VOTE 'NO' to postal vote fraud. Vote ‘NO’ to ‘a mayor’ in Tower Hamlets at the 6 May 2010 elections

POLICE are examining a series of claims of serious electoral fraud across London.

They are "assessing" 28 allegations, while an Evening Standard investigation has uncovered several examples of apparent irregularities in voting records in Tower Hamlets, where campaigners claim electoral fraud is taking place on an "alarming and widespread" scale.

Scotland Yard confirmed it is examining a number of complaints from residents and political groups in the borough. On a wider scale, police are looking at claims of electoral fraud in 12 boroughs but have yet to launch any criminal inquiries.

The Standard found some homes where up to 10 so-called "ghost voters" have been registered on the electoral roll without the knowledge or consent of the people who live there.

Politicians also claim activists working for local parties have been visiting homes and offering to post ballots on behalf of vulnerable residents. In other cases, it is alleged, candidates and activists have "assisted" residents in filling in their postal ballot papers.

Both practices - which can lead to vote tampering - are forbidden by the Electoral Commission code of conduct, signed up to by all the main parties.

The victims of the alleged fraud are usually Bangladeshi residents who speak little English. The Standard found two homes in Bethnal Green where, respectively, eight and 10 apparent ghost voters with Muslim names are registered for postal votes. In fact only five people live at the two properties and they know nothing of the 18 other people listed there.

At a house in Bow, 18 postal ballots were delivered yesterday but only 10 of the voters named live there. They say a Bengali-speaking man came to the door two weeks ago and told them they had to sign forms. Campaigners have raised suspicions about a further eight homes where 77 voters have been registered in recent months.

Respect MP George Galloway and Bodrul Islam, a council candidate for the party, have made formal complaints which are being assessed by the Met. Rob Hoveman, Mr Galloway's election agent, said: "They should abolish postal vote on demand altogether. Ultimately, it's democracy that suffers."

Peter Golds, leader of the Tower Hamlets Tories, said: "Here we are, going from door to door to win vote by vote. But all this is useless if 10 people here, or 12 there, are falsely registered to vote and are voting. It's really shameful." Tower Hamlets has been at the centre of postal fraud allegations before. After the 2006 local elections, it emerged that 90 residents in a Limehouse block appeared to have had their votes stolen by fraudsters who applied for postal votes in their names and arranged for the papers to be redirected.

A spokesman for the Electoral Commission said anyone suspecting postal vote irregularities must inform police, or the political parties whose members they suspect. A Tower Hamlets spokesman said: "We have done everything within our power to ensure the safety and security of postal votes.

"If there is an allegation of electoral fraud it has to be investigated by the police - the Returning Officer has no powers to investigate until after the election."

A Scotland Yard spokeswoman said: "All these complaints are being assessed. If it has been established that a crime has been committed, we will launch an investigation."

Strangers are using our addresses'
* Business student Noman Chowdhury, 22, had no fewer than 18 postal ballots drop through his letter box this week — but he doesn't recognise nearly half the names on the envelopes. He is one of 10 Bangladeshi students sharing the house in Campbell Road, Bow. A fortnight ago a man called Imtiaz came to them and, speaking in Bengali, asked them to fill in forms. Mr Chowdhury, who is eligible to vote in local elections as a Commonwealth subject, said he did not fully understand what was happening.

He told the Standard: “I don't know if he was from the council or from a political party. We just signed up, as we didn't know any better. But if we knew we had a choice, then we would have asked to go and vote at the polling station.” Mr Chowdhury, who is studying at the Commonwealth Law College in Whitechapel, said he and his housemates do not know the people named on the polling cards.

* Inge Reekmans was stunned to learn that eight strangers were registered as living at the small flat she shares with her partner Jason Loader in Bethnal Green.

The couple had no idea that the Bengali names were with theirs on the electoral roll until contacted by the Standard. Ms Reekmans, 34, who works in marketing, and Mr Loader, a 35-year-old IT worker, bought the flat nine years ago and have never heard of the eight “ghost voters” recently added to the register.

Ms Reekmans, pictured, said: “There's hardly space for the two of us here, let alone 10. We assume it must be fraud. It's outrageous that it seems so easy to scam the system. What's the point of voting if other people can cheat?” She said four postal voting forms in “ghost” names have been delivered but no one has tried to pick them up. Mr Loader has written to Tower Hamlets asking for the eight names to be taken off the register."






_____________________________


from the London EVENING STANDARD Aoril 2005


Vote fraud councillor jailed
Last updated at 00:00am on 08.04.05


A former Labour party councillor was jailed today for three years, seven months, for rigging postal votes in a local council election.
Muhammed Hussain, 61, arranged for the collection of blank ballot papers posted out to homes in the ward where he was standing in Blackburn, Lancs.
Campaigners went house to house asking voters to hand over blank ballot papers, telling them: "Don't worry we'll take care of them."
Hussain went on to beat the sitting Tory candidate at the local elections of May 2002.
He pleaded guilty at an earlier hearing to conspiring to defraud the returning officer in the Bastwell ward of Blackburn.
Passing sentence at Preston Crown Court Judge Peter Openshaw called it a "public scandal" and told Hussain he was passing a "stiff" sentence to set an example to others.
Earlier this week, a judge in Birmingham described Britain's postal voting system as something that would "disgrace a banana republic".
Judge Openshaw added: "In my judgment, public confidence in the integrity of the electoral process is a foundation of our democratic system. Those who fraudulently interfere are committing a most grave offence against the body politic."
He said the current postal voting system was "wide open to fraud".
"The defendant has literally stolen votes.
"There is no guidance available to me because happily there is no precedent as to how I should fix the appropriate sentence for electoral fraud on this scale.
"I consider it to be my public duty to make it a stiff sentence intended to discourage others from yielding to similar temptation."

Are you voting 'postal' in Tower Hamlets at or about the '6 May 2010' elections? Then make sure to Vote 'NO' in the referendum on 'mayor'

2355 Hrs GMT
London
Friday
30 April 2010


Editor © Muhammad Haque

BEWARE of ballot paper, postal vote fraud in Tower Hamlets!

Are you voting 'postal' in Tower Hamlets at or about the '6 May 2010' elections? Then make sure to Vote 'NO' in the referendum on 'mayor'

[To be continued]



From Times Online
May 1, 2010
Late surge in Tower Hamlets postal votes prompts police fraud probe

Dominic Kennedy, Investigations Editor
RECOMMEND?
Scotland Yard has launched criminal investigations into four allegations of bogus voter registration. Bundles of fictitious names have been put on the electoral roll in the London Borough of Tower Hamlets in what looks like a blatant attempt to steal the elections.

It will raise concern in an area notorious for election fraud and where a last-minute flood of applications to vote mean that more than 5,000 have been accepted without any checks — enough to sway Thursday’s results.

The council tried to clean up the register. Officials visited any home with nine or more voters and removed 141 names from the roll. But a surge of 5,166 new registrations were received just before the deadline of April 20 and there was no time to check them. Alarm bells rang when parties were given lists of postal voters to help with electioneering.

At an address in Bethnal Green Road consisting of a ground-floor shop and an upstairs maisonette, eight Bengalis claimed a postal vote. However, when The Times called there this week there was only one occupant, Inge Reekmans a Belgian photographer. “You’re kidding,” she said when told about the registrations. Showing The Times around her home, the only other occupant was her cat Kiki. “You can see, there are no Bengalis,” she said.

RELATED LINKS
Loophole exposes postal votes to fraud
Postal voting system is wide open to fraud
In Goldman Close, there were 10 Bengali names for a house where Stephane Leyvraz, a Frenchman, lives with two Europeans. When The Times visited, there was no sign of “Tanzir Alam”, “Nurul Aman” or the others. A man came for the ballot papers on Monday.

Across Tower Hamlets in Bromley-by-Bow, 18 people apparently requested postal votes in a four-bedroom house where Ali Saleem, a Pakistani student, lives with four companions. Does he vote? “Not even in my own country,” he said. “I don’t like to vote.”

The Electoral Commission’s Code of Conduct for postal voting forbids campaigners from soliciting ballot papers. But Mahmodul Hasam Talukdar was asked for his by a party supporter. “He said ‘Vote for us and I will take it back to the post office’,” Mr Talukdar, 23, a student from Bangladesh, said. “Why should I? It’s my vote.”

Vote "NO" to an ego-mayor in Tower Hamlets. Vote 'NO' on Thursday 6 may 2010. Introducing a new word into the English language: ego-mayor! Say 'No'

1448 [1440] Hrs GMT
London
Friday 30 April 2010.
Editor © Muhammad Haque.
STOP another power-hungry ego-mayor getting hold of the patch in Tower Hamlets. Vote 'NO' on Thursday 6 May 2010 in Tower Hamlets. Defend the community from the voracious, worrying appetite of the power-obsessed holder of ‘elected mayor’ office! Vote ‘NO’ on Thursday 6 May 2010 in Tower Hamlets


[To be continued]





Boris Johnson to get 'superpowers' if Tories win election
Pippa Crerar, City Hall Editor
30.04.10

TV: Brown vows to fight on as Cameron claims debate victory
The Mayor's new powers
The Mayor's existing powers
Commentary: Cameron shows he has an eye on the long game

Ads by Google

Conservative Manifesto
This is Your invitation to Join The Government of Britain

MP Expenses Row
Are your expenses in order? Concur® Expense automation tools can help.

Don't Scrap Your Old Car
Get Cash for Your 10+ Year Old Car! We Buy Any Car

General Election Poll
Who would get your vote if the election was held tomorrow ?


Boris Johnson is set to be handed sweeping powers if the Tories win the general election, the Standard has learned.

His new remit would put him on course to be the world's second most powerful mayor after New York's Michael Bloomberg.

Mr Johnson could be the beneficiary of the biggest devolution of power to the capital since the Greater London Authority was created a decade ago.

The Mayor would be responsible for a £16 billion budget for areas including the capital's transport network, policing and economic regeneration. He would also take control of housing, the Olympic legacy, the Thames and the Royal Parks from central government.

The Mayor's new powers

The Mayor's existing powers

Mr Bloomberg has a £33 billion budget and runs all New York's public services while the Mayor of Paris, Bernard Delanoe, has powers over transport, planning, housing and primary schools with a budget of £6 billion.

The policy paper proposals could be in David Cameron's first Queen's Speech as part of a devolution Bill, which might also hand more power to Scotland and Wales.

Tory policy chief Oliver Letwin and Mr Johnson's head of policy Anthony Browne have spent months thrashing out the details, which have now been signed off by the
party leader.

The plans are at an early stage and could eventually include replacing the Metropolitan Police Authority with an executive reporting directly to the Mayor and scrutiny by the London Assembly. The new powers would significantly impact upon Londoners but were not included in the Tory manifesto. Former mayor Ken Livingstone today welcomed the proposals but said the Tories should have gone further by devolving financial powers.

He said: “Clearly any devolution of more powers to the Mayor is welcome. But unless the Mayor has some independence financially they're still really in hock to the Government as that's where the majority of the Mayor's budget comes from.

“It's sad that they haven't given the Mayor power to run recycling because London has the worst record in Britain.”

Mr Johnson would face the prospect of deep cuts in his new transport and housing budgets as a future Tory government struggled to reduce the deficit.

Tony Blair first devolved power to London in 2000 when he set up the GLA and Mr Livingstone was elected.

Commentators felt he would have handed over additional responsibilities if he had more faith in the first occupant of City Hall. Mr Johnson was elected with more than one million votes, the largest personal mandate of any politician in British history.

Shadow London minister Justine Greening said: “An important part of our Big Society agenda is to give more power to locally-elected representatives of the people. So we have been discussing very carefully with the Mayor's office what additional powers could usefully be transferred from central government to the Mayor.

This paper is the product of these discussions and will be implemented by a Conservative government.” The Tories have said they would abolish the Government Office for London, currently headed by Tessa Jowell.


Also on this topic

Home Secretary attacks Boris Johnson over policing
This isn't 'fairness' - it's Labour's class war by stealth
London suffers second blow to global status
Opposition blasts Boris for ‘broken promises to voters’
Boris blocked from chairing arts interviews
Reader views (14) Add your view
@ Nikki, London

RE: Mad cows!

Yeah I do remember the low points of the Tories way back in the 80s, I also remember the many low points of Labour before that; but more relevantly the many Labour low points far more recently. ie: the last 13 years.

- Frank, Home Counties, England, 30/04/2010 15:33
Report abuse

Mick

Absence makes the memory grow fonder. Unfortunately I remember the old situation before BT when the nationalised industries cost us a fortune and you had to wait 6 or 12 months to get a phone installed unless you bribed the telephone engineers in which case the phone was installed later that day.

- Stephen C, London, 30/04/2010 15:21
Report abuse

so that's it Mick,

you claim it was revenge on Ken because the right decision was made?

what a peculiar and oddly irrelevant point of view.

- scotty, london, 30/04/2010 14:46
Report abuse

Will the superpowers include X-ray vision and the ability to fly?

- ForFS, London England, 30/04/2010 14:05
Report abuse

I am willing to stand for Mayor of London.

My first agenda will be; to take control of all utility company supplies to the people of London; in the London Area; and resupply utility services to all the people of London; on a non- profit bases etc; this will mean cheap power supplies as a service to Londoners.

When you think of all the possibilities of the power the Mayor could wield for Londoners; the sky is the limit.

Vote for me; and I will get you all cheap gas, electric, and phones, at no cost to the taxpayer at all.

Over to you Boris; match that if you can?

- mickinlondon, london, 30/04/2010 13:46
Report abuse

Revenge on Red Ken? Is that what you call dismantling a fraught and corrupt institution?

C'mon Mick, Red Ken got the bullet for reasons of natural justice not revenge.

Revenge? I'm still trying to digest that most fanciful of lies with no end in sight.

- scotty, london, 30/04/2010 12:12

I point out, Scotty; that the GLC under Ken Livingstone was the same corrupt institution [your words] as that same institution that was run prior to Red Ken, by Sir Desmond Plummer and Sir Horace Walter Cutler etc.

Thatcher was pro GLC then?

So Red Ken was a victim of the Iron Cow, or was it the Iron Maiden, a form of torture machine in old England’s Castles of the realm; which-ever one you chose the result is the same in my opinion.

Like your good self; I am trying to digest the truth, with no end to the lies in sight?

Happy May day; Scotty....from Harold Wilson?

- mickinlondon, london, 30/04/2010 13:28
Report abuse

Good news lets also have all the tax money that is collected from people working in London, staying in London. Can you imagine the furore, one suspects most of the country would be in penury without us generous Londoners.

- Leonard Lillywhites, Tottenham, 30/04/2010 13:27
Report abuse

I'd be more impressed if he wasn't a cyclist.

- BJ, East London, 30/04/2010 13:19
Report abuse

My concern is that we will suffer from a lack of local consultation before implementation of plans if Boris becomes a Super Mayor.

- Linda, London, 30/04/2010 13:05
Report abuse

Tories....remember...CJD mad cow disease where they took the decisions in 'good faith' and poisoned the people.....and why dont they bring back ...Dame Shirley Porter? She'd be great at helping Boris + David.

- Nikki, London, 30/04/2010 13:04
Report abuse

More power for Boris if you vote Tory?

*votes Lib Dem*. Better safe than sorry, I can't think of much worse than Boris putting even more clowns or crooks or Policy Exchange hard-rightwingers like Browne in charge of bits of London's government than he has already.

- Tom, London, UK, 30/04/2010 12:19
Report abuse

Revenge on Red Ken? is that what you call dismantling a fraught and corrupt institution?

C'mon Mick, Red Ken got the bullet for reasons of natural justice not revenge.

Revenge? I'm still trying to digest that most fanciful of lies with no end in sight.

- scotty, london, 30/04/2010 12:12
Report abuse

So; we will end up with the same old GLC that Thatcher destroyed for political revenge against Red Ken for not liking her?

Let's hope the Tories continue to undo all the damage and destruction Thatcher caused, and take back all the utility companies that once belonged to the people of the UK, which Thatcher sold off cheap as well.

Mind you; Tony Blair should have done all that 13 years ago?

But better late than never.

- mickinlondon, london, 30/04/2010 11:57
Report abuse

Any chance of me voteing Conservatives is now out of the question.Boris will add another 20% Tax on public transport,give all illegal immigrants the right to stay and became British.

- dave, london, 30/04/2010 11:49
Report abuse


Add your comment

Name:
Town and country:
Your comment:Terms and conditionsMake text area biggerYou have 1500 characters left.
We welcome your opinions. This is a public forum. Libellous and abusive comments are not allowed. Please read our House Rules.
I agree to the House Rules.
Remember me - this will save your name and location for when you leave your next comment.
For information about privacy and cookies please read our Privacy Policy.







NewsSportEntertainmentCelebrity




In the shade: Sunglass Hut flagship store opening party

World's sexiest women revealed by FHM

Oil disaster: The race is on to save the Louisiana coast's fragile ecosystem

Fashion special: Pixie Lott models the Pixie Loves Lipsy range


James Fenton
View from America: Now can Obama get the better of Wall Street?

Sebastian Shakespeare
A wee shot from the hip can save your day

Anne McElvoy
Showtime is over - now let the real business begin

Evening Standard comment
David Cameron wins back the momentum

Paul Waugh
Politics: Greg Barker pays more than £10k re 'recognition' of 2nd home profit




Natasha Richardson - a star who turned our world upside down
This weekend the Royal Court celebrates Natasha Richardson’s life in a private memorial event. Two friends remember the life-enhancing effect she had on all who knew her

Russell Crowe, Russell Crowe, riding through the glen
The script for a new film about Robin Hood was such a hot property that it sparked a bidding war between studios. Why, then, did director Ridley Scott throw most of it out?


Boris Johnson to get 'superpowers' if Tories win election
Soho alley sealed off and alarms handed out after two rapes
Dagenham white working class prepare to ditch old Labour loyalties
Cheryl Cole reveals stunning new look in sexy photo shoot
Tony Blair’s return marred by row over charity link


Haringey heads are set to enjoy five-star Oxford
It's a tough job but someone's got to do it. Bonnes vacances to the Haringey headteachers who are staying at the Randolph Hotel in Oxford for their annual headteachers' conference
All stories


Start your South Australian holiday here
Let Flight Centre design your perfect South Australian Holiday.

Life Insurance
Get £150k life cover from just £1.08 a week

Confused by Nick Clegg appearing this morning before VOTE LABOUR placards? To avoid confusion in Tower Hamlets, Vote 'NO' on Thursday

Confused by Nick Clegg appearing this morning before VOTE LABOUR placards? To avoid confusion in Tower Hamlets, Vote 'NO' on Thursday

Vote 'NO' to a system of ‘elected mayor’ in Tower Hamlets that will lower standards of behaviour and conduct

0340 [0330] [0300] Hrs GMT
London
Wednesday
29 April 2010.
Editor © Muhammad Haque.


Who wants to impose an ‘elected’ mayor on Tower Hamlets?

Why the ‘first ever elected mayor of London” Ken Livingstone, of course!

Who else! So what was he when still in office?
What way did he ‘use’ his powers as the ‘elected mayor’?
Was he an accountable mayor? Was he a mayor that had clear moral, ethical standards, which he was willing to share with members of the Greater London Assembly? Or the London Assembly as they now refer to call themselves?

Ken Livingstone's contempt for the London Assembly members was unconcealed on that occasion when they dared ask him about his role in managing his unaccountable powers..

He concealed nothing. He repeatedly insulted the Assembly. As he did the chair. Who just japanned to be a woman! The great feminist 'Red' [!!!!!????] Ken Livingstone was at his most ‘progressive’ form when challenged on his disastrous behaviour as the ‘elected mayor’ in the name of the people of London, who showed no accountability to the people of London! So whose ideas was it to recruit Ken Livingstone to appear on stages in Tower Hamlets and preach to us that we should ‘elect’ someone after his image and then get limbered with an egotistic, egomaniac who neither recognises the people nor has real, true, universally understood respect for the elected office that he craves and then grabs?

[To be continued]

How to stop a contemptuous holder of too much power that elections can give them! Vote 'NO' on 6 May 2010 in Tower Hamlets, Vote ‘NO’ to 'mayor'

2355 [2320] Hrs GMT
London
Wednesday
28 April 2010.

By © Muhammad Haque.


“Mortified!” he said! “Penitent sinner” he feigned. But Gillian Duffy had already been assigned a minder! WE shall see and hear the consequences of THAT in the days to come! She was already ‘booked’ on a career that nothing could have prepared her for! In the hours, days, weeks and months that follow, we shall be witnessing in some detail the further unravelling of the ‘powerful politician’. But will this ‘cultural shock’ or ‘shock in the culture’ last? I suspect that it will not. Why Gordon Brown’s ‘private’ conversation in the chauffer-driven, aides-carrying limousine was AT ALL in the ‘news’ is of course to be seen in the true context: there is an election on. And every single ‘candidate' of whatever stature and seeking whatever slot of received legitimacy, is transformed into as near a truly [!!!] humble being as we are EVER likely to find them in society. And this is the problem with ‘democracy’. It is so peripheral to the rest of life, the rest of the year. Once the dictates of democracy – as manifest in the ritually organised elections - are terminated [as they will be after the scheduled poll results are consistently officially announced and acted on] the temporary ‘culture’ of almost civilised ‘discourse’ will be a thing of the past!
Gordon Brown was of course held to account by default. That instance of holding of the ‘most powerful man in the land’ to accountability [originally done on radio in front of world wide TV network cameras, many of those live] was not done by Brown’s volunteering to face the facts and tell the truth about his insulting and unbecoming behaviour. His ‘private’ psychology and the resulting sound byte as recorded by the BBC radio [and played on BBC Radio 2 as fronted by the very careerist Mr Jeremy Vine] would not be parts of the proceedings in the normal parts of the year. And there lies the problem with accountability. What happens to the rights, the entitlements and to the equality ‘provisions’ that are flaunted ['manifesto'-ed] by all manner of ‘in’ candidates at times such as these [‘powered by election’!] to ‘bigoted’ people who can only tell of their lives, as Gillian Duffy did? How do they survive the attitude of heightened arrogance as displayed by Gordon Brown? What would a powerful mayor in post after ‘elected legitimacy’ think of ordinary people in Tower Hamlets if the people expressed views that were based on their experiences, their feelings? What could an ordinary person in Tower Hamlets do to focus the appropriate attention on the ‘normal private attitude’ of an elected mayor who is so hypocritical, so out of touch, so full of contempt for ordinary humanity that they could put on the smile, utter the amicable words in public but would do the opposite when inside the protection, the fortified boundaries of their ‘power castle’? For a start, by the ordinary voters in Tower Hamlets VOTING ‘NO’ on 6 May 2010 on the ‘referendum’ about the future of the local Tower Hamlets Council

[To be continued]

What kind of society can we expect in Tower Hamlets after 6 May 2010? Coming here shortly, the first of a series looking at the 'elections'

What kind of society can we expect in Tower Hamlets after 6 May 2010? Coming here shortly, the first of a series looking at the 'elections'

Has George Galloway chnaged his mind about standing for mayor in Tower Hamlets?

Directly-elected mayor system found seriously dysfunctional, failing in Doncaster. A report published by 'Tribune magazine' web site

Contextual update of evidence:

QUOTE 0212 GMT 28 April 2010:

Doncaster taken under central control as Audit Commission condemns ‘dysfunctional’ council

Doncaster’s ‘dysfunctional’ council, run by English Democrat mayor Peter Davies, has been taken over by central government following a damning report

by Bernard Purcell
Friday, April 23rd, 2010
Troubled Doncaster Council was this week formally declared “failing and dysfunctional” by the Audit Commission. Communities Secretary John Denham immediately took it under central government control using powers under the 1999 Local Government Act to establish an emergency advisory board. He was granted special dispensation to act by the Cabinet Office even though, by convention, ministers do not take important or controversial decisions during general election campaigns. The Commission, whose job is to protect the public purse and ensure value, said Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council does not serve local people properly.

In 2003 it recommended urgent ministerial intervention for councils in Hull and Hackney, but this week’s recommendations are even more drastic. It said there was no prospect of any improvement in Doncaster council unless it was taken out of the hands of its warring mayor and councillors. The Audit Commission said the council’s in-fighting, bullying and political point-scoring meant local children are not properly protected.

The “pursuit of long-standing political antagonisms is given priority over much-needed improvements to services for the public”, the commission said. The council “will not improve without significant and sustained support from external bodies”, it added. It said the most vulnerable people in the community are ignored, schools are failing, crime rates increasing, and public spaces left filthy.

Councillors were described as “venomous, vicious and vindictive” and responsible for widespread “bullying and harassment” of council officers.

Mayor Peter Davies, 66, was elected last year on an “anti-EU, anti-political correctness” platform. He and his cabinet of three Conservative and three unaffiliated councillors were not up to the job, said the Commission.

The Commission condemned councillors for putting their “hatred of the mayor” before their responsibilities to local people and electors. The result has been poor schooling, poor housing, high crime and poor health and poor education. For instance, many local adults in the employment were too unhealthy and/or unskilled to find new jobs, said the Commission.

The majority Labour grouping, in turn, frustrated any attempt to get work done.

Mr Davies was elected last year after Doncaster’s first directly-elected mayor quit after falling out with the Labour group.

The council serves 291,000 people and has an annual budget of around £600 million. The inspection was ordered following the violent torture by two brothers, 11 and 12 years old, on two other children in Edlington, near Doncaster, South Yorkshire.

The Audit Commission team concluded that Doncaster Council children’s services department failed to meet minimum standards in nearly all areas for which it is responsible.

This failure was despite urgent Government intervention last year following the deaths of seven children known to the town’s children’s services department over a period of just three years.

An emergency advisory board will take urgent decisions and direct acting chief executive Jo Miller. Commissioners may be appointed by Mr Denham to take over some or all of the council’s functions.


UNQUOTE

CONTEXTUAL research materials: The state of Muslims in Western European cities

"
The state of Muslims in
Western European cities
Muslims in Europe – a report by the Open Society Institute*

22 March 2010: There are estimated to be 15 to 20 million Muslims living in the European Union (EU); this population is expected to double by 2025. Muslims in Europe are a diverse population of citizens, as well as newly arrived migrants. Most live in capital cities and large industrial towns. Though the majority of Muslims are a long-standing and integral part of the fabric of their cities, many experience discrimination and social and economic disadvantages. Muslims in Europe today are also under heightened suspicion and scrutiny.

| Identity | Discrimination | Interaction | Education | Communities | Labour | Health care | Hate crime | Integration | Local government | Methodology

This complex situation presents Europe with one of its greatest challenges: how to effectively ensure equal rights and social cohesion in a climate of political tension, economic uncertainty and rapidly expanding diversity, says the report Muslims in Europe by the Open Society Institute (OSI).

There is very little data available on Europe’s Muslim and minority populations. What does exist is extrapolated from ethnic and country-of-origin data, which provides a limited picture of the lives, experiences and needs of Muslims in Europe. The increasingly visible ethnic, religious and cultural diversity of Western Europe has triggered debates on social cohesion and integration. Muslims are often at the centre of these debates. Policies to support integration and promote cohesion are developed at the European, national and local levels. The EU defines integration as a two-way mutual process. The report Muslims in Europe focuses on public policies at city level, in the context of national and European interpretations of the concept of integration, and how they are played out in the everyday lives of Muslims and non-Muslims across Europe.

On the whole, people from different backgrounds in the 11 cities (Amsterdam, Antwerp, Berlin, Copenhagen, Hamburg, Leicester, London, Marseille, Paris, Rotterdam and Stockholm) studied by the Open Society Institute said they got along well together and were willing to help each other. Yet, though both Muslims and non-Muslims believed that similar values were an important part of belonging to a country, the majority did not believe that people in their own neighbourhoods shared similar values.

Identity
Muslims identified respect for religion as a more important national value than did non-Muslims. These results present a complex picture, suggesting that a sense of shared values is not as necessary for people from different backgrounds as trust and a willingness to help neighbours. For Muslims, feelings of belonging to their neighbourhood and city are stronger than belonging to the nation. For non-Muslims, national belonging is greater than (or the same as) city or community belonging. Half of Muslims who identified culturally with their country (i.e. saw themselves as Belgian, French, Dutch, etc.) did not feel that others viewed them in the same way. Cultural identification increased with integration in other areas such as employment and education. Muslims with a visible religious identity did not differ from other Muslims in their sense of cultural identification, belonging, or levels of trust.

Discrimination
The OSI research suggests that religious discrimination against Muslims remains a critical barrier to full and equal participation in society. The findings of this report are consistent with other research and suggest that levels of religious discrimination directed towards Muslims are widespread and have increased in the past five years. European-born Muslims, particularly women, were more likely to perceive higher levels of religious discrimination than Muslims born abroad. European-born Muslim men identify the police as a key source of unfair treatment and discrimination. For Muslims, the persistence of discrimination and prejudice affects their sense of national belonging.

Interaction
OSI reports significant levels of interaction between people from different backgrounds, with European-born Muslims reporting the most. Frequent contact occurred at work, schools, shops, in public spaces such as transport and parks, and (more surprisingly) in the home. The majority of European-born Muslim women (51 per cent) had frequent contact at home with people outside their ethnic group.

The results run contrary to the view that Muslims live parallel or segregated lives, or do not feel a sense of belonging or attachment to the city and country where they live. It suggests that discrimination remains an important barrier to belonging, but one that many are overcoming.

Education
The picture on educational attainment for minorities is mixed. In some countries, once socioeconomic background is taken into account, minorities are doing well. For some Muslims, religion plays an important role in supporting and encouraging education. Parental support, particularly in the early years, is also a strong predictor of future educational attainment. Across all cities, there is increasing recognition of the importance of pre-school education in ensuring that pupils from minority and other disadvantaged backgrounds do not start formal schooling under-prepared. There is also growing evidence that education systems which place pupils into different education streams too early are disadvantaging young people from minority groups, who need more time to develop the linguistic skills to excel in education.

A desire for more ethnically mixed schools emerged consistently and strongly in the focus group discussions involving Muslim parents across the different cities. Parents were anxious about the adverse impact of segregation on their children’s education and future prospects. Policymakers must find ways to overcome segregation, ways that result from a mixture of residential settlement patterns and parental and school choices. Some Muslim pupils continue to suffer racism and prejudice at schools and are confronted by low expectations from teachers. Teachers need appropriate training and support to ensure that they can be effective in classrooms that are increasingly diverse, both ethnically and religiously. At the local level, many schools are responding positively to the needs of Muslim pupils, finding imaginative ways to work positively with their cultural heritage.

Communities
The settlement patterns of the majority of Muslims in the 11 cities in the OSI survey reflect the nature of the migration process in their country. Workers and their families mostly settled in the poorer districts of large industrial cities. This geographical concentration produced networks of support and the development of goods and services to meet cultural needs.

The OSI survey, however, shows that most Muslims want to live in mixed communities, challenging the claims that the geographical concentration of Muslims reflects their desire to live among their own kind. Discrimination in housing confronts many Muslims and restricts their choices. Policymakers must find ways to maintain areas that are ethnically and religiously mixed, and to ensure that Muslims are able to choose where to live in a city unrestrained by discrimination and prejudice.

Labour
Muslims are not integrated into the mainstream labour market. They face higher unemployment rates and higher poverty rates than the general population. Those who are employed are often in marginal and low-paid jobs, this carries a greater risk of unemployment. Low-paid jobs also lead to segregated or parallel working lives. Human capital accounts for some of this disadvantage in employment. Other factors include the lack of social networks, knowledge about the labour market, and language fluency.

Some Muslims, particularly women who wear the veil, face penalties in the labour market based both on their ethnicity and their religion. Muslim women are also influenced by cultural preferences regarding family and childcare. Across the 11 cities, different measures are being taken to provide support for labour market participation; these include working with Muslim communities to ensure that advice and information reaches those who are furthest from the labour market. Some cities, as major employers, are taking steps to ensure that their workforce reflects the full diversity of the local population.

Health care
There are high levels of satisfaction in the health care that individuals receive. Reports of discrimination and unfair treatment are low and most respondents felt that doctors and health clinics respect the needs of people of different faiths. Nevertheless, accommodating the needs of Muslim patients – in particular, the provision of halal food and, where hospitals provide chaplaincy services, access to imams – remains an issue that needs to be addressed. The need for appropriate care services for first generation migrants who are growing older is an emerging issue of concern for many Muslims. Across the cities, there are examples of effective service delivery and provision that takes the cultural and religious needs of Muslims into account.

Hate crime
It is critical to ensure the accurate reporting and recording of hate crimes. The high levels of trust in the police provide a good base from which to develop initiatives to improve reporting. However, it needs to be recognised that these overall high levels of trust exist alongside low levels of trust among young European-born Muslim men, who experience the greatest amount of discrimination and unfair treatment at the hands of the police. The situation in Marseille suggests that over time, even the most complex and fraught relations between the community and the police can improve. Some cities are developing imaginative ways to improve engagement with communities, as well as effective strategies for recruiting and retaining police officers from minority communities.

Integration
The OSI report Muslims in Europe points towards some encouraging trends, as well as the persistent challenge to ensure political and civic participation for Muslims. Many Muslims who are not EU citizens remain disenfranchised, particularly in Germany and France, where they do not have the right to vote in local elections (even though many are long-term residents).

Those who vote are more likely to feel that they can effect change in their city than those who do not. However, Muslim voters remain less likely than non-Muslim voters to feel that they can influence decisions affecting their city. Young Muslims, with more education and familiarity with political institutions, have greater confidence in their ability to effect local change than the older generations. Muslims are active in mainstream political parties.

Parties based on ethnic and religious identity have not gained the support of Muslim voters. Increasing numbers of Muslims are standing for political office, but face additional scrutiny and questions because of their ethnic or religious background.

Local government
Muslims and non-Muslims share similar views in relation to their level of trust in the city council and government. Trust in local political institutions is higher than national institutions. The difference between Muslims and non-Muslims in their levels of trust in Parliament is significant and should be of concern.

The majority of Muslim and non-Muslim respondents are involved in mixed ethnic and religious organisations. The OSI research finds many positive initiatives taken by officials at the local level to engage with ethnic and religious organisations in their city. These initiatives may account for one striking finding from the OSI survey: respondents involved in same-ethnic/religion civic organisations are significantly more likely to trust their city councils than those involved in mixed organisations. In engaging with Muslim civil society organisations, policymakers and practitioners always need to ensure that they include women, young people, and others who may be marginalised by existing community organisations.

Methodology
The Open Society Institute’s At Home in Europe project is working to address issues through monitoring and advocacy activities that examine the position of Muslims and other minorities in Europe. One of the project’s key efforts is the series of reports on Muslim communities in the 11 EU cities of Amsterdam, Antwerp, Berlin, Copenhagen, Hamburg, Leicester, London, Marseille, Paris, Rotterdam, and Stockholm. The reports aim to increase understanding of the needs and aspirations of diverse Muslim communities by examining how public policies in selected cities have helped or hindered the political, social, and economic participation of Muslims. All 11 city reports, drafted by local experts, include detailed recommendations directed at specific local actors; these will form the basis for advocacy activities by the project and its partners. The overview report has recommendations at the international level that will touch all countries covered by the reports and be directed primarily at the European Union (EU) and other international organisations.
*The full OSI report Muslims in Europe including detailed recommendations can be obtained from: www.soros.org/initiatives/home


"

Another massive ‘NO’ vote to “an elected mayor” in an English borough. Contextually looking back at the Gloucester referendum 2001

Another massive ‘NO’ vote to “an elected mayor” in an English borough Contextually looking back at the Gloucester referendum 2001


"

we believe that local
Government must further empower residents to hold it to account and deliver better, more
personalized services. Alongside enhanced scrutiny powers for councillors, we are
introducing petitioning powers for local residents to demand action

"

The above quote is from the 2010 manifesto of the UK "Labour Party' published in April 2010

[Other Parties' manifesto texts will be contextually quoted in due course]



CHELTENHAM RESIDENTS SAY NO TO ELECTED MAYOR
3 July, 2001

Local residents have voted no to a directly elected mayor in Cheltenham BC's referendum. ...
Local residents have voted no to a directly elected mayor in Cheltenham BC's referendum.
The results are:
Yes: 8,083
No: 16,602
The council will now have an executive structure of a leader and cabinet selected from the existing councillors. The new structure will be operational in October.
It also means that the civic mayor will continue. Officers will now redraft the constitution to reflect the decision. It will include how we will form the overview, scrutiny and area committees.
Duncan Smith, deputy leader of the council, said: 'The people of Cheltenham have chosen to retain their civic mayor, and to have a leader and cabinet. We now have to work with the new constitution to make sure that it delivers the improvement in local services that we are seeking.
'The intention of the governments legislation is to improve democracy and participation in local elections. Having voted for this change, I hope that we will see more interest in the affairs of the borough council and that this will be reflected in an increased turnout at elections next year.'
Cheltenham BC is one of the first councils in the country to hold a referendum for an elected mayor. The consultation carried out by the council had not been conclusive. The only real way to test opinion was to hold a binding referendum. Other councils will be looking towards the results in Cheltenham and Gloucester to see if there is public support for an elected mayor.
Clive Lloyd, mayor of Cheltenham, said: 'I am delighted that the civic role has been retained. I will be honoured to continue to serve the borough and residents of Cheltenham.'
The turnout in the referendum was approximately 31 per cent. This is disappointing considering it was a full postal ballot. The council hopes the new structure will encourage local residents to become more involved in the work of the council by including more public question time, consultation and scrutiny of decisions.


.

Mayor disaster! Right here in East London today! One elected mayor keeps another elected mayor locked out!

"



Jules Pipe, Mayor of Hackney was left locked outside the gates of Dalston Junction station today as the first train on the newly-opened East London line set off. “Sadly, Boris didn’t invite anyone from the local authority,” Mr Pipe said. “I hope once this naked electioneering is finished, he will invite everyone who has actually had a hand in making this happen.”

Jules Pipe and his predecessors lobbied for the street level extension of the line as well as contributing towards getting £1bn of funding for the line.

Ken Livingstone, who was Mayor of London from June 2000 to May 2008, initiated TfL’s £1bn extension of the East London line, which was partly designed to boost transport capacity for the 2012 Olympic Games.

Boris Johnson, Mayor of London, refuted Mr Pipe’s claims however. “This is a completely non-political event,” he said. “I hope that people can appreciate the wonderful achievement that has been made today.

“We are not in the grubby business of electioneering. We are united in celebrating a titanic achievement by Transport for London.”

TfL commissioner Peter Hendy announced that the line had been completed “on budget and early”.

A “preview” service of the line will run from 7am to 8pm Monday to Friday. Full evening and weekend services will run from 23 May.



"

Ego! Ego! Ego! Here we go! Here we go! No no no! You can't go Mind t' ego IT must have the go! ‘Cos it is ‘a’ BoJo!

Ego! Ego! Ego!
Here we go!
Here we go!
No no no!
You can't go
Mind t' ego
IT must have the go!
‘Cos it is ‘a’ BoJo!

Extracted from BHANGEELAAR! The Rhyming section contributing to the Chorus of ‘NO’ vote on 6 May 2010 in Tower Hamlets
Editor © Muhammad Haque


[To be continued]


The FOLLOWING is a report from the eastlondonline.co.uk website today Tuesday 27 April 2010:


EXCLUSIVE:


East London Line opens but “I wasn’t invited” says Mayor of Hackney
Written by Emily Jupp Lead Stories, Transport Apr 27, 2010

Boris waves as he arrives on the first train at Dalston station this morning Photo: John Sturrock

Jules Pipe, Mayor of Hackney was left locked outside the gates of Dalston Junction station today as the first train on the newly-opened East London line set off. “Sadly, Boris didn’t invite anyone from the local authority,” Mr Pipe said. “I hope once this naked electioneering is finished, he will invite everyone who has actually had a hand in making this happen.”

Jules Pipe and his predecessors lobbied for the street level extension of the line as well as contributing towards getting £1bn of funding for the line.

Ken Livingstone, who was Mayor of London from June 2000 to May 2008, initiated TfL’s £1bn extension of the East London line, which was partly designed to boost transport capacity for the 2012 Olympic Games.

Boris Johnson, Mayor of London, refuted Mr Pipe’s claims however. “This is a completely non-political event,” he said. “I hope that people can appreciate the wonderful achievement that has been made today.

“We are not in the grubby business of electioneering. We are united in celebrating a titanic achievement by Transport for London.”

TfL commissioner Peter Hendy announced that the line had been completed “on budget and early”.

A “preview” service of the line will run from 7am to 8pm Monday to Friday. Full evening and weekend services will run from 23 May.

See our video for an interview with Jules Pipe.

Ego! Ego! Here we go! Here we go! No no no! You can't go Mind t' ego IT must have the go! ‘Cos it is ‘a’ BoJo!

1812 Hrs GMT


Ego! Ego!
Here we go!
Here we go!
No no no!
You can't go
Mind t' ego
IT must have the go!
‘Cos it is ‘a’ BoJo!
Extracted from BHANGEELAAR! The Rhyming section contributing to the Chorus of ‘NO’ vote on 6 May 2010 in Tower Hamlets


Editor © Muhammad Haque


"

Boris Johnson Brings Hackney To Civilisation

THE plan to civilise East London moves on apace as Mayor of London Boris Johnson on board a train on London Overground’s new East London route. Bozza’s at Dalston Junction Station, in Hackney, east London. There are dragons in East London. Big ones. And Asian dancers. Lithe ones. And to our foreign friends looking in, there is the Olympic Games. Travel light. Bring swords. Talk in rhymes…

"

East London electors are being urged by the campaign ‘Tower Hamlets Council Bhangeelaar! To vote ‘NO’ on 6 May 2010 to Ken Livingstone’s 'deals'

1605 [1555] Hrs GMT
London
Tuesday
27 April 2010.

Editor © Muhammad Haque.


East London electors are being urged by the campaign ‘Tower Hamlets Council Bhangeelaar! To vote ‘NO’ on 6 May 2010 to Ken Livingstone’s very own "ghastly, corrupting backroom deals" as part of which he is trying to impose 'an elected mayor' on our community! Contrary to the cheap slogans that he has been participating in in peddling to the ‘deprived people’ in Tower Hamlets, the imposition of an elected mayor with all that power can only cause harm to our community’s collective welfare and may set back by decades the long overdue process for the establishment of the much needed honesty, accountability, legitimacy and democracy on the local Council in Tower Hamlets in the East End of London.


[To be continued]



BHANGEELAAR! contextual commentary on Haringey London borough Council:

London
Tuesday
1620 Hrs GMT
27 April 2010

Editor © Muhammad Haque




SOME myth making for the Lib Dems by an ignorant Independent newspaper. We refer to the texts for a paragraph containing an accurate summary on the record of the local Council in Haringey. No one is calling for an elected mayor as a way to solve those problems, many of which are very much as real in Tower Hamlets too:
Challenge for Lib Dems as memories of Iraq fade

Guy Keleny returns to the north London seat where he grew up to find political turmoil in the stolid Victorian suburbs

Tuesday, 27 April 2010

* Share

The Independent Close
o DiggDigg
o del.icio.usdel.icio.us
o FacebookFacebook
o RedditReddit
o GoogleGoogle
o Stumble UponStumble Upon
o FarkFark
o NewsvineNewsvine
o zYahooBuzz
o BeboBebo
o TwitterTwitter
o Independent MindsIndependent Minds
* Print
* Email
* Text Size
o Normal
o Large
o Extra Large

Guy Keleny with Lynne Featherstone, Liberal Democrat MP

TERI PENGILLEY

Guy Keleny with Lynne Featherstone, Liberal Democrat MP

* Photos enlarge

sponsored links:
Ads by Google

William Hill™ Online
Get The Best Odds Online,Plus A Free £25 Bet. Join Now!
www.WilliamHill.com/odds

Tory Party Manifesto
Find out what the Tory Partywould really mean for Britain
www.Labour.org.uk/ToryManifesto

Daily London Coupons
50-90% Off Top London SpasRestaurants & More. New Each Day!
www.Groupon.com/Sign-Up

A bright spring afternoon on Hornsey High Street. Sunshine and traffic fumes; pedestrians hurrying in and out of shops; solid, florid Victorian buildings. None more solid than the Three Compasses, one of those towering Victorian pubs you find all across inner suburban London. On the upper floor of the Three Compasses is the Liberal Democrat campaign headquarters, where Lynne Featherstone, MP for Hornsey and Wood Green, is defending the 2,395-vote majority she won over Labour in 2005.

Lynne and I are on the pavement outside. Lynne Featherstone talks nineteen to the dozen. Her hands weave arabesques in the air; smiles flit across her face; facts, figures and jokes crowd the ears of the listener. She is telling me about the follies of the local borough council, dominated by Labour for four decades; about funding for local schools; about the Government's assaults on civil liberties; about how Labour's policy failures threaten to close a local A&E department – "They're absolutely stark staring nuts."

A young woman approaches the MP. I expect some vigorous pavement politics. But, no, her intention is kindly. Lynne really ought not to leave her handbag unwatched behind her on the pavement. Not around here. Why, the woman's own son was assaulted on that very corner not long ago.

Featherstone, the accomplished campaigner, doesn't miss a beat. There will be no cliché headlines about urban street crime, not if she can help it. "It's very vibrant around here," she assures me, adding that things are not that bad at all.

The Hornsey and Wood Green constituency is the western half of Haringey. That borough has achieved an unenviable national fame for the failures of its social services to prevent the deaths of the children Victoria Climbié and Baby Peter. But those horrible events took place in Tottenham, at the eastern end of the borough. With Haringey, as with central London, the west end is the posh end.

It certainly is vibrant. For my return visit I drove into the constituency from the east. Around Turnpike Lane the shop-fronts say things like Paradise Halal Butchers and Afro-Caribbean Unisex Salon. Driving west towards Crouch End, you cross one of those sudden London frontiers between poverty and riches. In the space of a few yards it was all Prospero's bookshop and Walter Purkis and Son, High Class Fishmonger and Poulterer – looking for all the world as if it had been there for ever, though I don't remember it being there when I was a teenager.

In those days the area was solid, prosperous, a trifle dull – all right, very dull. Highgate, Stroud Green, Muswell Hill, Crouch End – the very names of the districts speak of the bourgeois respectability that had settled on the area when it was built up in Victorian times.

Today's cosmopolitan Crouch End with its restaurants and pavement cafés was 40 years in the future. This was a place you got away from to have fun. The Northern Line tube, the link to the West End, spoke to the adolescent heart with the same glamorous longings as inspired Dick Whittington when he heard the bells of London paused halfway up Highgate Hill, and turned back to find his destiny.

You could call it Middle London. The very western edge of the constituency takes in half of the very pretty Highgate village. The flat in Stanhope Road that I shared with my mother during the university vacations is in Crouch End ward. The house we lived in while I was at school is just the wrong side of Hornsey Lane, in the neighbouring People's Republic of Islington North, where they don't count the Labour votes, they weigh them. Hornsey and Wood Green provides a more interesting spectacle: the middle classes in genteel political ferment.

That has been the story of the constituency since it was created in 1983. Its first MP was Sir Hugh Rossi, a lawyer and a "One Nation" Tory. He retired in 1992. In that year's general election Hornsey and Wood Green was taken by Barbara Roche for Labour. Her support for the Iraq war did her no good in 2005, when she lost to Lynne Featherstone. Featherstone has voted strongly against ID cards and in favour of an Iraq inquiry.

Labour says Featherstone is now vulnerable. Featherstone denies it, pointing out that when she won the Commons seat it was at the third try, and her vote had increased each time. Now she squares up to Karen Jennings, the new Labour candidate. What strikes you is how similar the two women are: both baby-boomers; each the mother of two children.

Featherstone is rich but has never been idle. She had a career as a designer before going into politics. She proudly proclaims herself a "local girl". Jennings was not born here, but has lived locally for years. She is a former nurse and a union official. She comes across as quieter and more thoughtful, less concerned with local causes and more with national issues, genuinely horrified at the idea of a Tory government, keen to defend public services and to restore the good name of Parliament after the expenses scandal (which left Featherstone unsullied).

Jennings expects a close result: "Lynne Featherstone is locally a popular politician, so I think I've got to work hard". Featherstone sees no distinction between local and national issues: after the "disaster" of the expenses scandal "stickling up for local people is the only way politicians are going to regain people's trust".

I think Jennings would make a very good MP, but I don't see in her the touch of steel that makes Featherstone the formidable campaigner she is. But whichever of these two women wins on 6 May the people of Hornsey and Wood Green will have done themselves proud.

The person who is not going to win on 6 May, barring the biggest political upset since the fall of the Bastille, is Richard Merrin, the youngish Tory candidate. Last time, the Tories managed 12.8 per cent. But he gamely emphasises how warmly Sir Hugh Rossi is remembered locally, and enthuses about how all the recent immigrants are bursting with enterprise and hard work and make natural Tory voters. As the boss of a PR company specialising in technology, he muses about how this could turn out to be "the first election fought in cyberspace". He may not get into Parliament this time, but I think he represents the future of the Tory party.

Two things all the parties seem to agree on. One is that the ethnic communities live together harmoniously. One party worker remarked that this is probably the only place in the world where even Greek and Turkish Cypriots get on well together.

The other is that the electorate of Hornsey and Wood Green is very bright and highly political. "It's like a university constituency without the university," said one Labour party worker. And in this suburban reincarnation of the Petrograd Soviet, people actually go to meetings. Karen Jennings says: "People are engaging. I've not been turned away from a door yet. People are being very thoughtful about the future."

Some confirmation of all that came when I called at the house in Stanhope Road where I lived 40 or so years ago. The doorbell was answered by Sandip Patel, a captain in the Queen's Dragoon Guards. He has only lived there a year, but loves the area. He finds it fascinating too, because he read geography at university and did a study on gentrification.

So, what has the election meant to him? "A vastly huge number of leaflets through the door." He hasn't yet decided who he will vote for, but he definitely intends to vote. I seem to have stumbled upon the absolutely typical intelligent and politically aware voter of Hornsey and Wood Green.

Wistfully, I drove back through the Blackwall Tunnel to the leafy and deeply unvibrant Kentish outer suburbs. There, on 6 May, I shall confront a ballot paper with few "local girls", but prominently featuring Boris Johnson's little brother, parachuted in as Tory candidate for Orpington. Take me back to dear old Hornsey.

We SAY ‘NO’ to Ken Livingstone’s very own "ghastly, corrupting backroom deals" as part of which he is trying to impose 'an elected mayor'....

1344 Hrs GMT
London
Tuesday
27 April 2010

Editor © Muhammad Haque

“Ghastly backroom deals”

Ken Livingstone made a statement on video that was shown as part of the ‘news’ item promoting the 'YES' ballot after the stunt performed by Livingstone’s appearance at the Brady Centre on 6 February 2010.

In that statement, Livingstone referred to “ghastly backroom deals” that were being organised in Tower Hamlets by an individual whom he named.

We shall name that individual in due course and in context.

For now, we are pressing on with the dissection of the lie that Ken Livingstone perpetrated on 6 February 2010 in relation to the ordinary people in the East End borough of Tower Hamlets.

BHANGEELAAR! Is examining that Channel S publication in full.

We are adding that dissection to our submission against Channel S to the UK regulator OFCOM before the matter is taken to the High Court about the corrupting role being played that channel against the welfare of the community and against the objectively verifiable entitlement to democratic representation of the whole population of the Borough regardless of ethnicity, religion or any other group identity.



We are doing so to show that Ken Livingstone was factually wrong. He was also guilty of insulting the entire ordinary East End community in the context of his appearance. As were his fellow utterer of the lies concerned.

We shall be conducing our examination online and shall be publishing our dramatic details as we get on.

This is to ensure that we are seen as doing and are actually practising one hundred percent transparency for the benefit of democracy in our community.

So first with the phrase “ghastly backroom deals”.

What “deals” is Ken Livingstone referring to there?

Had Livingstone been open and up front about HIS involvement in peddling the fantasy that having a directly elected mayor in the name of Tower Hamlets would bring an end to what he was suggesting and implying in that phrase?

Who did he communicate with and how was the subject bright to his attention, assuming that it hadn’t been his idea from the start to foist the idea of a referendum upon our borough?

[To be continued]

WE SAY NO to ken Livingstoen's bvery own

1344 Hrs GMT
London
Tuesday
27 April 2010

Editor © Muhammad Haque

“Ghastly backroom deals”

Ken Livingstone made a statement on video that was shown as part of the ‘news’ item promoting the 'YES' ballot after the stunt performed by Livingstone’s appearance at the Brady Centre on 6 February 2010.

In that statement, Livingstone referred to “ghastly backroom deals” that were being organised in Tower Hamlets by an individual whom he named.

We shall name that individual in due course and in context.

For now, we are pressing on with the dissection of the lie that Ken Livingstone perpetrated on 6 February 2010 in relation to the ordinary people in the East End borough of Tower Hamlets.

BHANGEELAAR! Is examining that Channel S publication in full.

We are adding that dissection to our submission against Channel S to the UK regulator OFCOM before the matter is taken to the High Court about the corrupting role being played that channel against the welfare of the community and against the objectively verifiable entitlement to democratic representation of the whole population of the Borough regardless of ethnicity, religion or any other group identity.



We are doing so to show that Ken Livingstone was factually wrong. He was also guilty of insulting the entire ordinary East End community in the context of his appearance. As were his fellow utterer of the lies concerned.

We shall be conducing our examination online and shall be publishing our dramatic details as we get on.

This is to ensure that we are seen as doing and are actually practising one hundred percent transparency for the benefit of democracy in our community.

So first with the phrase “ghastly backroom deals”.

What “deals” is Ken Livingstone referring to there?

Had Livingstone been open and up front about HIS involvement in peddling the fantasy that having a directly elected mayor in the name of Tower Hamlets would bring an end to what he was suggesting and implying in that phrase?

Who did he communicate with and how was the subject bright to his attention, assuming that it hadn’t been his idea from the start to foist the idea of a referendum upon our borough?

[To be continued]

Why had Ken Livingstone hid the fact that Lewisham’s elected mayor Bullock had been a long-standing chum of his?

0840 Hrs GMT
London
Tuesday
27 April 2010

Editor © Muhammad Haque


“He first came to London to work for the GLC and was at County Hall for 10 years until its abolition in 1986. For part of that time,
he was Ken Livingstone’s policy assistant and played a key role in developing the ‘Fares Fair’ scheme. He was later Chief Officer of Greenwich Community Health Council. After giving up the LBL Leadership Steve established the Civic Skills consultancy and later worked as a consultant and trainer with the Capita Group.”



The SERIOUS link with Lewisham's 'elected mayor' that Ken Livingstone did not tell his 'adoring fans' [!!!!??????] about!

What was that link?

That Steve Bullock, one of the three mayors whom Ken Livingstone favourably mentioned by office in his spiel delivered at the Brady Centre, Hanbury Street, on 6 February 2010 where Livingstone was introduced as the most important living being ever to walk on planet earth, was, in fact, a ‘policy assistant’ to none other than Ken Livingstone himself dating back to the 1980s at the Greedier Livingstone Conurbation [=GLC] !

That spiel therefore contained a serious lie in that particular.

How?

Because Livingstone and his entourage cobbled together to snatch away the fragile framework of local democracy and to totally demolish it, were floating the three boroughs of Newham, Hackney and Lewisham as some sort of ‘model’ boroughs on the sole ground that those boroughs had had ‘elected mayors’ in them.

The motive and the purpose behind the reference to those three boroughs in their OTT-hyped ‘launch of the YES’ ballot propaganda, could only have been to give the impression to the target audiences both present [whether there voluntarily or brought there under any number of false pretences] at the Brady Centre itself and those watching on the identifiable ethnicity linked satellite TV channels whose controlling elements must have given Livingstone and his operational acolytes the assurance that they would carry that promotion in detail in the subsequent ‘news’ ‘bulletins’.

The objective was to mislead the people into voting YES [ later confirmed to be scheduled to be held on 6 May 2010] on the referendum on the question of a directly elected mayor in Tower Hamlets.

AS IS HIS PROPENSITY, Ken Livingstone has counted Steve Bullock as one of the permanent fixtures on the list of ‘progressive’ signatories to OPERATION Ken Livingstone’s CAREER MAINTENANCE!
And how long has that been going on for?

As long as it has been since April 1986 when the “GLC” was officially closed and the ‘County Hall’ in London SE1 declared ‘Ken Livingstone’-free!

And when was Steve Bullock one of the signatories to another ‘progressive’ plea to voters of London to ‘re-elect’ Ken Livingstone as a mayor?

Why in the Guardian in 2008, of course!

So shouldn’t Ken Livingstone have declared that as part of the ‘reason’ for his flaunting of the ‘fact’ that in Lewisham they had a directly elected mayor?

That he did not do that was not just a slip. Not a minor error. But part of a calculated ploy of disinformation and lying in order to mislead the voters of Tower Hamlets into the undemocratic trap of voting in an anti-democratic post and its occupant who has the potential of turning the already volatile situation in the borough into a really intractable social and political cauldron.

Not really ‘liberating’ the people of Tower Hamlets from an “undemocratic, corrupt cabal controlling Tower Hamlets Council”, is it?

[To be continued]

We shall publish another world exclusive - about the relevant background of one of Ken Livingstone’s 'model mayors'. Here later today, Tuesday .....

0618 Hrs GMT
London
Tuesday
27 April 2010

Editor © Muhammad Haque


We shall publish another world exclusive - about the relevant background of one of Ken Livingstone’s 'model mayors'.

Here later today, Tuesday 27 April 2010

Do outsiders to the borough have the right to gang up and arrive at the Brady Centre to stage their bid to hijack 'our' 'local' Council?

0055 Hrs GMT
London
Tuesday
27 April 2010


Editor © Muhammad Haque


Do outsiders to the borough have the right to gang up and arrive at the Brady Centre to stage their bid to hijack 'our' 'local' Council?

[To be continued]

Show us what you know! Calling all connoisseurs of campaign information!

2258 Hrs GMT
London
Monday
26 April 2010

Editor © Muhammad Haque

BHANGEELAAR! The “Vote 'NO' on in Tower Hamlets on 6 May 2010 CAMPAIGN” is asking for information about the role being played by 'ethnicity linked' 'newspapers' and 'TV channels' on the 'referendum’ on the future constitution of the Council: should it have a directly elected mayor with executive exclusive powers or should the Council have no such post and no such postholder? We are asking those who OPPOSE a executive mayor system to send us the following information:

1. Any statements made by the ‘NO’ campaign. If you have seen or heard any such statement, please let us have a copy of it. If in print or in hand written form or in a video or audio formats [in whatever detail as long ass the integrity of the material is not tampered with in any ay at all], we would like to have it.
2. Have you seen any photograph, film footage in any ‘newspaper’, leaflet, advisement, and placard or on any video or TV channel of any person or persons making any statement or comment or being present in any event doing the promotion about either side of the argument? If so, please let us know.

We shall publish more guidance on what other information would be useful to our campaign in the remaining 9 days [including weekend] of the campaign before 6 May 2010.


[To be continued]

ADVISING ALL those who are 'following' events in Tower Hamlets: That meeting at the Brady Centre, Hanbury Street off Brick Lane was on 6 February 2010

1625 Hrs GMT London Monday 26 April 2010 Editor © Muhammad Haque


ADVISING ALL those who are 'following' events in Tower Hamlets: That meeting at the Brady Centre, Hanbury Street off Brick Lane London E1 was held on 6 February 2010.

[To be continued]

To make sure that Ken Livingstone cannot destroy the local community’s principle of a democratic, constitutional say .............

1050 Hrs GMT
London
Monday
26 April 2010
Editor © Muhammad Haque



To successfully stop Ken Livingstone from removing the principle of democratic say from the local community in Tower Hamlets we must expose the lies that he has been peddling. To do this, we need the records of what he has been saying.
Also we need the records of what others in league with Ken Livingstone have been saying on the matter too.
On 11 April 2010, a meeting was held at the Brady Centre in Hanbury Street. Speeches were made at that meeting.
One member of the Tower Hamlets Council’s current leadership, Lutfur Rahman, was stated to have made a speech asking for a YES vote.
Is this true?
Who was there that recalls the speech, if it was in fact made along the lines that have been reported to BHANGEELAAR?
Did you see, hear and record Lutfur Rahman’s speech at the Brady Centre on 11 April 2010?
What did he say? Did he say anything about the Tower Hamlets Council Labour Party Group?
Had there been a decision by that Group on the issue of the ‘referendum’ ‘about’ the future constitution of Tower Hamlets Council with specific reference to a "directly elected mayor"?
Was that decision in favour of a ‘NO’ vote?
If so, does that mean that members of the Tower Hamlets Council Labour Party Group are bound to stand by that decision?
Are members of the Tower Hamlets Council Labour Party Group allowed exemptions from obligation to follow that Group’s decisions? Has any otter member of that group heard what Lutfur Rahman actually aid at that Brady Centre meeting on 11 April 2010?

[To be continued]

BHANGEELAAR! Vote 'NO' on 6 May 2010 in Tower Hamlets Campaign brings the latest news about the backer of a 'YES' vote: Ken Livingstone

2200 [2145] Hrs GMT

London

Saturday

24 April 2010

Editor © Muhammad Haque

It is quite possible that Ken Livingstone will in the not too distant future find evidence that will convince him that he made another serious error by getting so fanatically involved in pushing for the abolition of local council democracy in Tower Hamlets altogether. He may find evidence that will convince him that it is unwise to take ordinary people for granted. Especially when Livingstone's own career-linked track record is overfilled with instances of irrational behaviour very seriously at odds with the basic requirements of decency and courtesy. Why are we saying this? We are saying this on the facts. The facts as broadcast by Channel S satellite TV of Livingstone’s adventurist appearance at the Brady Centre on 6 February 2010. The satellite channel is itself the subject of a detailed new complaint to OFCOM over the same events. So for that reason we are not at this moment commenting on the behaviour of Channel S itself. We are commenting on Ken Livingstone’s defiance of common decency and reasonability.

[More on this here in the next parts.]

BHANGEELAAR! Campaign for a NO Vote on 6 May 2010 brings this relevant item about the UK Conservative Party supporting blogger site is demanding explanations on Labour Party constitution. The call arises from a leaflet apparently published by George Galloway s group for Galloway to get elected in the parliamentary constituency of Poplar and Limehouse on 6 May 2010. The Con Party blogger site claims that the leaflet has a picture of Ken Livingstone standing next to George Galloway with Livingstone s left arm on Galloway s shoulder and the pair looking at ease with each other in the shot. The Conservative site carries a few questions for the Labour Party on membership rules etc etc. Will the Labour Party now expel Ken Livingstone for apparently endorsing George Galloway who is standing against a Labour Party candidate, Jim Fitzpatrick, they ask! Others deride both Livingstone and the Labour Party and dismiss both as heading downwards. The question for the people of Tower Hamlets is this: do we approve of an agenda that has been devised by someone as unreliable and opportunistic as Ken Livingstone? After all, it was the same Ken Livingstone who had on 6 February 2010 at a staged spiel delivered for an elected mayor in Tower Hamlets denounced the NO votes campaign as nothing more than the product of certain dubious outsiders not really belonging to the community in Tower Hamlets. Ken Livingstone of course told lies there on 6 February 2010. As he arrived in the Hanbury Street walking to enter the Brady Centre venue of the mysteriously assembled fan club, he knew that he was not welcome in the community. He was loudly booed. One account of the day s events in the Hanbury Street includes a claim that Ken Livingstone was pelted with a missile. AADHIKARonline has no evidence in substantiation of that particular one. What we did observe was the tension in the crowded spot around Ken Livingstone. He looked shaken but struggled to keep a smile on his face. No, he even raised his arm in an ambitious replay of the routine he must have fantasised about going back to the days gone by as if he were there receiving the warm welcome from his subjects !

[To be continued]

AADHIKARonline publishing the following texts from the Conservative Party supporting blog site purely as a supporting material forming part of the edveince

” Is Ken Livingstone backing George Galloway in Poplar and Limehouse against the official Labour candidate?

Voters in the newly-drawn Poplar and Limehouse constituency have no fewer than ten candidates from which to choose come polling day.

Among them is the excellent Conservative candidate, Tim Archer, the sitting Labour MP for Poplar and Canning Town, Jim Fitzpatrick, and the Respect MP for Bethnal Green and Bow, George Galloway.

Above is a leaflet that Galloway has been distributing in the constituency (click it to enlarge) and below I have zoomed in on one section of it.

Yes, pictured with Galloway there is Ken Livingstone, the former Labour London mayor, who is desperate to stand for Labour again against Boris Johnson in 2012.

Has he given George Galloway an endorsement? Is that passage in inverted commas a quote from him or Galloway?

If the answer to either of those questions is yes, then I cannot see how he can remain in the Labour Party.

If the answer to either of those questions is no, then Galloway should withdraw the leaflet immediately as it is misleading in the extreme. He is clearly implying that he has the support of Ken Livingstone.

Either way, answers are required.

Hat tip: Matt Woods

6.45pm update:

Elsewhere on Twitter, Mr Onions has the below excerpt from the leaflet of the Green candidate for Cambridge, Tony Juniper

Again, it would appear that either Ken Livingstone is endorsing a non-Labour candidate or the Green candidate is falsely claiming his support. Can anyone establish which is the case?

8pm update:

Ken Livingstone has just returned my call about these leaflets. He was very blasÈ about the whole issue, as you might have expected. Here's what he said:

"There's nothing new in this. At the 1989 European elections Lord Bethell used a picture with me on a leaflet. It must be my immense personal popularity; I think I'm on the leaflets of about three quarters of Labour candidates in London - they don't seek my permission, they just go up. If you stick a picture of me on your leaflet, it's not going to do you any harm. Of course, I'm supporting the Labour candidates everywhere, but it would be churlish of me to deny others the pleasure of looking at me. I wouldn't mind betting that lovely George Osborne's got a picture of me on his leaflets too."

Jonathan Isaby

Posted at 06:35 PM in Green Party, Lurching Left | Permalink

Reblog (0)

Comments

Matt Woods (CleethorpesRock) said...

Jonathan, it also appears that another twitter user has found Livingstone backing ANOTHER non-Labour candidate- this time the Green candidate in Cambridge.

http://twitpic.com/1i3uua

(Please update to main article if you wish)

Reply April 24, 2010 at 06:42 PM

SuperBlue said in reply to Matt Woods (CleethorpesRock)...

Thanks, Matt - this is quite hilarious, really.

Reply April 24, 2010 at 07:20 PM

Sally Roberts said in reply to Matt Woods (CleethorpesRock)...

This has given me quite a giggle!

Nice one Matt!!

Reply April 24, 2010 at 08:09 PM

Gary Farrimond said in reply to Matt Woods (CleethorpesRock)...

I wonder if this means he intends to defect or that he believes Labour are in for a deserved hiding.

Reply April 24, 2010 at 08:34 PM

SuperBlue said in reply to Gary Farrimond...

Hedging his bets, evidently;)

Reply April 24, 2010 at 09:20 PM

Gary Farrimond said in reply to SuperBlue...

Well if memory serves me right did he not have a pact with The Greens in the past when he was Mayor of London?

Like you say hedging his bets!

Reply April 24, 2010 at 09:38 PM

SuperBlue said in reply to Gary Farrimond...

˛ˇ

TypePad HTML Email

He was originally an "Independent" Mayor, having

defeated "Dobbin" to the title - before Labour welcomed him back.

Reply April 24, 2010 at 09:41 PM

Norm Brainer said...

I got that one through on the same day as the nice one from Tim Archer - the difference in quality is striking.

A nice bright one from Tim and a gruff looking galloway with dodgy fonts and lots of talk of wanna be working-class speak such as talking about the "East End".

Made me laugh that it had Ken on as if that would help him, but didn't make the connection that he wasn't labour!

Not sure why Tim uses an odd email address though.

Reply April 24, 2010 at 06:47 PM

Peter Thurgood said...

Looks like all the rats are hurrying to abandon Labour's sinking ship.

First it was Mandelson, trying to talk up and defend the Lib-Dems, and now it's the other slippery snake, Livingstone.

These people really make me sick. They care only for themselves and their own personal interests.

I just pray that the voters see through them and send them to where they belong.

Reply April 24, 2010 at 06:48 PM

SuperBlue said in reply to Peter Thurgood...

Return to Sender.

Reply April 24, 2010 at 07:04 PM

Norm Brainer said in reply to SuperBlue...

They've probably uniquely identified them all and would charge you for postage .. like Brown did on his begging letter.

Reply April 24, 2010 at 07:32 PM

Peter Thurgood said...

Return to Sender?

I think the rights on that one have been hijacked by Gordon haven't they, in his latest ridiculous wheeze, with his Elvis impersonator?

Reply April 24, 2010 at 07:09 PM

David Jack Smith said...

I see this site is moderated by someone who really doesn't like pointing out the obvious truth about a couple of odious haters of those folks who brought us the Old Testament.

How's that Mr Moderator? Still too controversial? How about some threads here on Mr Cleggs' past hysterical anti-Israel rants?

Reply April 24, 2010 at 07:11 PM

Ultimo Tiger said in reply to David Jack Smith...

What the hell are you going on about?

Reply April 24, 2010 at 07:42 PM

Ultimo Tiger said...

I think I'd rather have a picture of Gideon than Kenneth on my leaflets.........[sarcasm]But who am I to judge the mighty Livingstone's opinon?[/sarcasm]

Reply April 24, 2010 at 08:01 PM

eugene said...

Poplar and Limehouse...that is going to be an intesting result in that it is not easy to call...my gut feel is that 4 parties can take it. Maybe ConHome can do an article on it for us.

What is the word on the ground there?

Reply April 24, 2010 at 08:16 PM

Norm Brainer said in reply to eugene...

Although I live hear I don't really know the word on the street as you wouldn't want to go into poplar... but given with the redrawing, Conservatives weren't that far behind, there's Galloway splitting the Labour vote and Tim Archer is probably known as well as that labour guy who is MP (having done lots as a local councilor) then it should go to Conservatives - but who can tell!

Reply April 24, 2010 at 08:56 PM

Norm Brainer said in reply to Norm Brainer...

Whoops - odd typo there.

Reply April 24, 2010 at 08:56 PM

Steve Foley said...

I'm having a laugh too, that and the Elvis impersonator.

Reply April 24, 2010 at 08:34 PM

Chris Buckwell said...

Tim Archer - indeed an excellent candidate - and the Poplar and Limehouse CCA deserve victory on 6th May. Let the others "play" politics if they wish. Very good luck to Tim, and to all our candidates in the Tower Hamlets Borough elections.

Reply April 24, 2010 at 09:18 PM

Peter said...

By the way, there are currently no 'sitting' MPs, and George Galloway is no longer the MP for Bethnal Green and Bow.

Reply April 24, 2010 at 10:16 PM

Haringey: Baby P tragedy and the role played by each of the 'authority' 'personnel' again reinforces the need to urgently establish high standards

0825 [0812] [0758] Hrs GMT
London
Saturday
24 April 2010.

Editor © Muhammad Haque.


Haringey: Baby P tragedy and the role played by each of the 'authority' 'personnel' again reinforces the need to urgently establish the highest standards of scrutiny and accountability on local councils. The scrutiny to be conducted by rigorous and consistently objectively applied democratic and accountable persons. With an 'elected' 'executive' mayor, such rigorous scrutiny cannot be done. They are physically impossible, let alone being advisable as a ‘way forward’ for any local authority or equivalent power-wielding body, agency or ‘institution’ with crucial powers over the welfare, the safety and the lives of people, especially vulnerable people. So the first lesson of Haringey is to ensure that in Tower Hamlets, the slippage, the overlooking and the negligence do not exist. And to ensure that if there is any scope for these then that scope and any accompanying loopholes must be focussed on and dealt with thus guaranteeing, as far as humanly possible, that the lapses and failures CANNOT occur. VOTE 'NO' to an ‘executive’ ‘elected’ mayor on 6 May 2010 [To be continued]

That the Murdoch SUN can brag and boast about getting its 'readers' to force Ed Balls to sack Haringey Council’s Sharon Shoesmith is a confirmation, once again, of the URGENT need to have accountable local democracy in local Councils that actually follow ethical standards of the highest kind. Had Haringey have that kind and standard of democratic accountability there would be no room for an organ such as the SUN to barge in and brag. There would be FAR LESS chance of the tragedy of Baby P occurring.

[To be continued]

Vote 'NO' on 6 May 2010 to the bid to snatch away what democratic prospects remain in Tower Hamlets as far as the locally elected council is concerned

2330 Hrs GMT
London
Friday 23 April 2010.
Editor © Muhammad Haque.

AADHIKARonline backing BHANGEELAAR! campaign to make Tower Hamlets Council serve the local community in a democratic, accountable, ethical and legitimate way. In a way that makes the difference. Vote 'NO' on 6 May 2010 to the bid to snatch away what democratic prospects remain in Tower Hamlets as far as the locally elected council is concerned

[To be continued]


__________


http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/view/132182/Baby-P-boss-loses-job-battle-


BABY P BOSS LOSES JOB BATTLE

ABOVE: Sharon Shoesmith has been fired
24th April 2010 By Emma Wall
Your Shout ( 0 )
SHAMED Sharon Shoesmith lost an appeal against her sacking over the tragic death of Baby P yesterday.

But the former head of children’s services could still win compensation.

Shoesmith said she had been made a “political scapegoat” after 17-month-old Peter Connelly was tortured to death in August 2007.

GENERAL ELECTION 2010: NEWS, POLLS, MAPS, GAMES AND ANALYSIS...

She said her sacking by Children’s Secretary Ed Balls from Haringey Council, north London, was a “knee-jerk” reaction.

She lost her £130,000-a-year role in December 2008 amid mounting fury that Peter was left at home to die despite 60 visits from officials.

Mr Justice Foskett told the High Court yesterday the decision “cannot be questioned on grounds of unfairness”.

But he left the door open for Shoesmith, 57, to claim cash from her council bosses, adding: “I have not been satisfied that the procedures at Haringey gave the appearance of fairness.”

Peter’s mum Tracey Connelly, 28, her lover and their lodger were all jailed for their roles in his death.

Why we are campaigning for a 'NO' vote on 6 May 2010 in Tower Hamlets on the Question of an 'elected mayor' for the borough - Part 1

Why we are campaigning for a 'NO' vote on 6 May 2010 in Tower Hamlets on the Question of an 'elected mayor' for the borough - Part 1

1610 Hrs GMT
London
Friday
23 April 2010

By © Muhammad Haque
Organiser,
Tower Hamlets Council Bhangeelaar!
Vote ‘No’ to an elected mayor on 6 May 2010

What is motivating us to campaign for a 'NO' vote on 6 May 2010 in the 'referendum' about an elected mayor in Tower Hamlets?

Here is what I said on 6 February 2010.

We all belong to one community.

I said that we wanted a diverse, multicultural, multi-racial, multiethnic community to exist in Tower Hamlets. I said that we wanted a local council that genuinely represented the local people regardless of backgrounds. Whatever their backgrounds.

I said that we were backing the campaign for a constitutional framework that was conducive to the local democracy as measured by universal criteria and definitions.

I said this in front of the many people who were there with me saying NO to the bid for an elected mayor in Tower Hamlets.

Almost all the people I was with in that demonstration were resident in Tower Hamlets. A very small number might not be. But I knew a majority of them.

And when I looked across the Hanbury Street and saw some of the faces that I recognised as being from parts of Tower Hamlets.


This is why I had begun by saying that we were demonstrating for the same community to which both sides of the argument belonged.

[To be continued]