One veteran of the Respect party said to me as I was leaving last night’s rally at the Water Lily centre in Mile End: “It’s just like the old days again.”
Depressingly, in many ways he was right. Lots of pretty tedious and predictable speeches, a few cheap and several offensive jokes about Eric Pickles’ weight. It’s strange how the so-called Left get off on making these remarks about a man’s appearance.
But how the audience giggled! …And then cried racism against the man one not-so-svelte union official called “the fat controller”.
They also mocked DCLG’s spending on limousines. But failed to mention Lutfur’s four years of travelling around the borough in a chauffeured Mercedes.
The lack of self-awareness and introspection was and is frightening.
The audience was huge. I’d guess easily upwards of 500.
The theme was “Defend Democracy in Tower Hamlets”, but that was a bit of a smokescreen. In reality, it was an election rally of the Left against the Tories.
I understand that Cllr Abjol Miah orchestrated it. The former leader of the Respect group and a serial failure in his attempts to become MP wants another crack at Westminster. He wants to challenge Rushanara Ali in Bethnal Green and Bow.
So too do Cllrs Rabina Khan and Ohid Ahmed.
Galloway, whose aides used to rail against Lutfur when he was in Labour, warned that if Tower Hamlets First didn’t field a candidate, Respect would. Some interpreted that as he would stand again but even he knows he’d be laughed out of the borough again.
His underlying message, I inferred, was he’d endorse Abjol as his candidate. Rushanara is said to be anxious but I think she’s safe.
As for Ken’s input last night:
1. He said he and fellow Labour NEC member Christine Shawcroft (who made the most boring speech of the night, and that’s saying something) would submit a motion at their next meeting calling for Lutfur’s re-admittance into the party. (He really does have a dry sense of humour, doesn’t he?)
2. He called on Lutfur’s hot-headed supporters to find the home addresses of the three Government Commissioners when they arrive in Tower Hamlets, and then protest outside “to make their lives intolerable”.
That remark prompted this response today from Local Government Minister Kris Hopkins:
I am appalled at Ken Livingstone’s comments which run the risk of stirring up a lynch mob mentality in Tower Hamlets.
The borough is already riven by the politics of intimidation and division, and stupid remarks like his will only worsen community tensions.
We will not be intimidated from taking any action necessary to ensure a free and fair democracy operates in the borough.
As for the PwC report, the only person to make more than a passing reference to it last night was in fact Lutfur. He said he would learn from the process failures and that the council would “embrace the Commissioners” when they arrive.
Well said, but let’s see.
Radio 4’s Today programme was there last night as well. Their reporter Zoe Conway broadcast this excellent report this morning.
Listen to how she puts Ken on the spot, how he flounders; how she puts Galloway on the back foot; and how she reduces Lutfur to robot mode, monologuing his usual mantra about all things One Tower Hamlets.
A nice hat-trick.
listen to ‘Tower Hamlets, Mayor Rahman rally’ on audioBoom
//
You are a brave man for going Ted, all respects to you.
As I’ve said before, Lutfur, Livingstone and Galloway, truly the unholiest trinity of slimy scumbags that we have the misfortune of having to endure on the political arena. All suedo champagne socialists who pander to the heard mentality to further their own positions. All 3 have been dogged with rumours of corruption throughout their rotten, hypocritical, egotistical careers.
We’d all be better off if these pigs just popped off quietly!
I thought you’d go John Wright? I really wanted to, but had something that I really had to do.
I think the MPS should have a word with Ken after what he said. Thinly disguised threats.
If anyone has a recording of Christine’s speech I have the most dreadful insomnia.
ManOnThe339 (@johnjee1966). I had a Residents Association meeting. Also I thought it was invite only. Probably better I didn’t go as I probably wouldn’t be writing this!
2. He called on Lutfur’s hot-headed supporters to find the home addresses of the three Government Commissioners when they arrive in Tower Hamlets, and then protest outside “to make their lives intolerable”.
That’s been unlawful (i.e. criminal offence) for at least the last 15 years meaning hounding someone at home to get them to change a decision or to alter the way they work in favour of the demonstrators.
Curious Cat
Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001 (c. 16) Section 42A
Offence of harassment etc. of a person in his home
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2001/16/section/42A
But only if you’re harrassing them. A peaceful protest outside their homes without harrassing them is not of course unlawful. (Not that I’m suggesting it but to set record straight)
Protesting outside a home is harrassment. Workplace a different matter. Imagine how animal rights activists would be treated by police etc if they ‘protested peacefully’ outside homes of GSK directors
Just downloaded this 2009 police pocket book.
https://network23.org/freebeagles/files/2013/05/NETCU-Handbook.pdf
Policing Protest
Pocket Legislation Guide
PDF page 27
Section 42 Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001
(also see Section 42A – page 31)
A constable present at the scene may give a direction to any person if:
(I) That person is present outside or in the vicinity of any premises used by any and individual as their dwelling,
(II) The constable believes on reasonable grounds that that person is present there for the purpose (by his presence or otherwise) of representing to the resident or another individual, or persuading the resident or another individual that they should not do something they are entitled or required to do or should do and something they are not under any obligation to do,
III The constable believes on reasonable grounds that that person’s presence
(either alone or with another person who is present) amounts to or is likely
to result in harassment of the resident or is likely to cause alarm or distress to
the resident.
Directions must be proportionate and may include a requirement to leave the
vicinity of the premises in question, and a requirement to leave that vicinity
and not to return to it within such period as the constable may specify, not being longer than three months.
Such directions must be given initially by the most senior police officer present although any constable may make any subsequent variation or withdrawal of the directions. In practice no such variation or withdrawal should be made without consultation with the most senior police officer present.
Curious Cat
The reality is that Livingstone is inciting people to commit a criminal offence.
Maybe a responsible man would also have highlighted the penalty for such an offence ie
A person guilty of an offence under this section shall be liable, on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 51 weeks or to a fine not exceeding level 4 on the standard scale, or to both.
Somewhere at the back of my mind I’ve got a notion that inciting somebody to commit a criminal offence is almost the same as committing it. Is this correct?
So what exactly is the Borough Commander doing what about this?
If more than 12 people attend, then the number required for a riot exists 🙂 Good ole Ken. He has finally hit the jackpot.
Quotes from a public order document (created in 2012) (an extract from a Law book) which I downloaded this night. I haven’t retained the URL. If you would like a copy of that and a copy of ‘Policing Protest. Pocket Legislation Guide’ I’ll put them on the net and publish the URL. Or if you give me an email address I’ll email them. http://u22.net/cat
Riot is an offence under s.1(1) of the Public Order Act 1986.
Section 1(1): Where twelve or more persons who are present together use or threaten unlawful violence for a common purpose and the conduct of them (taken together) is such as would cause a person of reasonable firmness present at the scene to fear for his personal safety, each of the persons using unlawful violence for the common purpose
is guilty of riot.
• There must be at least 12 people present for this offence to apply.
• The members do not have to agree to assemble in advance.
• They also do not have to agree on the common purpose in advance – s.1(3).
• It can be committed in private too – s.1(5).
• A person of ‘reasonable firmness’ must fear for his personal safety.
• The violence is only ever ‘lawful’ if it is used in self-defence.
• Violent conduct can be aimed towards property as well as people – s.8.
16.1.2 Mens rea of riot
The defendant must intend to use violence or is aware that his conduct may be violent – s.6(1).
• ‘Awareness’ is similar to Cunningham recklessness (a subjective test) in that the defendant must be aware of his own behaviour.
• The consumption of alcohol does not provide a defence to riot – s.6(5).
• Intoxication includes alcohol or drugs or other means – s.6(6).
• Riot is therefore a basic intent offence even though it does not expressly mention ‘recklessness’.
Perhaps the Old Bill are too frightened to breath down the neck of Red Ken and warn him to publicly cancel his rabble rousing campaign.
How on earth can people like Ken be in the Labour Party unless that party is so crap they care not about basic standards, just about raw political power and wealth.
Curious Cat.
=> You couldn’t make it up!
Somewhere at the back of my mind I’ve got a notion that inciting somebody to commit a criminal offence is almost the same as committing it. Is this correct?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy_%28criminal%29
Lord Bridge in R v Anderson – quoted in R v Hussain said:
“an essential ingredient in the crime of conspiring to commit a specific offence or offences under section 1(1) of the Act of 1977 is that the accused should agree that a course of conduct be pursued which he knows must involve the commission by one or more of the parties to the agreement of that offence or those offences”.
CC.
That may be your opinion, Ted. But it’s not what the law says.
Don’t expect Dave Stringer to do anything helpful. He gives the distinct impression of being in Rahman’s pocket.
I was thinking more along the lines of the ‘Joint enterprise’ rationale (e.g. which used the so-called “incitement” to convict and hang Derek Bentley – and I’m highlighting the doctrine not the rights and wrongs of that case).
This is the “guilty by association” rationale http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_purpose
I know people have been critical of it – but it’s still on the books so far as I am aware.
You left out the link to Zoe’s excellent report – here it is https://audioboom.com/boos/2646737-tower-hamlets-mayor-rahman-rally
It is difficult to see what Livingstone and Shawcroft hope to achieve by all this except to give the Tories weapons to use against Miliband. Livingstone got the highest vote for the NEC and it will be easy for Tory spin doctors to claim that the party is in the hands of the loony left in alliance with Islamists.
Interesting take by Eastern Eye. http://www.easterneye.eu and put Lutfur’s name into the search at the top right of the page.
Excellent point re Livingstone. His comment inciting criminal behaviour clearly provides fodder for ammunition against the Labour Party – and is a point which LabourList seems to be studiously ignoring.
Just as it ignored the PwC Report and the ‘official’ Labour perspective on what is happening in Tower Hamlets right now even before the Livingstone maelstrom entered the room.
If you don’t believe me just look at which posts are tagged Lutfur Rahman http://labourlist.org/tag/lutfur-rahman/
So what exactly is the strategy for getting the Labour Vote out come next May?
This is starting to get serious.www.labourlist.org/2012/11/mps-hit-out-at-disappointing-livingstone-over-attendence–lutfur-raman-rally/
Looking at the line up it really is an unholy alliance of people who were at each others throats in Respect and the fall out from it. My concern and I hope other peoples is the effect of this on next May. All in all, not good.
your link isn’t live (no gap after serious) here it is again
http://labourlist.org/2014/11/mps-hit-out-at-disappointing-livingstone-over-attendance-at-lutfur-rahman-rally/
Thanks.
Lutfur really is an expert in this double-think process… examine his use of the words “welcome” which actually means “obstruct” and now a new one – “embrace” – which presumably means “intimidate”. Is he subconsciously trying to be a character in 1984?
The whole thing sounds like it’s out of 1984.
Remember Animal Farm ? by Eric Blair (George Orwell)
First version : All animals are equal.
Last version : All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others.
Note is was the Pigs that seized power and we known how much pigs like having their snouts in the trough and favouring their own kind to the detriment of others.
Curious Cat.
“It’s just like the old days again.”
Yes, Ted, it’s just like the old days of Respect and Lutfur as Labour leader of the council again – but with one big difference. Back then they ran around and did what they like. Now they can run around and shout and scream, but there’s a ‘fat controller’ who is sending some more intelligent people to run the borough, to completely circumvent these screeching Trots and self-absorbed Bengali nationalists. All they can do is shout and scream but not wield power.
So ignore them, they’re an irrelevance; if we’re lucky they might go away.
Thank God for the “fat controller”. I am quite sure Sir Eric Pickles* will revel in that nickname!
*This honour is guaranteed now. It is destiny in much the same way as my urine is guaranteed to fall upon George Galloway’s final resting place.
Was the room really so lacking in female representation? Do only men have a voice in TH grass roots politics?
Doesn’t Livingstone’s outburst “calling on Lutfur’s hot headed supporters to ….to find the home addresses of the three Government Commissioners….to protest outside “to make their lives unbearable”” give credibility to
the Election Petitioners’ claim of the use of intimidation by supporters of the Mayor?
After all we’ve had a taste of Lutfur’s supporters in action when Sadiq Khan MP shadow Cabinet Minister for Justice, had to be safeguarded in the Troxy, because of the braying crowds outside.
Look forward to he Police response.
Yes especially when the call for harassment and intimidation has a direct link to the mayor’s associates. Rather difficult for him to claim he knew nothing about the conduct of his associates in their efforts to support hi,.
I heard about this rally but didn’t dare go, I think you are very brave Ted and thank you for the Twitter feed and the report because otherwise we wouldn’t have known what went on.
Why would he be brave? Ted, do you think you were brave attending the event?
Venturing into the Lions den where attendees were encouraged to commit criminal offences and the ring-leaders are all characters of dubious conduct and are able to summons a mob to intimidate others, is not exactly a vicar’s garden tea party, is it ?
Curious Cat.
oldford1 – Stop stirring the shit! Yes Ted was brave, he went where some were too nervous to go. I have Bengali friends that would have gone but were worried about the possibility of violence. Unlike some, they wanted and want to know the truth.
Two has beens and a soon to be nobody. Is this really the best Lutfur can do? I didn’t reaslise he was so desperate and out of ideas.
Be reasonable. What else has he got to comfort him in his last dwindling days as The Mayor ? Disaster is crawling along, unstoppable, to engulf him. It is not a pleasant experience.
To get better friends, perhaps he should change his deodorant or emigrate ?
Curious Cat
I bet he’s feathered his filthy nest with his ill gotten gains, so should have plenty stashed away to live comfortably?
I hear Iraq is nice this time of year, and Beirut? I bet Lutfur will have lots of accomplices / chums there.
If he’d like somewhere more tropical, perhaps Sierra Leon? I’d happily stump up the cash for first class oneway tickets for Lutfur, Galloway and Livingstone. The trouble is, these 3 are so slimy, the Ebola wouldn’t stick! They’d probaby mutate into an even more parasitic version (if possible) and come back to blight us even more!
I’d even stretch to fly his mistress Rania K out to keep him snugg. We know he doesn’t like mixing with the natives,unless he has his PR team and photographer to hand.