SEE VARIOUS UPDATES AT BOTTOM OF THIS POST:
The Guardian’s Dave Hill joked yesterday that the poison of the Tower Hamlets elections had yet to include the ritual allegations of vote fraud.
So, when will the traditional, pre-election #TowerHamlets Islamist-“linked” vote-rigging “fears” story appear? Can’t be long, surely.
— DaveHill (@DaveHill) May 10, 2014
I think Lutfur’s camp must have been glued to Dave’s Twitter timeline. For, on cue, less than 24 hours later this Tweet appeared this afternoon from the account of Lutfurite Cllr Oliur Rahman:
There are two Labour councillors in the Lansbury ward: Shiria Khatun and Rajib Ahmed. Because he named neither, Oli, in one fell swoop, defamed both. In libel law, his only hope would be if one of them had actually been arrested. When this was explained to him, he deleted the tweet.
In fact, I can say with certainty that Oli was referring to Shiria Khatun. And when Oli said in his Tweet, “just been told”, I confidently understand the person he was referring to there was none other than the Deputy Mayor, Cllr Ohid Ahmed, who is also standing in Lansbury. (See update below.)
The problem for them is that Shiria has not been arrested. As this tweet came through, she was out campaigning.
She is incandescent that such the smear is being spread among the voters of the Lansbury ward. She believes Tower Hamlets First is so worried about the outcome on May 22, they’re resorting to lies that could well see one or two of them in hot water.
I’m told that in 2010, rumours were spread (by whom, I don’t know) that Shiria was not a Muslim because she does not wear a hijab. These are some of the depths Tower Hamlets politicians plumb, on almost all sides.
I understand today’s matter has been referred to the Returning Officer, who surely now must show he’s taking these things seriously.
Did Ohid tell Oli that Shiria had indeed been arrested? He declined to tell me.
However, this is what he did say: “I’m personally against all sorts of voting fraud. I have campaigned against it and requested no candidate should be handling/harvesting postal votes. However, very unfortunately this has happened in my ward, I was told. I understand this has been reported to the police. It is up to the victim and police to reveal the name of the culprits if they find anyone involved.”
Expect more of these sorts of allegations over the next 10 days.
Sorry, Dave, it’s started.
UPDATE 8am, May 12
I’ve been told that Ohid says he was called by Oli asking if he’d heard a rumour that Shiria had been arrested, and that Ohid told him he had.
UPDATE 11.30am, May 12
Lutfur’s supporters were busy yesterday on Facebook saying that Shiria had been interviewed by police. I called Shiria. This is her version of events.
“I was knocking on doors in the Lansbury ward yesterday. I saw police in the street and I thought they’d come to talk to people about drugs problems in the area so I went over to them to say I was happy they were there. Then I saw Louise Stamp with them [from the council’s electoral services department]. They said there had been an allegation against me about faking votes. I was completely taken aback and shocked.
“I asked what’s going on. Then I saw one of Lutfur Rahman’s Ohid Ahmed’s supporters. He said he had been interpreting for an elderly Bangladeshi couple who had made an allegation. I told the police that’s not on, that he’s one of the mayor’s right hand men. The police said he hadn’t interpreted, that he was a well-wisher. But he had been in the room of their flat and I told the police they wouldn’t have been able to understand what he might have said to the couple, that he might have been influencing them.
“This elderly couple have made a formal allegation. The allegation is that I’ve taken their vote. This is a complete lie. I have not touched a single ballot and the only ballot I will touch will be mine. I don’t know this couple beyond that they are my constituents. I had previously asked them if they were going to vote.
“The couple who made the allegation have now flown to Bangladesh. I find that a surprise and some coincidence.”
Separately, the police have confirmed they have received a complaint and that they are investigating. They are also aware of the special characteristics of Tower Hamlets election time.
UPDATE 9.15pm, May 12
I now understand only one of the elderly couple has gone to Bangladesh and the police seem satisfied the trip wasn’t last minute.
I also gather the allegation is that blank ballot papers were taken. Shiria denies this.
It’s probable Shiria will be interviewed by police, but not necessarily under arrest. That’s standard practice when such allegations are made.
The elderly couple have also been warned that any false allegation could result in a perverting the course of justice investigation.
The police have a detective based at Limehouse examining all manner of electoral issues at the moment. That’s a good move by the police. I get the impression this more than a PR box-ticking exercise.
Tweets and Facebook postings are being particularly monitored for offences under election law.
Trial by Jeory 
Its nothing to do with the Returning Office. It is to do with the police as no one is allowed by law to make a false allegation against an election candidate.
Curious Cat
It’s all very well to say that the Returning Officer “must show he’s taking these things seriously” but the Returning Officer has almost no power to do anything. Any legal problems with the way the campaign is run have to be sorted out after the election, by means either of an election petition or a prosecution for election offences. Many people who have criticised the council officers in Tower Hamlets for inaction over electoral fraud simply do not realise how limited their powers are.
Section 106 of the Representation of the People Act 1983, which ought to be well known from its invocation in the Oldham case, is almost certainly engaged here.
Nice to see you are still around some 20 years after uk.misc and similar newsgroups.
CC (not my handle then)
TH First drones have been excitedly pressing the ‘share’ button all day with these allegations and Madewell almost wetting himself with excitement
Why did they call him “Madewell” #falseadvertising
Good question Grave Maurice.
er, no…he is reported, by you, as saying “got arrested IN (my emphasis) Lansbury Ward”
Any cllr who happened to be in that geographical location – maybe canvassing for a Mayoral candidate, or even passing through on a bike – could fit that description.
So he hasn’t “defamed both” as you claim. But you know that, don’t you?
Vote TUSC.
I think not.
Any Councillor being careful to avoid implicating any of the two Councillors in question would surely have referred to a specific place – not a ward.
By deliberately using the name of a ward there is a clear intent to mislead.
Clearly those who practice to deceive are not to be trusted.
I think the THF followers would do well to remember that in the Lord McAlpine case, when he was defamed by a tweet he named a number of high profile people in a legal action – see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McAlpine_v_Bercow
Those Councillors (by definition high profile during an election) proposing to use Twitter during this campaign would do well to read up on this case and consider their bank balances.
Another idiotic comment.
Which comment is idiotic?
The one by Southpaw
Ted, you are brandishing Southpaw’s comment as ‘idiotic’ just because you diasgree with his point of view. In doing so, you are behaving like Terry Fitzpatrick who employs the same tactic of insulting and undermining those who disagree with him. However, there is a big difference. Terry Fitzpatrick has a criminal conviction for intimidating and harrassing behaviour and you do not. We would expect you treat people with respect especially who disagree with you. Please do not dismiss their view point, but point out why you disagree with it.
Oh do drop it. I think Southpaw is big and clever enough to spot banter and humour.
Don’t be so dreary. You sound like Cllr Rabina Khan.
ADVICE TO CANDIDATES: How to behave like an adult who voters can respect
1) Learn the very important distinction between “a report has been made to the Police” and “an arrest has been made”. To get confused about this can make you seem very silly. If you then broadcast your confusion you can end up appearing incompetent.
2) Don’t spread rumours before you have ascertained the actual facts.
* Firstly because it’s likely to rebound on you and
* secondly because it could get very expensive if you eventually end up in the High Court (see Oldham judgement below)
3) Remember that Tweets or Facebook posts don’t disappear just because you deleted them. They can always be retrieved.
4) If a rumour is spread about you and it defames your character (i.e. it counts as slander or libel)
* do not respond in kind
* challenge the person creating or repeating the rumour
* broadcast what the other person has said (if you can prove they said it) and state why it is false
* report the person making the documented or witnessed ‘rumour’ statement to the appropriate bodies – and file a complaint with associated evidence
* take appropriate action – including legal action if appropriate
FOR INFORMATION
The Representation of the People Act 1983 regulates how political parties and people acting on their behalf are to behave before and during an election.
Section 106 makes it illegal to publish any false statement of fact in relation to the candidate’s personal character or conduct, unless he can show that he had reasonable grounds for believing that statement to be true.
Wikipedia provides an accessible version of what The Representation of the People Act 1983 actually does – including making false statements about candidates illegal.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Representation_of_the_People_Act_1983
This is a link to a pdf file of the High Court judgement in the Oldham Case in which it was alleged that a candidate for election made false statements about another candidate. The High Court found that this had happened.
Click to access summary-judgment-oldham-election-05112010.pdf
In other words, be mindful of the fact that candidates for election making false statements about another candidate(s) can end up in the High Court.
His lack of a command of the English language brings us back yet again to the question of mother tongue teaching as opposed stressing the importance of English. He may well yet rely on that as a defense. However, I don’t think that Labour being traduced was what Livingstone’s poodle had in mind.
The likes of Oliur Rahman and the unemployed waster that is Stuart Madewell, have no concept of the damage their stupid comments do. It just shows how desperate and scared they really are.
Stuart Madewell shared Omar Sharif’s photo.
14 hours ago
URGENT Lansbury Ward Notice!!!!!
Police interviews Labour Councillor Shiria Khatun for allegations into taking postal votes.
Sad or corrupt or both? Or wrongly accused but there must be some substance to this …
PLEASE SHARE — with Max Monnan Masud and 33 others.
This was being bandied about on facebook yesterday, so they were definately naming and shaming
Nothing new.
Outside London postal votes were delivered to voters on Friday. The same evening Labour collected them. UKIP collected them on Saturday.
Sunday, yesterday, Labour are predicting they will get only 2 of the 3 seats in a ward. How did they know that ? Opening the postal votes ?
There is no law preventing a political party, or an election candidate, assisting the public by collecting their vote and delivering it to the council. Wonder if there is any law banning to the collector opening the sealed voting envelope.
Curious Cat.
Caveats don’t cut it!
Presumably Stuart Madewell – as an election candidate – has yet to read Section 106 of The Representation of the People Act 1983?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Representation_of_the_People_Act_1983
No law requiring any candidate to read any part of the RPA of different years, as repeatedly amended. Anyone reading all the RPAs and associated legislation would be a mental case – time the election laws of England were cleaned-up.
Curious Cat.
They produce guidance for candidates which states in plain English what they can and cannot do.
http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/i-am-a/candidate-or-agent
Plus
“Candidates and agents at local elections in England and Wales
This page contains all the guidance and resources that you need if you are a candidate or agent at local elections in England and Wales. ” http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/i-am-a/candidate-or-agent/local-elections-england-and-wales
and
This part covers:
Campaigning dos and don’ts
Using the electoral register and absent voters’ lists
Using schools and rooms for public meetings
Imprints on campaign publicity material
Polling day dos and don’ts
Reporting allegations of electoral malpractice
Click to access Part-4-The-campaign-LGEW.pdf
With respect to “opening envelopes”
This is what the guidance to candidates re campaigning says
“Breaches of the secrecy of the ballot
1.53 Everyone involved in the election process or attending certain proceedings must maintain the secrecy of the ballot. The Returning Officer will give a copy of the official secrecy requirements to everyone who attends the opening of postal votes or the counting of ballot papers and to polling agents.”
There is no way any electoral candidate or their agent or any helper can open the ballot envelope and avoid infringing the rules for maintaining the secrecy of the ballot.
see para 14 of http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/141788/Part-4-The-campaign-LGEW.pdf
Re: Opening Envelopes
The Facts.
1.Postal votes received Friday.
2. Labour had the list of postal voters and probably marked their supporters on that list.
3. Labour collected postal votes on Friday evening.
4. Sunday, Labour were able to identify which 2 of their 3 candidates they thought would be elected and which Labour candidate they thought might lose. I think the only source of that is from examining postal votes.
Perhaps holding-up sealed envelopes against a very strong bright light might work ? but not with more than 10 candidates on the ballot paper.
People don’t officially talk because they are scared or don’t want trouble or feel disloyal to their South-Asian community.
Welcome to England – the growing sleaze (TM)** capital of Europe.
Curious Cat.
** Created by Labour.
This assumes that Madewell can read.
Just rec. my postal voting papers. Noticed one of the candidates for Bow East standing for Tower Hamlets First Kamali Sabia gives the address 30 Jedburgh Rd. Plaistow E13 2GF. Is this legal?
For local elections in England, one of 4 qualifications are required:-
1. live in the local authority area.
2. on the voting register within the local authority area
3. principal place of work is within the local authority area
4. occupy, as tenant or owner, a “place” within the local authority area (this is always open to speculation)·
Curious Cat.
Yes, if he has some kind of business/work or property connection to LBTH. But it is strange Lutfur couldn’t find someone local. Maybe Sabia is v important to him.
Cannot believe the answer I have been given. I give up. I thought all this was tightened up. What chance as honest people got in this Borough.
Also strange that the best Lutfur could find for St Katherine’s and Wapping is Stuart Madewell. Perhaps Lutfur is just using him to make Ahad Miah look better.
I wonder if we could find out where the principal place of work is for ALL the candidates standing in this election – and indeed if they work at all?
One 1 of the 4 possible quaklifications needs to be met.
Outside London a part-time electrician has successfully claimed his principal working place is his van operating in a different local authority area from where he lives – impossible to disprove because the Law is an Ass.
Curious Cat
It’s a reasonable question – and the sort of information which the electorate are entitled to know.
So she is the representative for Plaistow then? No doubt she discusses the Ugandan situation with Lutfur on a regular.
That’s a disgusting sexist remark.
@madmullah. If you have any information to that effect I’m sure Ted would like to have it. If not ……
As Curious Cat says, provided you fit one of the 4 criteria you are qualified to stand. However by standing a resident of another Borough Lutfur opens himself up to ridicule and shows his activist base to be minimal, if not notional.
Re the update “I’ve been told that Ohid says he was called by Oli asking if he’d heard a rumour that Shiria had been arrested, and that Ohid told him he had.”
It’s one thing to have a private telephone conversation between election candidates and quite another to then broadcast it on Twitter to all and sundry.
Do these people not read ANY of the guidance to election candidates on what they can or cannot do – or do they just think it doesn’t apply to them? It’s complete stupidity or arrogance – one or the other – there is no other explanation!
Given Sharia is stating she has NOT been arrested, I’d suggest it’s also malicious and defamatory to suggest somebody has been arrested – which requires a certain level of proof – as opposed to “a report has been made to the police” which was the earlier explanation.
It’s a very bad idea for ANY candidate – of any party – to get involved with spreading verbal (slander) or written (libel) rumours about another candidate if they want to avoid an appearance in the High Court regarding a breach of Section 106 of The Representation of the People Act 1983?
see http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/Resources/JCO/Documents/Judgments/summary-judgment-oldham-election-05112010.pdf
P.S. If a candidate does not read guidance to election candidates, what does that say about their attention to detail and their ability to read Committee reports? That then prompts the question of whether they are fit to do the job of Councillor.
You couldn’t make it up! wrote
The vast majority never ever read all of it. I estimate the non-readers to be over 80% of local election candidates. Then there is UNDERSTANDING of what they think they are reading. Its not a racial problem but an adult literacy problem.
Curious Cat.
The key points need to be well understood by candidates.
IMO the local party leaders have a responsibility to ensure all their candidates are fully briefed – verbally if necessary – about the do’s and don’ts.
FYI everyone: see updates to this blog post for new developments and extra detail.
Rubbish. You cannot equate not reading something with an adult literacy problem. And where do you get your 80% estimate from?
No rubbish.
Problems are:-
(1) an inability to read seriously worded adult English.
(2) an inability to understand the meaning of words and the resulting implications.
(3) a disinterest in reading waffle.
(4) lack of proper and comprehensive sets of election laws – the resulting dogs breakfast is a farce.
(5) the electoral commissions inability to write comprehensive – all in one place – guidance rather than its sometimes wrong interpretation of the law.
That’s the English system. Why are you moaning now when its been like that for years ?
80% comes from my experience over the last 12 years in a Labour borough. You may not like it and many may think its wrong – I do too – but that is today’s reality. .
Curious Cat.
Which particular aspect of the documents on this page http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/i-am-a/candidate-or-agent/local-elections-england-and-wales do you have difficulty with?
To my mind this is actually an excellent effort at making a necessarily complex topic comprehensible
=> You couldn’t make it up!
Wrong question.
Its not me that has problems reading such material but real live election candidates.
By the way, I have no recollection of reading your document and certainly no intention to read it either having read lots of electoral commission publications over the years.
Curious Cat.
Ted’s post has produced some extremely informative comments regarding the electoral rules and regulations, unfortunately I think that many of us believe that some of the electoral candidates don’t give a damn about them. They seem to think they are above these rules, and will try to get elected by any means, and the authorities will do nothing about it, that’s the worrying thing.
BTW – Has anyone noticed that EastEndLife has become actually readable since the Panorama program?
=> John Wright
Think you are wrong, partially at least.
It is the desire to win that subjugate everything else. The literacy quality of candidates can exasperate the situation.
Curious Cat
Gosh John – that’s a prompt for me to actually read it! I stopped reading it when it became one long soapbox for Lutfur
So much for all the rules, regulations and guidelines. They are not worth they paper they are written on as otherwise there would have been repercussions for Oli on this.
Who says there won’t be?
Check the date of the High Court action re. Oldham and the date of the breach of the law on campaigning
Ted, I think you do the Guardian a disservice when you associate it with Dave Hill, and that is saying something.
What Livingstone’s poodle meant of course when he raised the whole subject was that is master Lutfur would soon be the subject of totally unjustified slurs and smears about vote rigging.
His poodleness shurely couldn’t have been expecting this.
John Biggs is campaigning on a promise to “clean up politics in Tower Hamlets”.
http://www.johnbiggsformayor.com/news/2014/4/24/cabinet-members-building-biggs-momentum-with-key-endorsements
John I’m calling you out. If you don’t take demonstrative, strong action to nip this behaviour in the bud, right now before it gets out of control, we will all know you are just talking. And I, for one, will vote accordingly.
We’ll all behind you and are tired of these divisive dirty tactics. Do something !!
What behaviour are you referring to?
I was going to say the same thing Ted!
On the face of it it appears that a elderly Bangladeshi couple – on what appears to be a promise of a free airfare and trip to Bangladesh (I’m not a believer in coincidences in this type of incident) – were prompted to make an allegation against a Labour candidate. That allegation was then improperly translated into “an arrest has been made” by an electoral candidate(s) and broadcast via Twitter by that candidate and others campaigning on behalf of THF – in breach of s106 of The Representation of the People Act 1983 – which regulates the behaviour of electoral candidates and any supporters campaigning on their behalf.
How exactly does John Biggs figure in all of this?
How about somebody asking when Lutfur Rahman is going to take control of the campaign of THF?
Or maybe he is content for his team and supporters to continue to breach electoral law and regulations?
I now understand only one of the elderly couple has gone to Bangladesh and the police seem satisfied the trip wasn’t last minute.
I also gather the allegation is that blank ballot papers were taken.
It’s probable Shiria will be interviewed but not necessarily under arrest.
The police have a detective based at Limehouse examining all manner of electoral issues at the moment. That’s a good move by the police. I get the impression this more than a PR box-ticking exercise.
I’ll update the main post to reflect this.
Fair enough. I take back the impression about the ‘coincidence’ of the trip given by the earlier statement.
Marc P. Could we have this again and this time in English? You seem to be challenging John Biggs to something or other about something or other.
Apart from Stewart Madewll the loony left seem to ave abandoned Lutfur. I was expecting Jon Lansman to have written an article on ” dog whistle politics” by now but he is strangely silent. Does anyone know what dog whistle politics are because according to Lansman there is a lot of it in Tower Hamlets?
@ Madmullah of Labour (Terry Racist Fitzpatrick)
Please try and spell properly, it’s ‘Madewell’ and not ‘Madewll’ or join one of Lutfur’s world’s best schools for further education.
Ash/Simon Woolley. I was typing quickly and missed out an e. You’ll have to do better than this. I keep referring you to to http://www.swadinata.org.uk. Put Terry’s name into search and read how to run a grassroots campaign without a penny of government or charity money. You know all about the latter two sources of cash. Whatever happened to Black Londoners Forum and the £300,000?
there are two issues raised and I’d suggest the Bengali couple are irrelevant. For the moment.
What is relevant at this time is the mud slinging has already started. Against a (very successful and effective) member of the Labour Party. Clearly someone is willing to do whatever it takes to try to disrupt her electoral aspirations.
Biggs, as the mayoral hopeful and leader of what (should he prevail) would be a Labour cabinet, should do everything possible to defend his candidates against such actions. If he lets this slide then there will be another instance, another negative slur. Then another.
He said he was going to clean up politics in Tower Hamlets. Seems like he should start here, and The Labour party has the resources to nip this in the bud.
Biggs should get out in front of it, and now. Divisive, negative politics doesn’t advance dialog and it has to stop.
Marc P wrote
Since that behaviour is typically Labour (no one does it better), just whom with Labour experience do you think is using Labour tactics against Labour ?
Tories, UKIP or whom ?
Curious Cat.
CC. Any evidence for your allegation against Labour? I’m not saying it hasn’t happened in the past but in this particular instance now what is your evidence?
Good morning Mr Mullah,
I write from my own personal knowledge and my own personal experience.
Its been done by Labour against non-Labour candidates in my local authority area. Often Labour will use third-parties to do the dirty work, despite Labour being the instigator. Its the way Labour operate. Labour are devious.
Like it or not, within Labour discuss these things nationally. Its called . A few years ago it was with Labour creating hatred against other parties gays but never ever mentioning their own gay candidates. It happened in London and I read about it on the Internet. Lib Dem gays were included in the targets.
In my area, two years ago Labour invited UKIP to contest local elections for the first time ever. Labour did not stand any phoney independent candidates, as they always did, to split the anti-Labour vote. Instead Labour did a deal with UKIP. It was successful. 3 non-Labour seats were lost. When the Leader of the Council heard he was re-elected, the first person he thanked was a regional organiser of UKIP who worked all night creating a leaflet to attack the independent candidate opposing the Leader. UKIP never criticised Labour who run the local authority – only the independent.
One wonders why Labour’s TH campaign is so dismal especially with a whole chest of proven dirty tricks at its disposal.
English local politics has become increasingly dirty and dishonest. Serving the public has been replaced with serving the egos and pockets of the unimpressive.
Curious Cat.
I think another serious aspect of the slur is that it is made about a female politician who does not follow the gender stereotype which some people prefer
I’d far rather see her standing up for herself in the first instance rather than relying on John Biggs to defend her. If she wants to have an impact and to be seen to have an impact then she also needs to be seen to be tackling the accusations head on and NOT looking to John Biggs to defend her interests. Which as it happens appears to be exactly what she is doing – based on the statements made on this blog.
Granted a statement by John Biggs at some point would be appropriate……
Of more interest to me is the notion (also quoted on this blog) that the Labour Party knew the results of the postal votes this weekend
Can we know WHO provided this statement? Or is it just another one of those unattributed rumours which those who like to stir are so apt to generate?
=> You couldn’t make it up!
Never mind your personal preference, let us examine the facts.
1. ordinary (not Superwoman) member of the public contesting a local election.
2. busy with her normal life (and children if she has any) (and husband or partner if any)
3. earning a living with a normal job (if working outside her home)
4. actively campaigning in the sunshine and rain – and probably getting soaked at times
5. then needing to find the time, the energy, the inspiration of how to effectively tackle the political mud-slinging.
On occasions like this, the candidates – not being Super Humans – would clearly benefit from good, experienced, legal advice and help submitting a complaint to the police.
It is unrealistic to expect a victim to be able to cope with a hectic and demanding election campaign AND then to instantly know how to properly and comprehensively respond to a political smear.
Curious Cat.
Agreed – but that’s a very different proposition to John Biggs having to get up and defend her.
She seems to be doing a pretty good job of defending herself based on what’s been said on this blog.
I have no notion whatsoever as to the truth of the matter – but I do know which side is behaving better!
“Tweets and Facebook postings are being particularly monitored for offences under election law.” (by the Police)
That’s very good to hear.
Maybe you could enquire as to whether the Police will be issuing warnings to the offending parties i.e. all electoral candidates and supporters active in the campaign who may be using Twitter and Facebook in a way which breaches the election law?
Obviously ignorance is no defence in an issue of this nature in a borough like Tower Hamlets – given previous track records and irrespective of an individual’s ability to read English.
The responsibility for the behaviour of their candidates and campaign supporters lies ultimately with the party leaders.
The responsibility does lie with the party leaders. Is there any evidence that Labour ave been involved in these practices so far?
In relation to tweets and FB postings, the front page news on the Metro this morning was about a Green party activist being asked by police to delete a tweet about why people should not vote UKIP. Apparently, the tweet had links to UKIP’s controversial positions on various things. Can someone share links or shed more light?
Rather depends on whether the links were to defamatory websites or to UKIP’s own website.
I can’t see the basis for being asked to delete a tweet if linking to a proper political party website
However if it was linking to a hysterical OTT website making all sorts of nasty noises that’s entirely proper action on the part of the police
For the record I could make the same comment in principle about any of the political parties – with respect to the behaviour of their supporters.
I think this will be the election when political parties and their supporters need to gets to grips with what they can or cannot do on Twitter or risk prosecutions and sentences after the election and big fines.
Are any of the previous members for Ilford and Redbridge standing again? I know Ted exposed at least one of them some time ago. How many of those Lutfurites living outside the borough are claiming the fact that have been given non jobs by Raman as their employment in Tower Hamlets?
I know that, certainly in Weavers, many of those on the register are in fact living in places like Romford, Ilford, Gants Hill and places East. They are renting the flats out after having bought them but don’t live there.
Because of Right to Buy and the fact that Bangladeshis in particular have an attachment to the East End, it is surely time to look at the whole issue of the conditions whereby people can be electors in boroughs they don’t live. It is all reminiscent of the old rotten boroughs that the reform act of 1832 dealt with.
When it happens on such as scale as is now occurring in Tower Hamlets the whole principal of representative democracy is completely undermined. Time for a change of the law I think.
Ted, thank you as I would rather be likened to Cllr Rabina for being dreary than Terry Fitzpatrick for intimidating and dismissing others.
Ted, although you might like to brush it off as banter, I seem to remember that Southpaw did not see the funny side when you brandished another comment he made as ‘idiotic’.
That comment was idiotic. Are you Cllr Khan?
Ted, I would say that your question is ‘idiotic’ (to borrow your own terminology). I am posting as a man (the clue is in ‘Man on the Clapham Omnibus’). Cllr Rabina is a woman.
I think you’ll find the Man on the Clapham Omnibus can be a woman as well. Your syntax is remarkably similar to Cllr Khan’s. Uncanny. But there you go.
Factual http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_man_on_the_Clapham_omnibus
More contemporary http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/34433/how-do-i-explain-the-man-on-the-clapham-omnibus-to-the-man-on-the-clapham-omni
The bottom line is that there is prima facie evidence of wrongdoing by Shiria, which is why police are talking to her. As Ted said, this is more than just some PR box-ticking exercise. Police are serious and Shiria’s actions have given rise serious concerns.
We cannot say any more than that at this stage.
I think you might want to insert the word allegedly in there.
Well he would insert allegedly if he knew what he was talking about! But since he doesn’t….
Apparently the notion that somebody has made an accusation is equated to meaning the same as “prima facie evidence” which it is not.
The police investigate accusations made all the time. It doesn’t mean to say there is prima facie evidence which is sufficient to warrant an arrest nor that an offence has been committed. People attend police stations and walk out again without a stain on their character all the time.
In fact, if it is true, as Sharia asserts, that she has NOT been arrested that would very much suggest to me that the Police are very properly investigating an allegation and do not actually have any evidence.
I would love to know where the money has come from to pay for Lutfur’s incredibly expensive election leaflet, arrived today
This article and further comments allowed by the author are very poor. It starts with the repetition of a claimed libel. There is an unsupported criminal allegation (re a ‘promise’ about something) and a claim about a person’s private life (in Private Eye style) as well as no more than personal comments about candidate Madewell. So I’ve no concern about being called an idiot by Jeory for making sensible points. Thanks, Clapham for your comments.
What does annoy though is the obvious use of this blog as a ‘Stop Lutfur’ platform with little attention given to what Biggs (and Labour council candidates) say and do. In an ideal world, any costs for this blog would need to be listed on the election expenses of Labour.
Incidentally, as I recall from the (90s?) case of Cllr Paul Beresford (then Tory Leader of LB Wandsworth), he was allowed to be a council candidate just by serving as a councillor there when nominated (and so ‘working’ in the area); his previous qualification of living there, or working there in a ‘normal’ job, presumably no longer then the case.
I think you fail to understand or make a distinction between:
* what’s allowed by those commenting on elections and
* what’s allowed by those participating in elections.
I imagine you won’t see Ted out with a party banner or a sticker in his window – quite apart from the fact he no longer lives in Tower Hamlets and hence cannot vote in the election!
Are you really seriously alleging that this is a campaign blog for the Labour Party?
Obviously you are not a follower of this blog or you would have read serious and extensive criticism of the various Labour Party politicians at one point or another by various people.
Gave you moved away from BowTed? I hope it was for good, positive reasons and not for fear of intimidation or “Security” issues.
I’ve a very good knowledge of such matters as a former senior local government officer at the corporate centre (hence my knowledge of obscure stuff, like the Beresford case) – but thanks for the patronising anyway.
The point I was making is clear – what is happening here is wrong (against the comments policy, if not illegal) as well as possibly libellous (hence my care in not repeating such).
I don’t think Jeory is Labour, but in a 2 horse race, fair (and unfair) concentration on just the campaign of THF, is necessarily pro Labour.
Would that be a former senior local government officer at the corporate centre in Tower Hamlets by any chance? Obviously you’re not in any sort of senior position / politically restricted grade with a current Council given your obvious campaigning support for a political party.
What you seem to be doing is adopting that threadbare posture of “if you’re not with me you’re against me”. Yawn.
WHY is concentration on the campaign of the THF so wrong? Here’s some facts you might want to reflect upon
1) Most of the comments I’m reading above are taking the trouble to correct the impressions being left elsewhere in the borough by Lutfur Rahman supporters who are very definitely breaching the regulations on what candidates for election and their supporters can say.
2) You’ve obviously also missed the fairly extensive discussions of the UKIP position and indeed some comments made by self-declared UKIP candidates on this blog (prior to Purdah which they seem to be observing pretty well). There’s a school of thought that UKIP stand to pick up a lot of votes in this election – in part because of the behaviour of both the THF and Labour Parties.
3) You’ve also clearly missed the opportunity Ted has been giving to different people to put their views – which means you really don’t know what you’re talking about.
4) I see Ted commenting on the newsworthy. If Lutfur and his supporters will insist on putting themslves in the spotlight so be it
@Southpawpunch. Sir Paul Beresford was leader of the Council in LB Wandsworth from 1983-1992. In 1992 he was elected as the MP for Croydon Central. Conservative Associations like to commit their candidates in winable seats to move into the constituency. Beresford continued to serve as a Councillor until 1994 (effectively “working his notice”). His Knighthood in 1990 was given “for services to inner city rehabilitation”. He was instrumental in transforming Wandsworth from an inner-city Labour controlled cess-pit into the shining column of municipal Toryism it is today. He and his colleagues were instrumental in piloting the practice of hiring contractors to do jobs that council workers had previously done. This is now standard practice by almost all Councils whether Left or Right wing.
How is this equivalent to the case of Sabia Kamali. Having used a search engine, using her name and the terms “Tower Hamlets” and then “Newham” I found two relavent references, a Sabia Kamali who stood in 2006 in Plaistow North for Respect. http://www.londonconservatives.com/Clist.php3?boroughID=25. and a KAMALI, Sabia Begum, a Respect candidate for the London Assembly in 2010, then resident at 45 Ernald Avenue, East Ham, E6 3AL. So we taking about someone with everything to do with Respect and Newham and nothing to do with Tower Hamlets.
Well said pwei34. A good bit of research.
I’ve just come across this article in Local Government Lawyer highlighting that the “Electoral Commission calls for proof of ID scheme after 2015 elections”
“A further recommendation in the report called for a strengthening of the Code of Conduct for Campaigners, in particular by restricting the involvement of campaigners in absent vote administration processes.
To be introduced by the 2015 elections, this would mean campaigners no longer handled postal or proxy vote application forms or completed postal ballot papers.
The watchdog said it would discuss these changes with political parties and other campaigners. If it is not satisfied that campaigners were prepared to comply with the strengthened requirements voluntarily, it will consider whether to recommend that the law should be changed.”
Ah the Electoral Commission – whose motto is . The very same people responsible for widespread abuse of voters’ personal details in 2012, example removing the Z classification and encouraging local authorities (principal areas) to sell voters’ personal data.
Curious Cat
Finally – an arrest!
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/two-arrests-over-electoral-fraud-in-tower-hamlets-and-enfield-9365195.html
I understand that, in the Tower Hamlets council elections, there are three male candidates whose age is 38 – one Labour, one Conservative, one Tower Hamlets First. No doubt more information will emerge in due course.
Thanks for digging out the ages – that will get the gossip rumour mills rumbling! I do hope all the supporters and campaign activists have read the Electoral Commission’s guidance for electoral candidates and their supporters as to what they can and cannot say to the electorate i.e. tweets count!
This is what the Evening Standard report states
[QUOTE]Police made clear that the two cases are not linked but said both relate to alleged false declarations on nominations papers for local elections to be held on May 22.[END QUOTE]
How interesting!
http://www.eastlondonadvertiser.co.uk/news/candidate_for_lutfur_rahman_s_party_says_sorry_for_ku_klux_klan_slur_1_3599110
Time for another post Ted – gosh they’re keeping you busy!
Just come across this on the ELA – which is worth highlighting with reference to the topic of this post
http://www.eastlondonadvertiser.co.uk/news/tower_hamlets_unveils_new_election_procedures_to_prevent_vote_rigging_1_3257133
[QUOTE: TOWER HAMLETS COUNCIL SOURCE]
The new election protocol
– Police will be based at some polling stations on election day and a mobile police team will respond as necessary.
– Police will prevent large groups of supporters congregating around polling stations and obstructing voters. There will be a limit on numbers of activists who can gather outside.
– A direct dedicated email address for agents and candidates to report concerns will be introduced from February.
– Allegations made to the Returning Officer will be investigated fully and responded to within 24 hours. If the Returning
– Officer passes an allegation to the police, they will respond within 48 hours.
– Extra training for polling officers around challenging voters they may have suspicions about.
– At the beginning of March letters will be sent to every property in the borough confirming who we currently have registered at the property.
– All late registration and absent vote applications will be verified against other council records.
– Election officers have increased the number of visits they make to check properties.
– Party campaigners will be discouraged from handling postal votes and asked not to assist with the completion of ballot papers.
Source: Tower Hamlets Council [END QUOTE]
More on what is being done to counter voter fraud re. postal votes
ELA: Tough moves by Tower Hamlets to stop bogus voters rigging May 22 elections
http://www.eastlondonadvertiser.co.uk/news/politics/tough_moves_by_tower_hamlets_to_stop_bogus_voters_rigging_may_22_elections_1_3598923
Last section is worth quoting with respect to measures put in place
[QUOTE]Town Hall estimates put postal votes for next week’s elections at 30,000. Some 3,500 arrived yesterday and today, but counting won’t begin until May 23, the day after next Thursday’s local and EU elections.
There has been a breakdown in trust between voters and organisations involved in the electoral process, the Town Hall admits.
So tough measures being taken include police preventing large groups congregating around polling stations, challenging voters that officials have suspicions about and party campaigners being told not to handle postal votes or help voters complete ballot papers.[ENDQUOTE]