have to do anything?
From my perspective, if they genuinely didn’t know then the issue for interested observers is about how well Labour monitors the conduct of its own councillors.
Or, looked at another way, how often councillors can lie to the Labour Party and never get found out until somebody “dishes the dirt”.
One only has to look at some of the Declarations of Interest to see the scope to ask questions of some councillors – in terms of what is NOT there – but do ANY of the political parties ever do that? I wonder.
My dear Watson, the Spitalgate Scandals aren’t difficult to solve at all. All that is needed, given the limited resources made available to us gentlemen in Baker Street, is a thorough post-mortem, not necessarily forensic, into the electorally corrupt areas surrounding the notorious vicinity of Hanbury Street simultaneously with Labour’s variably flawed local election candidate selection processes and panels made of Winter potatoheads that constitute the formation of ill judgement due to cognitive or cerebral deficiencies…
Benefit fraud might be free but so is reporting it! If you suspect any councillor is cheating the benefit system simply call the National Benefit Fraud Hotline on 0800854440 or visit benefitfraud.org.uk Of course you must find other means to report council committee chairs that earn £18,000 a year for holding just half a dozen or so 2 hour meetings like Gastronomic Per-purses or Personal Planning and Development…
# 18 ‘You couldn’t make it up!’ refers to Baroness Uddin.
This is Pola Uddin – also another name in the SBT community activists’ accounts. From a 2001 obituary for Caroline Adams (on the Avenues Unlimited organisation):
“Her early colleagues included John Newbigin, Abbas Uddin, now leader of Tower Hamlets council, and Pola Uddin, later to become Baroness Uddin of Bethnal Green…”
Is ‘You couldn’t!’ indicating to us that Pola Uddin and Abbas Uddin are related? Or the name Uddin has been sullied by Baroness Uddin with her Spitalfields Housing Association house and Kent house expenses claim, hence the name change for Abbas Uddin, connected to her via Avenues Unlimited (Spitalfields)? The obituary having been written in 2001 now confirming that “Helal Abbas” is indeed Abbas Uddin.
‘You couldn’t make it up!’ says h/she is not a councillor. But as you have brought this to our attention, you could be one of the people with inside knowledge. Maybe even a colleague, also on the list of SBT community activists. You’re not Terry Fitzpatrick (as Ted has spotted on the SBT ‘list’)??!! John Newbigin of Rich Mix fame? Dan Jones of Denise Jones/Rich Mix fame?
Oh…and talking of Rich Mix what will happen to Lady Oona King if her in-deficit Rich Mix Centre is denied any more of the public money it is draining from us Tower Hamlets residents? Her arts centre has had millions “from the public purse” and will we have to keep it afloat with more of our money so her ladyship stays solvent and the interests of Denise Jones, Rachael Saunders, Michael Keith and Abbas Uddin, sorry “Helal Abbas” are all served? Also – and this is still relevant to SBT councillors as he is one – why did Abbas Uddin arrange twice for s106 money to be taken from Bancroft Library and given to his clique’s projects: Rich Mix and the next Idea Store?
“You’re not Terry Fitzpatrick (as Ted has spotted on the SBT ‘list’)??!! John Newbigin of Rich Mix fame? Dan Jones of Denise Jones/Rich Mix fame?”
@Not from SBT CORRECT – I’m not any of those people. Keep guessing.
I’ve absolutely no idea whether Baroness Uddin is connected to Abbas Uddin or when or why any name change occurred. I’m certainly not indicating they are related.
However do you imagine any of the ordinary residents of Tower Hamlets do NOT read the news media?
Or would NOT know about or be appalled by the level of corruption and fraud going on among people representing the people of Tower Hamlets – both past and present.
BTW I also wouldn’t worry about a non-story about a possible future Idea Store. You’d do much better to start reading news relating to the world outside Tower Hamlets as well. Maybe you’ve noticed how many councils around the country are proposing to close libraries and other CURRENT services in response to the cuts – in order to enable them to continue funding essential CURRENT services?
That’s why FRAUD by a councillor (or an MP or a Member of the House of Lords) – taking money under false pretences from the “public purse” – is such a despicable act. It deprives real people in need of real services.
Why the caps on CURRENT? Sorry don’t get your extra-shouty voice on ‘current’. What is the service in TH that has been retired or expired, ie is no longer CURRENT? Assuming that is what you mean.
Sorry if you thought it shouty. It wasn’t meant to be.
All I was trying to do was emphasise that it would be rather nice if councillors could give their full attention to working out what is going to happen to existing services in the light of the resource contraints imposed by the comprehensive spending review.
Rather than speculating about how to develop new services with money they simply haven’t got.
In short – it would be very helpful if councillors and local politicians would actually get down to the business of real politics and stop playing at politics and/or raiding the public purse for their own personal benefit.
The truth about Andrew Gilligan
Posted by Mehdi Hasan – 22 November 2010 12:20
The Telegraph man’s links to Iran.
As predictably as night follows day, Andrew Gilligan has responded on his Telegraph blog to my interview with Tower Hamlets mayor Lutfur Rahman last week. I suspected he wouldn’t be able to resist.
For those of you who haven’t followed Gilligan’s illustrious career since his role in “outing” Dr David Kelly, it’s worth being aware of the fact that, these days, the former BBC reporter is obsessed with “Islamists” and, in particular, Lutfur Rahman. By my count, he has published around 15 blog posts on Rahman on the Telegraph website over the past month: that’s a ratio of one postevery two days. Obsession, perhaps, is an understatement. The man who came to global prominence by helping to expose the British government’s lies about Iraqi weapons of mass destruction is now “cyber-stalking” a local politician in east London. How the mighty fall.
I’ll come on to Gilligan’s own links in a moment but, first, let me quickly deal with his blog post about my interview. Gilligan mocks what he describes as my “fearless and probing interview of Lutfur Rahman”. If he and his friends in the right-wing, Islam-obsessed, McCarthyite blogosphere bothered to read the magazine, they’d know that the weekly “NS Interview” isn’t designed to be Paxman-esque. It’s a Q-A format which caters for interviewees as diverse as Lutfur Rahman and Osama Bin Laden’s son, on the one hand, to Russell Brand and Sienna Miller, on the other. And the truth is, as the transcript of the full interview with Rahman shows, I still managed to question the mayor on all the main allegations against him (from his religious beliefs to his alleged links to “extremism” to the smear campaign against his Labour opponent) and, for the first time, we hear the man himself respond to each and every claim. But I guess Gilligan and his friends don’t want to hear the mayor put his side of the story, or defend gay rights, or publicly confirm his belief in secularism; they’d rather stick their fingers in their ears and chant “La la la la, we can’t hear him!” Why bother with debate or discussion when caricatures and smears serve you better?
In fact, on the secularism point, Gilligan chooses to selectively quote from the interview (I guess nothing’s changed since the Kelly affair!), writing on his blog:
Sample extract:
Q: Do you believe in a secular Britain?
A: I do.
Phew! So that’s all right, then!
Um. That’s not a “sample extract”. This is:
Do you believe in a secular Britain?
I do. I live in a society based on a clear division of powers between the church and the state. Yes, I absolutely believe in a secular society.
But what else should we expect, I suppose, from a journalist who long ago became a propagandist for Boris Johnson and the Tories and has since been accused of “sockpuppeting”, ie creating, in the words of Wikipedia, “a false identity through which a member of an Internet community speaks with or about himself or herself, pretending to be a different person”. (See here, here and here for details.)
Gilligan says on his blog that I have “form on defending the IFE” despite the fact that I clearly stated, in a debate with Gilligan on Sky News over the summer, that I didn’t agree with the IFE agenda but that I’d rather trust the opinion of grassroots groups like London Citizens, which work with and support the IFE, than his own biased and selective “journalism”. I also challenged Gilligan to define Islamism in a coherent or consistent manner, live on air, which he was (surprise, surprise!) unable to do.
In fact, in a previous blog post, in March, Gilligan included me among the “allies of Islamism”. I’m not sure how many allies of Islamism have criticised the concept of an “Islamic state”, denounced suicide bombings in Palestine and questioned Islam’s illiberal apostasy laws but here’s a question: if I’m an ally of Islamism, then what’s Andrew Gilligan? Lest we forget, the man is a paid employee of the Islamic Republic of Iran. He hosts his own show on the state-funded English-language Iranian broadcaster, Press TV. (For the record, let me just point out here that, like Oliver Kamm, Iain Dale, Martin Bright and others, I have also occasionally appeared as a guest on Press TV – but not as a presenter!. And, of course, I don’t spend my whole life hunting for Islamists, as Gilligan seems to.)
Here he is interviewing his old enemy, Ken Livingstone, on Press TV:
As even his friend, supporter and former boss, the Spectator’s Rod Liddle wrote in July 2009:
So what’s he doing — Gilligan — working for PressTv, the international propaganda channel run by the Iranian government?
Liddle continues:
‘I’m not going to give you my reasons if you’re just going to rip the piss out of them,’ he says on the phone from his holiday in the west country.
‘Well, how can I know if I’m going to rip the piss out of them before I’ve heard them, Andrew?’
He sighs a lot. I hope he is sighing because he knows he’s done a bad thing rather than because he’s been found out. He explains that at first he thought that PressTV was an agreeable symptom of social change and greater openness in Iran, though he adds, ‘I may have been wrong about that.’ He says he has not worked for PressTV since the election and that its post-election coverage has been ‘flawed’ (no kidding, dude). He ‘might’ not work for it ever again. And how much did they pay you, Andrew?
‘Not that much.’
How much, exactly?
‘I’m not going to tell you that.’
Why not?
‘Because I don’t want to. It’s private.’
Sources at Press TV tell me Gilligan is among the highest-paid, if not the highest-paid, employee at the channel. So, let’s get this straight. Gilligan is a journalist who makes lots of money from “outing” as many British Muslims as he can as “Islamists” or “extremists”, often on deeply dubious grounds, and with the aid of selective quotation, yet at the same time also makes lots and lots of money working for a foreign country which is explicitly, openly and proudly Islamist and based on the rule of the clerics and a version of sharia law.
In the aforementioned quote in the Spectator, by the way, from June 2009, Gilligan says he “might” not work for the channel ever again. But, of course, he didn’t stop working for the channel. The above YouTube clip is from a Gilligan show broadcast on Press TV earlier this year, in the run-up to the general election.
Isn’t that ironic? The man who obsesses about Islamists under every British bed is himself a paid, high-profile employee of an an openly Islamist government: the mullahocracy of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Hilarious. And, of course, deeply hypocritical. (Unless, of course, that is, Gilligan believes that the Tower Hamlets council under the leadership of Lutfur Rahman is more “extreme” or dangerous than the Iranian state. Judging by the volume of his blog posts on the subject, perhaps he does. But I, for one, haven’t yet spotted anyone being stoned to death on the streets of east London.)
So, Andrew, I ask you: when will you quit your lucrative job at Iranian-owned Press TV? And, until you do so, how can any of us take seriously your repeated complaints about the advance of “Islamism” in Britain? Feel free to leave your answers (excuses?) in the comments thread below the line – either as yourself, or perhaps in sockpuppet form. Cheers.
Very good piece by New Statesman’s Mahdi Hassan. Why would Gilligan want to work for an employer who denies the holocaust of six million Jews? Looks like he is the real supporter of extremism, not LootforO’Heed!
My last comment was removed so I am leaving this blog.
It contained a libel. Try again.
To “the script” and others, I did not make any comments on this subject, therefore would be grateful if you could kindly not accuse me of making comments. Thank you
@ ‘You couldn’t make it up!’
Understand your ‘CURRENT’ now. Have to respond though that the new Idea Store is not part of a “new service.” No speculation therefore has taken place about how to develop this “new service” – CSR or no CSR. A decision was made at Cabinet in July to build another one. It is a rolling programme of replacement library buildings – Ted and the ELA have covered it for years.
Sorry but it is not a “non-story about a future possible Idea Store”. Not when it will be built with money taken from the public purse, ie capital (+ s106 & lottery money.)
Where will they get this capital from? In the past it was by closing libraries and selling the buildings. That may mean Limehouse Library in this instance. Whitechapel Library was sold to fund the Whitechapel Idea Store.
You say you wish “councillors and local politicians would actually get down to the business of real politics and stop playing at politics and/or raiding the public purse for their own personal benefit.” Whitechapel Library was sold to Whitechapel Gallery. The councillors and local politicians who benefitted from that: Denise Jones and Michael Keith – both Trustees…and John Newbigin again. The Whitechapel Gallery Extension as they now call it was the “University of the Ghetto” – a famous library in Spitalfields (yes it’s back to SBT) – now Denise and Michael’s pricey restaurant.
Oh, the councillors who made the decision to build another Idea Store with money from the public purse:
Denise Jones
Joshua Peck
Rachael Saunders
David Edgar
Marc Francis
Shahed Ali
Sirajul Islam
Shiria Khatun
Abdal Ullah
Helal Abbas
‘You couldn’t make it up!’ doesn’t want councillors to play politics. Don’t worry, they’re not playing, it’s truly the “BUSINESS of real politics” when it comes to this.
Capital funding is neither here nor there in the current context. The only game in town at present is what happens when the revenue budget is minus £70+ million.
I seem to recall decisions made at the July Cabinet were before Councillors had got their heads round that fact they were going to have to reduce the Tower Hamlets Revenue Budget by £70million. Certainly the paperwork which went to Cabinet in August only provides very high level initial outline themes (in Aooendix D) for the guidance to Chief Officers for how savings should be made. Nothing real.
At the end of the day the issue will be whether the Council actually has the revenue to run all the libraries they’ve got at present. (e.g. some Council are having to make massive cuts in library services in order to protect other essential services)
That’s why revenue being siphoned off by councillors who commit fraud really matters a lot – because that becomes revenue which is not then available to fund essential services for the public.
From my perspective any and all politicians spouting about “fighting the cuts” lends an air of unreality to the current situation. They can take all the stands they like but they still have to balance the budget!
The real business of politics in this borough in the next few weeks SHOULD be about getting to grips with reality and focusing on:
– delivering a balanced budget for 2011/12 – 2013/14 and
– creating the basis for delivering even more significant change beyond that.
That’s if they can raise their game and stop name-calling for long enough……….
Sorry YCMIU! but the decision to build this new Idea Store was confirmed on 4 August 2010:
“Councillor Jones, Lead Member Culture and Creative Industries…Concluded by expressing the aspiration that the Cabinet would re-affirm its previous decision in relation to this matter.
The Chair Moved the following motion for the consideration of members of the Cabinet, and it was: –
Resolved
1. That the advice /comments of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee, as detailed in the Tabled Reference (CAB), be noted; and
2. That the provisional decisions of the Cabinet, made on 7th July 2010, in relation to Idea Store Strategy Action Plan Update – Idea Store Metro Watney Market and One Stop Shop (CAB 010/101)be reaffirmed.”
So you can see YCMIU! that the (same) councillors decided to siphon off millions of public money into this new Idea Store. They don’t seem to have taken into account the need to reduce the budget or the need to maintain the existing libraries (3 left.)
Millions from the public purse will be going into it YCMIU! And statue-less Limehouse Library will be flogged off to developers.
While someone somewhere will be profiting – with more books needed for this new Idea Store. Wonder who has that contract?
The decision to siphon off money is only taken when the whole Council approves the revenue budget on which the council tax is based. In other words this is a matter of collective responsibility and always has been. The introduction of a Mayor does not change that.
Until that is approved, nothing is approved. Until you have an approved budget, all you have in reality is a set of aspirations on paper and decisions in principle.
Which should make the Council Meeting which sets the Council Tax particularly interesting! Even more interesting will be the meetings behind closed door before that to try and work whose pet projects are in or out.
Labour have lost it completely now. With section 106 money (£29m) going to Rich Mix (Fix) instead of essential community groups, one can only conclude that Cllr Josh Peck’s poodle Cllr Abbas will be the scapegoat for all the finger-pointing. The mayor needs to commission an independent inquiry into the Rich Mix scandal that would make all its Labour patrons accountable at least on paper. Similar inquiries should be set up for dubious or suspicious projects set up by Mayor Rahman when he was council leader, eg can’t think of any ain’t good enough! We don’t necessarily need Lord Hutton or Butler to do it as it would save costs, we could ask the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) or Serious Organised Crime Agency (SOCA) to investigate for free as both factions (Lutfur and Abbas) accuse the other of corruption with taxpayers’ money.
@Fighting4EdMiliband Pointing fingers is easy – doing the graft to make the case for an investigation is a bit more difficult.
I suggest you acquaint yourself with the various ways in which anybody living in Tower Hamlets can already ask for an investigation of matters of concern relating to the funding of specific projects.
Independent Inquiries are a very expensive proposition which is why they rarely get commissioned. However if that’s the road you want to go down, first you have to make a case for an Inquiry!
Why don’t you write to the Chief Internal Auditor with your concerns. He or she has a mandate to investigate any matter which might not be legal or proper.
You have the right to ask the approved auditor to review decisions made by the Council if concerned that there is something not quite right. You should find a link to them on the Council’s website.
If you want the paperwork to make the case use the Freedom of Information Act – but make sure you ask the right questions!
Thanks, you couldn’t have made that up!