26 October 2010 4:19PM
Your latest blog reads as if you have been buying into the party bureaucrats. First the Peter Golds and the Tory group’s propaganda, now the line that would have made Harriet Harman very pleased with your service.
What about the records of the various place men and their women counterparts as councillors? Have you the necessary unfettered and objective access to the records IN OFFICE of those?
And are you as interested in examining those records, as you appear to be in retailing the various diktats and the sterile [or, to coin a phrase] Stalinist positions of the intimidating entities the ‘mainstream’ bureaucracies disguised as political parties.
It is on the basis of the evidential foundation that the campaign against an executive, "elected mayor in tower hamlets" came into being and is continuing. This pro-democratic campaign for a locally accountable local Council in Tower Hamlets represents the reality that the ordinary people are not convinced that Tower Hamlets Council is doing a good job.
Contrary to the various plugs being peddled for various individual councillors and their sidekicks and hangers on, the truth is that the mainstream bureaucracies are in the business of robbery of the remnants of democracy that are just about still visible.
As we have told you in previous comments, Abbas Uddin ‘Helal’ when claiming to be ‘opposed’ to the elected mayor system was involved in the setting up of a web site dated 9 February 2010, which then published a list of defects that an elected mayor system would bring. It was around that time that he was asked to state what the UK labour Party said about the system.
Abbas Uddin ’Helal’ replied that the “Party policy was to oppose the mayoral system”. When asked further to cite Party decision with date and location and occasion, he required extra time to provide the answers to those detailed questions. The campaign never received the details. The next thing we knew was that Abbas Uddin ‘Helal’ along with several other “Labour Party” councillors opposing the “mayoral system” were in the running to become the Party’s candidate to be the mayor themselves!
So who or what got them to feel so free from any obligation to explain to the community that they had changed their positions on the serious issue?
It could only have been the Harriet Harman-like Party bureaucrat.
The same applies to the Lib Dems and the Tories. Both those Parties were claiming that the elected mayor system would be a disastrous step backwards and that the Tower Hamlets community needed to stop any move to abandon the relatively democratic system of a Council made up of a leader with a cabinet answerable to the full list of councillors.
Then we found that neither the Lib Dems nor the Tories were really campaigning for a “No” vote at the 'referendum' not as fervently as they were doing fir their council candidates or parliamentary candidates.
All the evidence we have found shows that the three Parties secretly abandoned their part in the “NO” campaign.
That is why there is a staggering numerical discrepancy between the numbers of votes overall that the Parties’ parliamentary and council candidates polled and the votes cast for the “NO” box.
The figures speak for themselves. This is why we had been calling for months for a probe into the conduct of the referendum. And who is among our sources to lend undeniable veracity to that?
Why step forward none other than the very same Abbas Uddin “Helal’ himself who signed on 17 September 2010 'that dossier' which included an entire paragraph of allegations about wrongdoing, vote fraud over the same referendum.
At the end of September 2010, the ‘local’ “East London Advertiser" belatedly but accurately reflected the relevant abuses that had gone on by running the front-page splash “SCRAP THIS TAINTED BALLOT”. These facts show that you are not right to promote the line based on Party [whatever the Party is] bureaucrats’ agenda to continue to mislead and to misrepresent the local community.
No comments:
Post a Comment