I can’t find the article online, but Andrew Gilligan reports in the Daily Telegraph today:
Council leader used staff to campaign for Labour
By Andrew Gilligan
A LONDON council leader used staff paid by the taxpayer to campaign for the Labour Party in a recent parliamentary by–election.
Lutfur Rahman, the controversial directly elected mayor of Tower Hamlets, took a coachload of people, including a number working for the council, to canvass for Labour at the Leicester South by–election. The visit took place during working hours on a weekday. Asked by The Daily Telegraph, the council refused repeatedly to deny that the staff were on duty at the time.
Mr Rahman was elected as an independent after being expelled from the Labour Party for his alleged links to an extremist Muslim group, the Islamic Forum of Europe, which has been accused by the local Labour MP of infiltrating his party. The April 27 visit to support Labour’s candidate, Jon Ashworth, was part of Mr Rahman’s so far unsuccessful attempt to win readmission to the party.
In emails to Peter Golds, the Tory opposition leader in Tower Hamlets, the council’s head of democratic services, John Williams, admitted that “staff from the youth service did attend in Leicester, but did so in their private capacity”. The staff were from the “rapid response” team, a community–based outreach service.
However, Isobel Cattermole, the council’s director of children, schools and families, stated in a further letter to Mr Golds that “no staff were on leave” on that day. Another council officer told The Daily Telegraph: “The staff attended the event as paid staff and did not take leave.”
Mr Golds said: “It is a blatant abuse of public money for party political purposes. If a minister had taken civil servants in a coach to campaign for a political party during working hours, we would never hear the last of it.
“We will be sending our full dossier to the District Auditor.”
Footage of the visit broadcast by a local television channel shows people working for Tower Hamlets council among a group wearing red Labour rosettes and campaigning for Mr Ashworth.
A spokesman for the council said the staff present were “not necessarily” working at the time of the event because they might have been part–time or rostered to work outside normal hours. He insisted that “no staff due to be working on that day were absent from their ordinary duties”.
But he refused to respond to questions about how the council monitored whether community–based staff were performing their “ordinary duties.” Invited to deny that any staff from Tower Hamlets were in Leicester during their duty hours, he three times refused to do so.
The fact that council staff seem to have been campaigning while on paid duty is fascinating enough, but there are some more interesting wider issues at play here and ones that go right up to Ed Miliband.
At the very beginning of this video, you can see a victorious Jon Ashworth thanking his supporters. In the front row, with their backs to the camera you can see the nodding heads of Lutfur Rahman and his deputy Ohid Ahmed. Ashworth then leaves the gathering and then Leicester East MP Keith Vaz manages proceedings. The Tower Hamlets contingent are singled out for praise and then at about 5mins 23 secs in, Vaz lays it on with a trowel. Ohid is picked out for setting up the Labour Friends of Bangladesh and Vaz describes how successful that group’s meeting at last year’s party conference was when 500 people packed into a Manchester restaurant. (He fails to mention that Lutfur and Ohid were both absent, having just been kicked out of the party..).
Then at about 7mins 30secs, Lutfur says a few words about how much of a “progressive” he is and how “we have come to show our support for the progressive elements of Ed Miliband’s Labour party”.
Take a look:
Why is this so significant? Well, Jon Ashworth, who is a former adviser to Gordon Brown, is a serious player in Ed Miliband’s camp as head of party relations. Keith Vaz, we know tried last year to ensure Lutfur remained a Labour party member and he is still determined to get him back in. By inviting Lutfur & co to campaign for a mate of Ed Miliband’s, speaking in Leicester mosques and using his Bengali connections, Vaz would have ensured Lutfur earned a few loyalty points.
Ashworth seems to have been happy to go along with it, which might well have been a mistake given the Telegraph story and the recent revelations that Lutfur spent £115,000 redecorating his offices.
Labour members in Tower Hamlets are utterly bemused by it all. During the 2010 general election, Lutfur, then the council leader, was regarded as the missing man of Labour politics. Indeed Bethnal Green and Bow MP Rushanara Ali complained to Harriet Harman last year that he singularly failed to support her successful run at Westminster. “You couldn’t see Lutfur dust,” was how one activist put it to me.
So while there seems to be some cynical momentum gathering behind his attempts at readmission, thanks to the Telegraph and to Peter Golds, that has been overshadowed by the word which follows Lutfur everywhere – inept.
Trial by Jeory 
I had no idea Ohid set up the Labour Friends of Bangladesh. It’s a tremendous success. Well done, Ohid.
As for non party members campaigning and helping the Labour Party, this is what Peter Hain keeps telling us to do, so no one can complain about this video.
I doubt if people were getting paid to work on that day. Lutfur isn’t so stupid..
Ohid didn’t. He took it over and used it as a personal vehicle.
Elaborate or be silent?
In western culture we openly discuss the issues.
In Bangla culture we make annonomous allegations.
In this respect, is one of these cultures superior to the other?
Ted, Ask Mr Gold to close to home before jumping up and down………… maybe someone attended could list names of everyone was there that day. Would like to know which officer gave Mr Gold the information.
What exactly #5 is on about I have no idea. One of things that I have learnt from following the sorry saga highlighted by Gilligan in Tower Hamlets is that he doesn’t get his facts wrong. Everything that he has said over the last few years about the increasing control of the council and its purse strings by IFE and a group of businessmen has proved to be correct.
What his critics both here and in places like Pickled Politics do is to use words like lies and smears whilst refusing to talk about the very specific and detailed allegations that he makes. Look at the headine of the article. Very specific, no ambiguity there. If this statement is untrue then Lutfur and Tower Hamlets have a clear run to the courts for libel.
I am not a betting man but if I were I would be on my way to Paddy Power to try to get odds on them not going. It is not for nothing that Gilligan has won major journalistic awards and in the three years of his exposures of corruption in the GLA under Livingstone and the penetration of Tower Hamlets by Islamic extremists.
There is a knee jerk reaction from the left that anything that appears in the Telegraph or the Mail is a lie or a smear even if it turns out to be true. All that this does is to reinforce the credibility of Gilligan and make his detractors look like the petulant foot stamping children that, in reality, they are.
What is becoming clear in Tower Hamlets is that there is a Bangladeshi political grouping emerging which is based on family and village loyalties with distinct Islamist overtones being bankrolled by business interests with an eye on the billion plus budget of the council. In short a scenario familiar to anyone with even a passing knowledge of the sub continent.
Gilligan doesn’t get his facts wrong? Has credibility?
Dave Hill the respectable Guardian journalist had this to tweet about Gilligan today:
“East London Mosque responds comprehensively to recent media attacks from predictable irresponsible source: tiny.cc/hz95y #lbth”
http://www.mcb.org.uk/features/features.php?ann_id=2165
Imran,
There isn’t an allegation. Gilligan doesn’t say they were being paid at the time that they campaigned for the Labour party. He just says that some youth workers went out campaigning with Lutfur. So what? It’s a non-story. What facts has got right or wrong by saying nothing?
Mr Maccurry.
Call me pedantic, maybe it’s because I,m a solicitor, but I have re-read the article and am reproducing some of the more relevant parts.
” A London council leader used staff paid by the taxpayer to campaign for the Labour Party in a recent Parliament by-election”. This is very specific and there can be no doubt as to the intentions of the writer or publisher.
” The council repeatedly refused to deny that the staff were on duty at the time”. One again no ambiguity there and it was probably the council press office which is being quoted but I am assuming this at the moment.
The appropriate officer Elizabeth Cattermole is quoted as saying ” no staff were on leave that day”. Quite why she was making a statement to the press without going through the press office is open to debate but possibly indicates that there are a number of different agendas in place. Possibly Ms Cattermole was getting her retaliation in first or at least her defence if the ordure hits the ventilation system.
An as yet unnamed official is quoted as saying ” the staff attended the event as paid staff and did not take leave”. If the Telegrapg cannot substantiate this statement then they have left themselves open, but I doubt it.
The Telegraph have very good libel lawyers and I am sure this was run past them before publication. This is a serious one and could be fatal for Mr Rahman. It is well known that he is trying to get back into the Labour Party and of course if the thing was done under the name of Labour Friends of Bangladesh the party in Leister South would have suspected nothing.
It is my understanding that ordure, ventilation systems and Mr Rahman will be featuring in the press over the next few weeks.
Isobel Cattermole didn’t speak to the press.
Maybe you’re right, but there is also a pretty clear denial from a council spokesman, “no staff due to be working on that day were absent from their ordinary duties”. Youth workers do work odd hours and at weekends. Especially outreach workers.
”The council repeatedly refused to deny that the staff were on duty at the time”. This is ambiguous. They haven’t said they were on duty.
” A London council leader used staff paid by the taxpayer to campaign for the Labour Party in a recent Parliament by-election”. This says that the staff were employed by the tax payer but doesn’t say they were paid when in Leicester.
By the way, did you represent the Lawrence family?
One more thought, Imran. If Lutfur took a coach load of people and some of them were AWOL, was Lutfur aware of this?
This may well be fair comment or honest belief, so far. But it would be libel if they said that Lutfur was aware that they were AWOL and allowed them to go on the coach. The article doesn’t make that allegation.
I’m glad you are not my Solicitor…
Leicester South was, of course, where fake ‘Lib Dem’ leaflets describing various Lib Dem MPs as ‘committed homosexuals’ and explaining in some detail their supposed homosexual agenda were distributed, in predominantly Muslim areas.
Join the dots.
But of course those homophobic smear leaflets which appeared at the same time and in the same places as the Respect canvassers will be a ‘non-story’ for Dan McCurry.
No shibboleths, eh, Dan?
“What is becoming clear in Tower Hamlets is that there is a Bangladeshi political grouping emerging which is based on family and village loyalties with distinct Islamist overtones being bankrolled by business interests with an eye on the billion plus budget of the council.”
I wholeheartedly agree! What’s more I’ve been to at least three meetings where George Galloway has called the council “The most corrupt council in England.”
As yet he has never been taken to court for libel.
I’d add in addition to this that many people involved in LBTH – of all races, creeds, religions and colours – also see “the billion plus budget” and want their part of it.
A lot of people are trying hard to get their noses in this trough full of cash.
Did anyone ever find out what happened to all the money that went missing to all the local “centres” around LBTH btw and who was responsible?
I rest my case. Is Dan Mccurry drunk or just a member of the Labour Party in denial? He is now becoming embarrassing and I think I will leave it at that.
Thanka for resting your case, Imran. The jury can consider your insults alongside your points and form their own conclusions.
Imran/ Ted ask Peter Gold where was one of Councillor?
Don’t understand your question…can you expand? Ask Peter what?
Lutfur was there building his case for re-admission. Good for the man. Council officers were there in derelict of their duties. If this is true, name the individuals and let the Council’s disciplinary procedure take care of it. No doubt Ted and co will keep an eye on any such proceedings. Discussions about who knew what, when, why and of course the inevitable Bangladesh politics is irrelevant.
Ted, maybe you should ask Cllr Golds to look more closer to home before he goes and sniffs in another trough…..ask Cllr Golds where his only Bengali Cllr was on that day and at least one other Tory member.
Does Tower Hamlets Council policy include allowing its staff to distribute homphobic smear leaflets during working hours? Did they get overtime?
@ Dan McCurry,
”The council repeatedly refused to deny that the staff were on duty at the time”. This is ambiguous. They haven’t said they were on duty.”
If they weren’t on duty, then why not simply say so? Is there a Tower Hamlets Council policy to refuse to tell the truth?
It’s reasonable to infer from the refusal to deny that they were indeed on duty. If you refuse to deny a simply provable or disprovable allegation, then it’s fair to assume your guilt.
It depends on what the question was.
If Gilligan asked whether staff were paid on that day and the press officer responded by asking which staff, in order that she could check the time sheets.
Maybe Gilligan said, “I don’t know but I want an answer to my question”.
If the press officer asked again for details, then Gilligan can say “I asked 3 times and didn’t get an answer.”
Feeble stuff. How low are you willing to go?
As this isn’t a court I will reopen my case against Mr Mccurry. His last post is complete supposition and so far he hasn’t dealt with the main thrust of what is being discussed here.
Also, could Amir and Anon1, although they appear to be the same person, clarify what they are talking about?
My comment was supposition, but the council’s lack of comment was less than that, in that the officer didn’t say anything. You can draw an inference from this, but you’d first need to know the circumstances of the non comment.
Why doesn’t Gilligan just name the officers in question? That would help clear this business up.
ask Peter Gold where was one of his councillor’s on that day and what was he doing from 1pm.
You’re going to have to give me more material to work with than that, I’m afraid. Email me directly if you have any more info. Thanks.
@Lamia. If you have evidence Council staff were distributing homphobic smear leaflets during working hours, did you contact the council? Can you let us know what their response was? If you haven’t, why not?
In #9 Lamia makes a reference to homophobic posters and Respect. By the time we get to Amir at#18 this has become Council staff “distributing homophobic smear leaflets during working hours”. This is a serious allegation which should be supported with evidence.
I find it incredibly hard to believe in the coincidence that there were (a) a bus-load of staff from any team in Tower Hamlets who happened to not be working (whether on holiday or off-shift) (b) all prepared to volunteer time to support the Labour party and (c) all fully aware of where parliamentary by-elections were happening in the country and prepared to volunteer their time and organise a bus to some constituency miles away from London.
To those who are asking where Conservative councillors were that day – councillors are free to engage in political campaigning because they are political. Council staff are not.
Other than that – highly depressing stuff. Notable for the fact that it is truly a meeting of the brethren – only about 1 female in the entire video. That’s not necessarily a reflection of race – it’s just as reminiscent of the good old days when the union brethren would have things stitched up. But it is deeply depressing and shows why Rushnara won’t get support.
Also depressing is 6.24 in the video where Lutfur is being praised for his speech in the mosque which was linked (?sent?) to all Bangladeshi families in the consituency and as a result of which the leader of the mosque urged all present to vote Labour. Unlike the coach-load of TH staff I don’t know Leicester South at all but there must be non-Bangladeshi communities there surely? In which case – surely equal campaigning is called for? I really don’t like the idea of speeches from any pulpit calling for support for one parliamentary candidate over another.
All good points and could I have an answer from Amir?
Maybe you should re-read Lamia’s comment #15 and you may get your answer.
A bus load of staff hey? Just one name would do. Pass the information to the chief exec and keep us informed on how your complaint is handled. Otherwise its all baseless pathetic waffle!
Why do you expect this blog to provide the names when TH council officials themselves have admitted staff were there (although they can’t make up their mind whether they were paid or not) but have refused to say who was?
“the council’s head of democratic services, John Williams, admitted that “staff from the youth service did attend in Leicester, but did so in their private capacity”. The staff were from the “rapid response” team, a community–based outreach service.
However, Isobel Cattermole, the council’s director of children, schools and families, stated in a further letter to Mr Golds that “no staff were on leave” on that day. Another council officer told The Daily Telegraph: “The staff attended the event as paid staff and did not take leave.””
Ted you don’t seem to understand or maybe you don’t want to understand, Gold’s Bengali councillor went with Lutfur. Why don’t you ask everyone who was there or even better ask your friend in the council.
Calum, what people do in their private time is their business. The accusation is that some people were there while on duty. That’s wrong! If this s true, these individuals should be identified and reported to the council. Otherwise its just hearsay.
Errr – maybe the bigger picture is why a so called “independent” mayor of LBTH is travelling to the North of England (obviously paid for by exes)to support and endorse a LABOUR rep in that area. In a time of economic austerity in LBTH where “Value” is closely monitored, where is the value for LBTH for it’s “independent” mayor being paid to go outside LBTH to support a political party he is “supposedly” not affiliated to??? The value for LBTH is,,,,,,,?
Peter Gould is too scared to touch his conservative Bengali councillor. He can get away with murder. That councillor is more pro Lutfur than some of the independent councillors yet nobody does anything. Strange indeed
TheTruthHurts? You wouldn’t know the truth if it slapped you in the face!
Don’t be ridiculous – of course the Mayor was not paid to attend. Taxpayers do not pay mayors for political campaigning – that would be a scandal and he’d have to resign at once! He went in his capacity as a left-wing political activist.
There’s no mystery around staff either: Lutfur organised a bunch of his supporters to join him on a campaign minibus trip that day. Some of them were public sector workers employed by the council. It’s hardly rare for junior public sector workers to support Labour. They were not on leave, as Isobel has made clear. They were not absent from their duties, as the Town Hall spokesman has made clear. They were simply not there in their work hours. If, for example, I don’t start work until the youth club I run opens at 8pm, I can do whatever the he’ll I like until that point.
As for the Tories, if Peter Golds believes one of his group has been campaigning across the country for Labour, he can take the whip away and then he’ll have an all-White group.
[…] for Peter Golds’ Tory group. I was told by someone I trust today (and who was there) that on board Lutfur’s minibus to campaign for Jon Ashworth in Leicester South in May was Tory councillor Maium Miah: yes, that’s right, a Tory out campaigning for Labour […]
Which planet does Steve O’Driscoll inhabit and when did Lutfur become left wing? The current Mayor of Tower Hamlets now has few defenders on the left and Socialist Unity has been strangely silent on recent developments in Tower Hamlets.
Lutfur Rahman is a typical south Asian political wheeler and dealer who can wear several hats at any one time. He can accomodate the extreme Islamists of IFE and associated groups while doing deals with businessmen whose adherence to Islam is pretty much being seen at prayers on Friday and not much more.
Being in the same profession as Lutfur and having had the misfortune to meet him I can tell you that he is not particularly bright and sees everything through the prism of deals, bribes, nepotism and the buying and selling of block votes.
He is convinced that he can do a Livingstone and be re-admitted to the party thereby being able to use his power broking skills to get himself selected for one of two safe Labour seats.
Unfortunately there is no way that Milliband could allow this without a national scandal that the Tories would milk for all they were worth. What Labour have essentially done is write off Tower Hamlets and hope that whatever goes on down there doesn’t have too much of an impact nationally.
There is little if any chance of re-admission to the Labour Party and this latest faux pas will rebound on Livingstone who has publicly embraced Lutfur in defiance of the the party both in London and nationally.
In doing so Livingstone has shamelessly courted the Muslim vote across the capital hoping that it will be enough to swing him back into City Hall even if it is by a hair breath.
This is a dangerous game for Livingstone and London Labour. The whole business of courting ethnic minorities through Lee Jasper seriously rebounded in the four or five months before the last Mayoral elections and is very likely to do so again.
Rahman was prevailed upon to appoint a former Livingstone aid Murceline Parchment to a highly paid non job at Tower Hamlets in order that she could exercise some kind of restraint on Lutfur’s more obvious excesses. This doesn’t seem to have happened and couldn’t because Lutfur has his own agenda.
Rahman, the IFE and some business interests have effectively created a mini state in Tower Hamlets based on Syhleti village allegiances, radical Islam and business interests that can operate independently of the wider world around it.
Political opinion and voting patterns are shaped by the Bangladeshi television channels and newspapers which have effectively been bought by the Lutfur businessmen.
I predict that Peter Golds’ will expel his councillor, if he has any sense he will, and can then be seen to have acted honourably. Any Tory scandal in the matter will then have been nipped in the bud and Labour can take the flack through the Livingstone connection.
All in all another fine mess for Labour but one entirely of their own making by refusing to act against the emerging Islamist/business clique within the party in Tower Hamlets years ago simply ignoring it and hoping it would go away.