A few weeks ago, Andy Erlam, who stood and lost in Bow East for his Red Flag Ant-Corruption Party in May, launched an Election Petition challenging the result for the directly elected mayor poll.
That petition is being backed by a number of people from various parties and is currently going through the early court processes. The petitioners are having to do the very hard legwork of amassing evidence to present to a judge who must make a decision on whether there is a case to answer.
Yesterday, Andy wrote an open letter to John Biggs asking for him to “publicly back” the petition. Hitherto, John has welcomed the petition and the chance it might give to clear the air.
Andy copied me and other journalists into his open letter. It’s below. You’ll see he says this:
I estimate that between 10,000 and 15,000 votes were forged or affected by intimidation across the Borough in the Mayoral election
I asked him for examples of the evidence he’d gathered to back up that claim. He said that wasn’t possible at this stage because he wanted to protect people’s identities. So I asked him to provide the calculations behind his estimate and how he extrapolated to that number. He still hasn’t answered.
My personal view is that he risks looking silly. The figure of 15,0000 is huge: he’s saying that up to 40 per cent of the 37,000 votes for Lutfur Rahman were as a result of fraud or forgery. That really would be Mugabe-land. It’s also a bit of an insult to Lutfur’s electorate. Well, a bit more than a bit.
Anyway, the open letter has prompted a reply from John Biggs. In it, he uses his strongest language yet.
He, too, feels some of Andy’s claims might be somewhat outlandish, but he strongly believes the election was “bent”.
John goes beyond his previously stated belief that there was widespread postal vote fraud. He now also believes there could have been “organised fraud” in the counting of votes.
He does not state how, but I understand the allegation is this: counters deliberately undercounted John’s votes and over-counted Lutfur’s. Counters count the votes in bundles of 50. The belief is that some counters counted to say 47 or 48 for Lutfur’s votes and bundled them up into a pile of 50; meanwhile, the counters would count to say 52 or 53 for every 50 of John’s votes. So Lutfur’s piles of 50 votes overstated his true position, while John’s understated his. Or so the allegation goes. I understand that some counters were called up on this by party agents and other representatives on the night.
John, in his letter, also confirms he’ll cooperate fully with the petition and appear as a witness.
Here are the two letters.
Dear John,
I am writing to you to ask you to this week publicly back the Tower Hamlets Election Petition that was launched on Friday 13th June.
As you know, there is very deep concern in the community about the legitimacy of the Mayoral and local council elections held on 22nd May and the subsequent chaotic count. I do understand and admire the fact that you have been a “good loser” in the contest which you were said to have lost by 3,500 votes.
However, there is a growing mountain of evidence which points to the fact that you did not lose, because the election was grossly corrupted by industrial-scale irregularities ranging from “ghost voters”, multiple voting, intimidation at the polling station, the stealing, forgery of postal votes on a massive scale and deliberate miscounting of votes.
On the basis of reports received by me to date, I estimate that between 10,000 and 15,000 votes were forged or affected by intimidation across the Borough in the Mayoral election.
If so, had the election been honest and managed properly, I believe that you would have won by a substantial majority.
As regards the count, the only issue in my mind is whether the chaos was just chaos or whether it was organised chaos. In 40 years in politics observing elections and counts, including a stint as an official EU International Election Observer in South Africa in 1994, I have never seen such intimidation, corruption and deception in an election and count.
Furthermore, the Council refuses to say where it held the ballot boxes following the election and a whole series of corrupt ballot papers have been kept from the police. I am now convinced that the current police investigation into cases where there have been arrests is not serious and that the police are simply going through the motions of investigating election fraud.
So the point is, that it is not John Biggs who is the real looser in Tower Hamlets, it is the whole voting population who have been cheated of a fair and democratic election and as such face next year’s General Election with absolutely no confidence that their vote will be honestly and fairly handled. If you continue to sit on the fence, this golden opportunity to clean up Tower Hamlets politics once and for all will be lost. People look to community leaders like you to show a lead when times are tough. Tower Hamlets is not presently a democracy area of Britain.
As you know, 4 individual voters have stuck their necks out for you in launching this Election Petition. We are free from political party influence and have no motive except to see justice down. Now is the time for John Biggs to stick his neck out for us and for Tower Hamlets.
I hope that you will be able to issue a statement this week publicly backing the Election Petition and urging all Labour Party members and all voters to make statements on irregularities that can be used in court. This open letter is designed to open up the debate much further.
Yours sincerely,
Andy Erlam.
And this is John Biggs’s reply:
Dear Andy,
I was very busy yesterday and only became aware of your letter when two of the media outlets to whom you had forwarded it asked for my comments! I am therefore replying on the assumption that you will share this reply with the media (and am pre-emptively copying it to one outlet). This is an important matter and so my reply is quite lengthy, with no apology to those seeking sound-bites.
My position is as follows:
I am a democrat and accept that the result announced by the Returning Officer must be treated as the proper result unless and until it is proved otherwise. To not do so would throw the foundations of democracy into dispute. However, I accept that there is a very widespread unhappiness with the election.
One needs however to be careful and to disentangle the strong antipathy that Mayor Rahman attracts from large sections of the electorate from underlying anxieties about whether the election was fair. By recent analogy, many people of our generation will recall that Margaret Thatcher was massively unpopular and polarising to many people but that she still legitimately won elections. The election, and administration, have both in my view been unhealthily polarising but we must disentangle that from anxieties about whether the election was fair. It is important to make that point.
You raise very serious concerns about the election, which have also been raised by others. My position is that I share most of these. I believe that there was a considerable amount of election fraud, principally but not only centred around the manipulation of postal votes. I am less persuaded about the allegations of intimidation, although conduct around, and in, polling stations was a disgrace.
This feeds however into the next point, which is that, separate from the comprehensive breach of the ‘election protocol’ by one party, conduct at polling stations being just one example of this, the administration of the election, both the management of polling stations and of the count, fell far short of being well-organised. I believe that we may also find that there was organised fraud in the counting of votes, albeit by a minority of those involved. All of these things need to be tested, with evidence. Without evidence they remain mere beliefs.
I am also angry about the smear tactics used in the campaign, by the Mayor’s supporters (and by nobody else), against me, as the only serious challenger to the incumbent. Specifically, I am not a racist and I was disgusted by the unprincipled use of this claim to try to polarise opinion and to secure support for the Mayor as a perpetual victim. Life does need to move on from this form of politics and if redress is available by showing that the result was improperly influenced by this claim, knowing it was false, then it should be available.
In other words I think there are comprehensive concerns, and I have shared these, as have other Labour members, with the police, the electoral commission, the council, the media, with yourself and your fellow petitioners and with your legal representative, Gerald Shamash.
You ask if I will ‘stick my neck out for us and for Tower Hamlets’. You need to understand that we must respect and work with our democracy and not make wild claims that will damage good community relations and which do not respect the proper democratic will of voters. However, there are continuing widespread concerns, and, short of criminal sanctions, an election court is the only way to test these concerns and I welcome you and your fellow petitioners in making this challenge. I will do all that I can to ensure that the case is properly considered, including making statements, appearing as a witness as necessary, and working with your legal team, and I will do all that I can to ensure that it is, and to encourage others to support you. I will do so in a way that is respectful of all the people of our borough.
There are two final points, which are that to succeed your petition must be supported by an adequate legal team, and that the partnership you seek with me and others needs to be a real one and not a maverick campaign, as it will otherwise fail. Your claims must be based on evidence which can be persuasive in an election court. You need therefore to use a serious legal team which inspires confidence and encourages others to come forwards, and you, working equally with your other three petitioners, must be open and clear with the people of Tower Hamlets, and respectful of all parts of our community, in making your claim. If you do these things, you will attract support and the likelihood that the truth will be known.
John Biggs
Trial by Jeory 
This raises more questions which are probably easily answered;
– Are the ballot papers still available for a re-count?
– What powers will this review have should it find that fraud took place? (i.e. Will it be able to insist on a re-count?)
40% corrupt votes sounds daft, but given the huge swing in votes for some councillors (eg Sanu Miah, who ‘lost’ 25% of his votes on a re-count and dropped from first to sixth place in his ward) I’m not sure how anyone can have much confidence in the count anyway.
Tim.
Ballot papers are, I am advised, retained by the local authority for one year before being destroyed.
CC.
To put it simply… These pakis can’t win…
Does everyone forget that every poll leading up to elections, John Biggs lost. Even in his fanzine the wharf newspaper’s online poll John trailed… Every indicator outside of elections proved John would lose in Tower Hamlets, but would’ve done wonderfully well in Essex. Only in the deranged minds of Gilligan et al was John second-preference Biggs ever viable contender to the mayor.
Get over it and don’t disregard the electorate so readily. If your Labour councillors votes were given to you, you would’ve won. But most of them just campaigned for themselves and Lutfur. THAT was the real scandal. How John Biggs alienated his own party members into not campaigning for him at the door step.
Will you also be contesting the cllr seats? How about the European elections which had a higher turn out?
Wrong Migel. Polls prove nothing – ask any politician. Neither did Biggs trail in ‘every poll leading up to the elections.’ Do you know how many polls there were? Did you see every poll? Do you know how many voted in those polls? Was it possible to vote more than once in those polls?
It isn’t beyond the wit of man to eliminate most of these voting problems. Use of ID at polling stations; stricter rules on postal votes; better (electronic) voting methods. Why oh why do we put up with these antiquated systems.
Bloody postal votes – they should only be available to those unable to get to the polling stations. They are too open to misuse.
JohnJee,
Exactly right – the holes in the voting system are big enough to drive busses (or should that be ‘private hire vehicles’) through and would be very easily sewn up. However the voting system has always been held sacrosanct in England and it was assumed that the populace was honourable enough not to abuse it. A system that allows freedom for just about everyone (i.e. not just ‘the majority’) to exercise their vote is quite a prize, even if it allows the odd rogue character to swing things by a vote or two.
The problem is that there are few defences against large-scale vote rigging, the likes of which are alleged here. Those at whom the fingers are pointed have a track record of such things and are from a culture where elections are deeply corrupt affairs. Political Correctness prevents the powers that be from tightening up things against those of a different ethnic origin (racism is cried whenever criticism is made of anyone faintly brown) and hence you have the stage set for easy fraud if effected on a large scale.
If I was redesigning the election system in LBTH I’d be doing the following at a minimum;
– Refuse postal voting unless there is a proven medical inability to travel to the polling station
– Only allow polling cards for people who are on the list of council tax payers (or exemptees)
– Cross-check numbers of voters at any address with the known number of bedrooms at that address and actively investigate those where there are suspiciously high numbers of people per bedroom
– Require full-face photographic proof of ID when attending a polling station, and ensure that the voters’ faces are presented uncovered
– Use election ink (google it) for all voters
I’d also insist that all the seals on all ballot boxes are checked regularly throughout the day and before they are opened for counting, and insist that they remain under police guard at all times when not in an open polling station.
And as for the counting process …. well, someone else can have a go at re-designing that.
Tim.
=> Tim,
Don’t get diverted by LBTH election practises. It is no good, and legally ineffective, to reform only TH. The entire system for England needs radical modernisation and adherence to the ideal of reducing fraud as much as humanly possible.
TH is a manifestation of a corrupt and declining country.
Curious Cat
=> JohnJee
Because the usual beneficiaries are the main national political parties.
Blame Labour for making postal voting easier- in some areas Labour win only because of the Postal Votes.
Why should a person who can’t read and write and who signs their name with a thumb print get a postal vote …… and the application is signed in the normal, non-thumb print, style ?
Curious Cat
England – the heart of electoral corruption in the Western World.
Blimey !! John Biggs is seriously losing the plot. I agree with you Ted, these lot are going to look pretty silly and made into a laughing stock with out substantive and irrefutable evidence of fraud / malpractice.
Ajay,
I read this and, at first, thought it was John Biggs who gave the estimate of 10-15,000 votes being fraudulent. It was only on re-reading that I realised my mistake – it was Andy Irlam who estimated this.
Are you making the same mistake? Or is your comment about Biggs losing the plot based upon his letter (in the latter half of the article)? FWIW, I thought that letter was measured and well thought-out, although there will be differences of opinion.
Tim.
WOW!! I’m actually very surprised with John Biggs response here. Simply cannot accept that the voters didn’t want him in power. It’s also a very clever response – trying to support the democratic process but yet adding a few comments here and there which only supports the argument that his a sore loser.
The reality is that if those voters who voted for the Labour party Councillors also voted for Biggs then we would probably have seen a different outcome. There’s clear evidence that residents decided to vote for Labour Councillors but not the Labour choice for Mayor – Ted, I remember you doing a recording in Shadwell of a young man which showed this.
What Labour need to REALLY do now is see where they went wrong, not just recently but ever since the 2010 elections. In May 2010 Labour demolished the field but yet 6 months later fell apart. You would’ve thought they would’ve learnt there lesson then but 4 years later the results have been a hammering for them. And sadly, it seems they they still don’t learn, I worry another hammering next May!
Slating Mayor Rahman hasn’t got them anymore (it’s been their downfall!), they should be working with him. It’s funny how John Biggs stated that he would work with the Mayor, the letter doesn’t seem consistent with that viewpoint – his a very confused man indeed!
John Biggs wants to have his cake and eat it. He is a seriously deluded man. If he actually respects democracy, he would distance himself from this ridiculous petition which says that 40% of the votes Lutfur got were by fraud. This petiton is from a guy who contested the election as a councillor and I think he got the fewest votes in his ward. He was previously a Labour party parliamentary candidate and came a lowly third.
After reading his letter, I’ve lost any respect I ever had for Biggs. He comes across as quite disingenous. He could have been a man of integrity and respect, but instead he sounds like a little snake. He wants to appear as a witness in support of this petition!!! This petition is calling for the election to be declared null and void. How can Biggs be a witness in such a petition? Has this man got proper political advice? He seriously lacks any good judgment of his own!
This claim is simply mad. It shows a complete and utter misunderstanding of local government officers – particularly the relatively junior ones who do this counting.
Why would they do this? I have worked doing this work (as a council officer) and it is not believable they would do such, or even could do such.
How could it be organised? Councillors are not involved in the appointment of any other than the most senior staff and many council officer stay in their job for years. It just would not be possible to get their placemen there – it is social workers, library attendants, committee clerks, bookkeepers etc who do this counting. The chance a Mayor or even a majority group could have on getting them to fix such is zero – How could THF possibly pull off such a grand scheme to get all these people miscounting for them – council officers who will be of differing views, and as usual, not really interested in politics. It is an utterly ludicrous suggestion.
I know that people think council officers are ultra political and at the beck and call of councillors and maybe are close to them. It is not like that at all – most council officers will never speak to a councillor and will only ever see them walking through reception. Only a few Chief Officers are close to councillors and they never count ballots and any suggestion they could get staff to do that for them is nuts, nuts, nuts.
In normal boroughs perhaps. But the Electoral Commission report did note an over familiarity between some counting staff and the mayor.
Ted,
I work for the council and I’m paid the London living wage, so you get an idea how low down in the grand scheme of things I am.
I have no links to the mayor or any cllr and I didn’t even know who he was until I started working at the council. I must also state that I don’t have much interest in politics and never voted in previous local elections.
I have met the mayor in passing about 5 or 6 times, the first time being when we shared the same lift. It was here he asked me what role I did, he encouraged me to stay with it and that the council is a brilliant place to work, which I partly agree to.
Since then, every other time I have met him, he remembers me, now that is important. I have walked side by side Steve Halsey and he didn’t even acknowledge me, in fact I have never heard him talk. The difference is that whilst the mayor having small talk with me makes no difference to him or me the fact that he takes an interest does. His friendly and approachable.
Did I vote for lutfur? Yes
Did I speak to him doing the count? Yes
Did it effect my counting? Absolutely not.
I spoke to John Biggs, but he did exactly what Steve Halsey does. So while the electoral commission says there was to my familiarity between the mayor and count staff, I don’t seen how that makes a different. We was all counting the votes. We didn’t know who we will be with so organised counting is a ridiculous remark
I think on the whole the mayor is respected amongst staff and that’s not a bad thing, it means his in touch with us. The only people who lose out is residents and workers because our borough is being tainted with bad politics. I find it difficult to progress my career with other councils because tower hamlets reputation has become so bad!
I think if you spent time at City Hall you’d see John regarded affectionately there as well.
I’ve certainly seen that. So too has Ken.
…any suggestion they could get staff to do that for them is nuts, nuts, nuts.
They said similar about Hillsborough, Mid Staffs and the phone hacking scandal.
Agreed, these claims do seem to get madder and madder as each day goes by.
It’s also staggering to postulate that all these junior public officials would be prepared to risk imprisonment in order to help a candidate win an election.
But hey. I reckon the calculation here is that when claims from a public figure are so ridiculous as to be unbelievable, they’ll attract coverage simply for being so extreme. No matter that they’ll not be substantiated, it just ramps up media pressure re this petition (for which we’ve yet to be shown any evidence of any illegality, funny that…)
I must say that the fact that John Biggs begins every statement at the moment with ‘I’m not a sore loser but…’ (owtte) says a lot. For someone who lost an election to behave in this undignified way is practically unprecedented. This is the way to deal with losing: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8MT_woCw2kA
I’ve done a count and known people who do counts. There’s typically a solid cadre of people who do it year after year. They know one another – and if very friendly with the politicians could easily become oblivious to the ethics of the situation.
It’s not so difficult to imagine the scope for “shenanigans” to occur.
Whether they did or not is anybody’s guess but the Electoral Commissioner’s report certainly gave no comfort in that direction.
I very much like the notion which I read in one of the broadsheets that those doing the count should be from outside a borough i.e. wholly and completely independent of the Council holding the elections.
That’s actually not too difficult to organise.
I think for those where elections are regularly disputed that this should certainly be an option open to the Electoral Commissioner to impose
i.e. that the Returning Officer and all the Presiding Officers and the Count staff should have no connection with the borough. That would certainly provide a considerable incentive to any Council to ‘raise their game’ when it came to holding elections.
My feeling is we will only get an incontestable election when those running it have no connection with the borough or any of the politicians.
Have you worked at tower hamlets? I have and I would not be too sure – the politics of race and division is alive within the officer class
I’d normally say this isn’t credible. But remember: in one ward the discrepancy between first count and second count was over 20%. That suggests massive disorganisation, at best, fraud at worst.
THF weren’t even in contention in that ward (Island Gardens). The changing result was between Labour and the Conservatives. Which of them do you think might have been party to the fraud?
Incorrect – see http://moderngov.towerhamlets.gov.uk/mgElectionAreaResults.aspx?ID=91
The votes cast for any party can affect the overall outcome.
How about the notion that more than one party would prefer not to see Labour winning seats?
Come on. You really think any potential fraudster supporting Lutfur would risk imprisonment to help Peter Golds and Gloria Thienel (!!!) get re-elected, just to spite Labour?
This is getting ridiculous. You’re far more sensible than these wild conspiracy theories.
People were asked to count for a silly amount of hours, the Returning Officer foolishly didn’t have a relief shift on hand, they were tired and they cocked up, and it was all clarified after a recount.
Andy Erlam asks Biggs not to sit on the fence. What does Biggs do? You guessed it….he continues to sit on the fence. Your letter is the best example of sitting on the fence.
No wonder Biggs has always been second choice, second rate and second best.
…and it was Lutfur who begged for a second chance, a second term and is second rate.
Is Jay Kay the most pathetic and childish commentator on this blog?
I dont understand why Biggs, Rushnara and Ted and CO are crying foul when they were engaged in elaborate plans to smear the Mayor, (with the preposterous Panorama proggramme and all). It is frankly laughable that Labour is playing the victim card. Why do they make false allegations of which they are clearly guilty of themselves?
Can you pinpoint where I’ve cried foul please?
Erm… lets see… like in the Standard article where you and Rushnara moan about a virtually non-existent smear campaign by some fringe element, which you blamed on Lutfur.
Smooth operator! Strangely a lot of things can be done without necessarily discovered/found……. Ted being married to the community must now by now they are smart…. Twisted….manipulating….renaming them-self if needed! Denying when needed…… Not. Existing when needed……..
The conspiration is not ……far……afair…….
btw Ted, according to the foi 10898 – you have 437 unique council staff accessing your site!
Is that all?? Methinks they’re using personal mobiles to read the blog. Wonder if dear Meic is still obsessed with me.
He’s probably too busy looking in the mirror. Or on Facebook. Or belting up his toy dragon.
I would always use my mobile – was worried that if I viewed your blog I might be targeted by the organisation –
My feeling is that this petition will fail spectacularly. Any involvement that Biggs has in this petition should be documented and used by Lutfur’s team against him. Biggs should be exposed for being a snake. He used the words “election fraud” twice in his letter. Fraud is a very serious allegation and requires a very high standard of proof in English law. It is not good enough for someone in Biggs’s position to be using words unwisely like that. It may be ok for Andy Erlam because he is a clown compared to Biggs (although Biggs is on a seriously slippery slope).
But it’s OK for Lutfur to abuse the words ‘racist’ and ‘Islamaphobia’ with no proof when his administration is criticised?
When has he ever abused either?
He’s said he was concerned about racial overtones and motivations in the production around Panorama.
That’s the only ‘criticism of his administration’ I can think of where race or religion has been central to his response – unless you can point out others?
Now ignore his response for a moment and concentrate on his actions for a change.
Ask yourself why and how Lutfur managed to completely alienate white vote?
How come his party is so painfully monoethnic?
Is it because the entire non-bangladeshi population of TH are racists? Or is it because he is a divisive little man who knows how to win the elections but does not know how to run this borough?
Errr…ok. Let me explain.
It can’t be the former.
It can’t be the latter, either, because he clearly knows how to run the borough. It’s building more affordable housing than any council in the UK and the only inner London borough in the top ten of getting students into university is not Camden, or Islington, or Hammersmith and Fulham….but Tower Hamlets. TH hasn’t evicted anyone who couldn’t pay the bedroom tax, and hasn’t passed on the council tax benefit cut. It hasn’t closed any libraries (unlike Brent which closed six) but it’s opened a new one.
But most white people in Tower Hamlets probably aren’t aware of these and hundreds of other accolades because in the mainstream media, black political scandal sells papers so what would be considered parochial local council complaints anywhere else is the stuff of headlines.
The local Bengali community, as Carlo Gibbs said here, are more engaged with local politics than other groups. They know this stuff.
So probably that’s why they still vote in huge numbers for Lutfur, when others are put off by all the negative press.
Of course, as Carlo again acknowledged, Lutfur still did attract substantial numbers of non-Bengali voters who were instrumental in his victory. But yes, not enough, for these reasons.
It’s not completely beyond the realms of possibility.
The difference in first preference votes was 8896. In bundles of 50 that would be 177 and a bit bundles.
If you transfer – lets say a nice round number of 100 bundles- from Labour to THF then Lutfur’s vote is 31539 (or 37.44% of the vote) and John has 32643 (or 38.75%). Still close but easily enough for Lab to win on 2nd preferences.
There were around 1684 bundles in total, so we would be taking a big risk by either doctoring so many bundles, or deliberately taking so many Lab bundles them to wrong pile.
A figure 38% share of the vote for John in the Mayoral election is significant, because that’s the share of the vote that Labour got in the local elections, compared to THF’s 34%. According to the Mayoral result, Lutfur got 43% of the vote – 9% more than his councillors. Is it possible though that his appeal goes beyond that of his councillors, or that people voted for him and then voted Labour in the locals, or split their vote? Maybe, hard to tell.
Now irrespective of all that, does this sort of thing happen, whether by design or tiredness and or incompetence in elections?
Well, from time to time, yes
http://www.guardian-series.co.uk/news/wfnews/8378182.WALTHAM_FOREST__Election_blunder_confirmed/
Truth is, all the main parties *should* have a pretty good idea as to whether this is what happened from their box count of first preferences.
It all, sadly, goes back to the flaws in the system.
I appreciate your attempt to explain – it seems to have failed though. You have kindly and no doubt efficiently repeated Lutfur’s propaganda slogans regarding housing and education.
Are you saying then that non-bangladeshi voters are self destructive in their nature and vote against the very person who delivers such great results? Are you saying the non-bangladeshi community are stupid and cannot see through the media smoke screen but Bengali can? Or are they so isolated they have no access or interest in the main stream media? Whichever is true I think we would struggle not to blame Lutfur for this state of affairs.
Black political scandal sells papers you say? So why is it Lutfur and not Rushanara that brings all these controversies? Why is it Lutfur – despite his records on education and housing – and not Chuka Umunna without any substantial contributions – that make people angry? Why is it Lutfur who gets investigated, audited, attacked, panorama’ed and dispatches’ed?
I welcome your reference to Carlo Gibbs as a source of wisdom. Let me spell it out for your though what the real reasons for all this are – Lutfur divided this community by cynically manipulating bangladeshis and ignoring anyone else. Once again then – he knows how to win the elections but year after year showed he is unable to extend his appeal beyond mosques and a few local bengali tv channels.
Great local politician? A real leader? Champion of his community?
Yes, a great local politician – best in the country. His record speaks for itself.
Yes, a real leader – showed strong leadership to shield his residents from the worst cuts from central government.
Yes, champion of his community – he fought to improve the lives of everyone in TH.
Please do not insult Lutfur by comparing him to the likes of Rushnara.
The best politician in the country wouldn’t have ordered a chauffeured Merc and avoided scrutiny questions at a time of cuts. Schoolboy errors.
Ted, you’re a good lad and I hate to say this, but you are beginning to sound like a broken record with your comment about Lutfur’s silver merc. I have lost count of how many times you brought it up in exchanges with me alone.
Merc was a good choice for a car. It symbolises reliability, efficiency and good workmanship – some of the values which Lutfur himself represents.
Lutfur is probably the most important person in the borough; in charge of a £1billion budget. In that context, hiring a good quality car to transport him around the borough is not a bad thing. Admittedly, there are cheaper cars available in the market. The speaker can use a cheaper car.
Mulberry Place is literally in the middle of nowhere. A hired car was essential. Because of all the clamour and fuss from you lot, he might hire a Toyota Prius or some other cheaper car. Actually, any news on what he’s hiring nowaday?
It’s a symbol of political miscalculation and it sounds like a bad record to you because you don’t want to hear it.
No one else in his team would have hired it. Frankly a few found it embarrassing and it certainly brought bad publicity.
It raises a question of character. No idea what he’s got this time but he’s pretty much admitted it won’t be a Merc, so I guess he doesn’t buy into your allegory of efficiency.
Mulberry Place is literally not on the middle of nowhere; it’s right next to two DLR stations that serve Poplar (for Canary Wharf and Island Gardens etc), Westferry, Limehouse and Shadwell, which has easy connections to Wapping, Whitechapel and Shoreditch High St/Brick Lane. It also goes into Bank which has easy connections into Bethnal Green and Mile End.
I use it every day and I’m able to work on it as well. It’s a model of efficiency and represents all that’s good about capital investment in public transport, something his old Labour values support.
MOTC
It is very un-British, according to my British friends from old established families who are in the 1%, to be showy about things. New, flashy cars are a no, no! Depreciation devalues a new car by 30%.
Hiring a car and a driver does not add to the council’s assets. Hand it back without a return? Bad economics!
We are a poor borough. Plundering our reserves to fund such vanity is another British no, no!
The hired car was one instance. Lutfur and his co-mayoralty conspirators told LBTH that he would only cost £60K per year. The mayoralty has consumed many times this cost with his office refurbishment, new advisers, expensive communications folks and his propaganda newspaper and their ‘journalists’. We should be adhering to stoic, Luddite values of parsimony, value for money and care of public funds. It isn’t a quoted company with a sensitive share price like ICI and John Harvey Jones, he aint!
AYM, it is just not good enough to churn out the rubbish you read in the press. You actually have to question and verify stuff for yourself. Otherwise, you end up looking silly.
The newspaper, East End Life was there well before Lutfur became mayor. Lutfur did not invent it.
Office refurbishment was required to usher in a new full time executive mayor and his team. Old offices for the old leader of the council were not sufficient.
Advisers are required to provide specialist advice on various matters. Lutfur is not a specialist in everything from regeneration to social care. All elected representatives have their own staff.
Luckily we are not part of the 70,000 who get East End Life so I don’t get The Mayor’s propaganda or believe his claims as others here have so articulately stated were false! Incidentally, I do know that EEL was in place for years. However, Eric Pickles, decreed these in-house publications were illegal and asked for Lutfur to cease publishing it – he hasn’t so far.
Ad hominen attacks about me being ‘silly’ are the lowest form of debate!
There were/are specialist council officers in place who could have advised Lutfur about the wide ranging areas of his responsibilities. We even had an excellent CEO but Lutfur doesn’t/didn’t get on with not 1 but 3 CEOs.
He rejected the submissions from the qualified people and awarded his own grants to his favoured community groups.
He wants to be surrounded by ‘Yes’ people and do what he wants irrespective of the correctness of the process as advised, at the time, by his highly thought of CEO. He seems to fall out with a lot of people.
By nature and nurture I am parsimonious with my own money and expect Lutfur and LBTH to be the same with my household’s full council tax contribution.
In a show of solidarity for the poorest borough in London, Luftur could have stated he would like a refurbished office but, given the current state of the economy, he would hold back until the economy had improved. That might have won him some Brownie points! The same with the car. The London Transport network is one of the most admired in the world for coverage, speed and cost. Lots of money could be saved by ditching the car, chauffeur and mandate that all LBTH Councillors, officers and staff use London Transport just like millions do every day. Those members of LBTH who get allowances should be funding their out of pocket expenses from these allowances and not double claiming as per previous posts on taxi expenses.
Dear Ted,
I have now stopped being appalled at the goings on of this so called Mayor of Tower Hamlets – not only does he bring the name of Mayorality into disrepute but he is blot against all black and ethnic minorities. Because of him my Bengali friends are tarnished with the same corruption brush. But that’s an old story.
The latest news is this – from reliable Bengali source in Lutfur’s office. That his Deputy or more accurately former deputy Ohid Ahmed has fallen out big time – to the point there is non communication between the two of them. There are several reasons for this:
1. Ohid being demoted to just Cabinet Status. The main reason for this is that Lutfur asked Ohid to give a statement to the a equality and human rights commission complaining that John Biggs is a racist, but Ohid declined. Because Ohid considers John to be a fair and good man and an anti-racist.
2. History of Ohid being undermined by Lutfur. According to my source, apparently Ohid was always against the dodgy practices engaged by Lutfur and his kitchen cabinet – especially the grant giving to Lutfur’s pet support organizations, the postal vote fraud (which Ohid spoke out against on the equally disreputable Channel S).
3. Ohid apparently has not to date attended any Cabinet or MAB meeting.
On another equally juicy topic. Do you remember Abjol Miah? The former Respect Party Leader. Well he sacrificed his Respect life for a life with Lutfur. My source tells me it’s not been much of a life, Abjol sold himself for no return whatsoever – no cabinet position. Apparently he is so angry at the Husband (Emran) and his Wife (Rabina) cabinet team affair, that Abjol is lobbying other Tower Hamlets First Cllrs to form another splinter independent group. I wonder what they will call that: Carry on Tower Hamlets?
Utter nonsense! You work for one of the tabloids? The Sun? Daily Star? Or maybe Daily Sport?
And so what if I do work for one of the papers, our job is to shine the light of truth and expose you and your Mayor for your serving corruption. We will not give up until we are rid of your kind once and for all.
Given your utterly blind support for Lutfur, I can only but deduce that you are on Lutfur’s payroll either as one his pet poodle Councillors like Alibor, Rabbani, Emran, Rabina, Oliur (who simply has lost all credibility) or one of his paid lackey’s. Whatever your paid position – Man on the Clapham a Omnibus – once the payment stops so will your apparent die hard loyalty. And that goes for all the other Tower a Hamlets First (Lutfur) Cllrs. almost all are on the dole or in some project funded by Lutfur. So you see all you people and your loyalty goes as only as far as the tax payers money you get. Have a bit of spine – just little morality, and challenge Lutfur and see how he reacts.
Put it another way. You don’t really know Lutfur and his kind. He will drop you without a moments hesitation if you remotely challenged him for what is fair and proper. You are useful to him now because you do his dirty jobs without question. In good time you will see what a mendacious hypocrite Lutfur really is.
You will not stop until you rid our ‘kind’ once and for all. You mean people of Bangladeshi heritage? Have the guts to say what you really mean instead of being a coward.
Your post was not about exposing any corruption. You wrote some utter nonsense of gossip which you supposedly got from a ‘reliable’ Bengali source. You really have no idea how deluded you sound. It is you who needs to be exposed for what you are. You are permanently stationed on cloud cuckoo land.
You provided three pieces of gossip about Ohid, some made up nonsense about Abjol Miah. Why don’t you get a life instead of trying to cause mischief? Go and read Daily Sport. That is just about the level you represent.
Look young fella, ‘Man on the Clapham Omnibus’, it’s clear your getting paid to defend Lutfur writing at 1.22am. Your parents would probably be ashamed of you, if they knew what you were up to. Surely they didn’t migrate to the UK to escape paddy fields of Bangladesh so that you could freeload on tax payers money. They probably wanted you to get a decent education and then get a decent job so that you could be useful to them and the wider society.
Instead here you are wiping the proverbial faeces off Lutfur’s backside. You my friend need to grow up.
Lutfur’s trained you well. Having no credible rebuttals all you have is to shout racism every time you lot are caught with your hand in the till either electoral or a Council coffers.
He means the ‘kind’ of person Poulson was!
Richard Cohen, the trouble with your ‘kind’ is that you are so deluded that you think everyone who defends Lutfur must be paid for by Lutfur. This mindset is the cause of your downfall. Lutfur has more supporters in the borough than any other politician or political force. He has increased that support over the last four years. He is now more popular than ever before. He has proved it through the ballot box.
Your ‘kind’ refuses to acknowledge the overwhelming support that Lutfur has, because you are suffering from a misperception of reality. You are permanently on cloud of cuckoo land. Sensible people deal with evidence and facts. Your ‘kind’ deal with gossip, conjecture and falsehood. Therefore, you will write post after post utterly convinced that I am either a paid lackey or a THF councillor. You could not be more removed from the truth. I am neither. In fact, I have no dealings with Lutfur whatsoever. I am just one of his supporters and we are the majority compared to your ‘kind’.
You are racist and there is no doubt about it. This is evident in your statement that my parents escaped the “paddy fields of Bangladesh”. In your racist minsdet, Bangladeshi migrants are a bunch of illiterate peasants who escaped the paddy fields. My father came to this country as an acamedic and my family joined him here after he gained his British citizenship as a highly skilled migrant.
Throughout this post, I referred to your ‘kind’ by which I meant extremely deluded anti-Lutfur gossip mongers like yourself.
Have you ever had any paid dealings with Lutfur? Let’s not stick to present tense.
Not that it matters to me, but just so we’re as open as we can be and not mislead.
In the same breath, let me ask Richard Cohen if his background is as his name suggests, ie Jewish.
=> Clapham
May I enquire what motivates you to be an ardent supportor of Mr Rahman ?
CC.
Ted,
Unlike this individual who hides his identity behind the name ‘man on the Clapham Omnibus’ – for he is nothing if not unreasonable and deceitful, I am indeed Jewish and proud of it. What does this guy know of suffering – ask a Jew. We don’t go around crying racism, though if any race on this planet has the right to do so we do.
Anyway to the substance of the matter which the apparently educated Lutfur zombies would like to conceal.
At the very core of the Bangladeshi culture is this blurring of what is right and wrong. Let me give you a few examples:
Claiming benefits and working – including the Bengali religious scholars who twisted Islam now to accept it’s ok to get whatever you can out of the ‘kuffar’ (heathen) state it’s all halal – the same narrative used by the Islamist Terrorists.
Many of the Bangladeshis in the uk came with false passports or lied about their parentage and age – the likes of the Man on the Omnibus is probably one of them. Because the region his parents are from (Sylhet) from didn’t have many academics.
Many Bangladeshis just feel that anything goes (there is no Halal or Haram) when it comes to cheating the state. This why for example some of them like Lutfur Rahman and his Lackeys will even swear on the Holy Quran, their children, mothers and sisters to get their way. I understand this is exactly what Lutfur has done e.g. Promising Ohid that he would support Ohid on the life of his children when it comes to Ohid being the Tower Hamlets First MP candidate. Of course Lutfur never intended to uphold this promise it was just to get Ohid and Ohid’s supporters to vote for Lutfur at the last Mayoral elections.
It is critical that investigations continue and you will see how much Lutfur and his lot has manipulated and cheated the system. I’m disgusted at Ken Livingstone and Keith Vaz supporting Lutfur they should know better.
Eric Pickles is a man of honor and immense talent, I have spoken to him and he will leave no stone unturned. He knows everything – it’s just a question of putting pieces of evidence together. When go after organized criminals you need patience and perseverance.
Thank you. I’m curious as to who you are.
There are very few people of Jewish background who closely follow LBTH politics and far fewer who have such apparent knowledge of the Ohid/Lutfur relationship. Not even Peter Golds.
Would be very nice if we could distance the real issue of the wonderful and successful LBTH from religion.
It is unfair to blame believers of one ideology for the sins of others sharing that same ideology. Mr Cohen writes, inter alia
Obviously he forgot, like the rest of the world did, about the circa 26 million killed by Stalin. He also forgot about the people forced out of their home land too. Some of the same religion as Mr Cohen might accurately reply:…..
(1) Ask a Palestinian child whose head and limbs have been blown-off their tiny body or
(2) Ask the 4 Palestinian children killed on the beach whose bodies were burnt to charcoal or
(3) Ask many of the hundreds of millions living in poverty and exposed to violence and premature death every day of the year. Awareness of others suffering is essential for full membership of the Human Race.
Two wrongs never make a right. Talking is always better than violence. That is why the election petition is better than attacks on the alleged bad guys or on their property.
The problem for Tower Hamlets is the widespread believe that the public local service has failed to be applied fairly to all members of the public and the ruler’s power has benefited a clique rather than the residents generally. Problems are said to have happened at the election but English election law is woefully unfit for dealing with the resulting allegations.
If anyone wants to help, then get material to add to the petition. Dates, times, names, descriptions, videos and photos.
Peace to everyone.
Curious Cat.
Ted,
Curios Cat is so predictable citing some of the casualties of the Palestinians in Gaza as if by doing so he can offset the Holocaust and the thousands of years of persecution of the Jewish race. He cannot. To the curious cat I say this from the Talmud:
“You can educate a fool, but you cannot make him think”.
Ted, I have always taken an interest in Tower Hamlets but a bit more closer focus now as I have some very good influential Muslim Bangladeshi friends who live and work in the Borough. Some of these friends were misled and duped into supporting Lutfur Rahman, because of the Labour Party’s treatment of Lutfur Rahman. Although they may have had every reason to kick him out of the Party – producing the Abbas dossier just simply made him into a victim and was too compelling for those fighting injustice and inequality.
These Muslim friends are clearly ashamed of their hand in supporting Lutfur Rahman and regretful of ever doing so. They pour their hearts out to me – because like them there are many thousands of decent Bangladeshi’s who for the second time reluctantly supported Lutfur Rahman, knowing fully he was corrupt and self serving, because the Panorama program did exactly what the Abbas dossier and Channel for Dispatches program did – give Lutfur Rahman free victim oriented publicity.
Most Bangladeshi’s want to speak out against this Hypocrite masquerading as a mayor. They just need the right alternative to do so. Sadly while John Biggs is a perfectly decent chap, he lacked charisma and effective engagement with the Bangladeshi community – not to mention the divisions in the Labour Party over supporting John. We must all understand Lutfur is great at lying and treacherousness which he deploys with great skill and ingenuity.
I Would be delighted to meet you Ted as I think the work you do to provide scrutiny in Tower Hamlets is admirable. Let me know how I can get in touch with you.
I have little time for Peter Golds though, he is someone who is all too often blinded by his own ignorance and inner hate for the Bangladeshis. Clearly, he is missing a political opportunity here. If he changed his attitude he would have a very very multicultural and diverse Conservative Party here in a Tower Hamlets and could change the face of east end politics.
=> Richard Cohen,
Not wishing to drift too far away from the daily issues of LBTH, I would – like many members of the Israeli Labour Party – like to tell Mr Cohen that
1. the mass extermination by the Nazis of mainly Jews and some non-Jews was wrong.
2. So too was the killing of circa 26 million by Stalin.
3. So too is the 2014 killing of 400+ Palestinians and the injuring and maiming of more than 2,500 civilians in the occupied state of Palestine, specifically Gaza with a population of 1.8 million.
Netanyahu was always a hard-line extremist. His government depends on right-wing fanatics. He will do anything to retain political power including placating the right-wing extremist parties and the killing of children, women and other non-aggressive and non-threatening civilians so long as they are not Jewish. Meanwhile Iran keeps – as it has done for many years – delaying progress and their nuclear bomb making day gets closer. That is a substantially bigger danger to Israel than Hamas.
The world wants peace not war. Talking to your enemy is not a sin especially if it will stop the violence and begin the end of the inhumane subjugation of the Palestinians.
Shelling defenceless people is a crime against humanity – regardless of the fact the victims are not Jews.
P.S. I watch Al Jazeera English : HD channel 108, standard definition 83. Better than the BBC for international news.
Give peace a chance. One does not have to be anti-Jewish to want peace for all. Talking does not kill other Human Beings. The only cost associated with talking is one’s over-inflated ego.
Curious Cat.
[…] « John Biggs suggests ‘organised fraud’ by council staff in the actual counting of votes f… […]
Richard Cohen
In your post of July 20th 6:31pm you make several comments about the “core of Bangladeshi culture” which show a deep degree of racial prejudice. One of the ways racism works is to observe bad behaviour on a few occasions, and then blame the entire ethnic group for the actions of a few.
Incredibly, in your next post, without a scrap of evidence, you accuse Peter Golds of an “inner hate of Bangladehis”. I am sure Peter would not support any of the comments you made in the earlier post.
To find the racist, I think you need a mirror.
MOTCO
Your increasingly uncritical hero worship of Lutfur Rahman is becoming quite laughable. I’m sure if Lutfur were to fart, you would praise the sweet smell.
Surely any fool can see that if an asset worth £4 million is sold for £875,000 there is something wrong somewhere – and the same goes for Limehouse Library, Sutton Street depot and Mellish Street. The only question is whether this is incompetence, or something rather more sinister.
The flashy chauffeur driven car, the ubiquitous photographs and the stream of sycophantic articles in East End Life, are rather ugly displays of egotism, but not the main reasons for opposing Lutfur. Anyway, he seems to have dampened these down lately – perhaps at last realising that they simply provide easy targets for his opponents and alienate potential left wing support.
Andrew Conway, thanks for your contribution. I made no comment about Lutfur’s handling of the sale of these assets. I do not have all of the facts to comment on this issue. I will take on board what you have said. At the same time, I will remind you that a man is innocent until proven guilty of any wrongdoing.
Which man is innocent until proven guilty ? Mr Cohen or Mr Rahman or both ?
CC.
Thank you Curious Cat for your enquiry. Lutfur is innocent until proven guilty. As for Richard Cohen, he is a bit of a joke. You just have to ignore him. He gets satisfaction if you rise to his bait.
His racial prejudices have already been exposed.
It has interesting to note how two widely different ethnic minorities have the same response to critisism.
In our own bubble here in Tower Hamlets we are all familiar with the cry of racism going up from the Bengali community, particulary from their political elite when coming under the critical microscope from time to time.
You can see it in the global context from the army of zionist bloggers and journalists currently getting their retribution in first in declaring all and any critisism of Israel as anti semeitic, if you are Jewish and take a critical stance against Israel, and I know plenty that do, you are immediatly labeled a self hating jew
More than 600 Palestinians dead including 147 children and more than 4,000 injured some with life-long disabilities.
Nothing wrong with Israelis being peaceful and talking to their enemies in a polite, respectful and civil manner. Hamas’ demands for Israel to end the siege of Gaza are really reasonable.
Things are so bad the UN might consider war crime charges against Israel.
Talking never kills people. From enemies it can make friends who want to live in peace.
Curious Cat.
Curious Cat, I could not agree more with those sentiments. You are a good man.
Whether I am good or bad is not relevant to the Gaza massacre..
Any normal Human Being will instinctively know what is happening in the impoverished permanent refugee camp called Gaza where 1.8 million people live in distressing circumstances ignored by many West governments for political reasons, is fundamentally wrong.
How can the Arab’s colonial master, Israel, be proud of so many unlawful deaths and the senseless destruction of people’s homes and lives?
CC.
Sorry Ted for drifting away from the marvellous, brilliant, wonderful, really great inner London Borough everyone truly loves and adores. Oh, I forgot to add ‘worships’.