Newham Power to Prosper Hub

Apologies for the lateness of this post — I’m well behind on social media updates — but I didn’t want to miss recording a very well‑attended and genuinely constructive meeting last month in Newham organised by Power to Proper.

I was there on behalf of Mayor Forhad Hussain, who had already met the organisation but was unable to attend this particular session. Fortunately, we were joined by Stephen Timms, our longstanding East Ham MP. It was a hot day, and Stephen was — true to form — the only person wearing a tie. Standards maintained.

One of the key issues raised was something that had initially caused a bit of confusion within the Council: “organisational homelessness.” Once explained, it made perfect sense. This wasn’t about individuals sleeping rough — it was about charities, community groups, and voluntary organisations who have no base, no office, and no centre from which to organise and deliver the vital services our residents rely on.

The discussion was frank and practical. I was able to confirm that the Mayor and Cabinet are committed to working with these organisations to identify and provide community spaces where possible. We all recognise that maintaining centres to a high standard — and ensuring they are run properly — requires resources. But we also know that the Council cannot solve every challenge alone. To meet our shared goals for Newham, we must work hand‑in‑hand with the voluntary sector.

This is an area I understand well, having spent nearly all of my working life in the voluntary sector. The passion, commitment, and resilience of these organisations is extraordinary — and helping them achieve stable, accessible spaces to operate from is not a luxury; it’s a necessity.

The meeting was a reminder of how much good can happen when local government and community organisations come together with honesty, ambition, and a shared purpose.

Newham Labour Mayoral Candidate Rokhsana Fiaz "Thank You" Party

This is a really lovely picture from Roksana's "thank you" party for supporters which took place last night at our campaign HQ in Canning Town.

Despite the cold and the snow the venue was packed out with happy and enthusiastic supporters from all parts of the Newham Labour movement family.  Rokhsana gave a well received speech on unity, determination and wanting not only a different style of politics in Newham but policies that make a difference. She had her Mum and Dad either side of her as well as nieces and nephews.

It was great to meet up and celebrate with the many colleagues and comrades who have long argued and campaigned for change in Newham politics and have now finally achieved their goal.

The overriding emphasis is now on getting Rokhsana and our Newham Labour Party Councillor candidates (I declare an interest) elected on May 3rd.

An an entirely unintended consequence of this whole Mayoral selection contest is that we will unite (99%) as a Party around Rokshana and now in Newham we are one step ahead since we have so many experienced and "battle hardened" campaigners.

It is going to be an interesting 6 weeks (until May 3 election)

Hat tip photo Muhammed Ravat (Colour splash added)

Getting fit with Labour (apart from eating chocolate cake)

Picture collage from yesterday's Labour campaign session in my ward, West Ham, with our MP, Lyn Brown (and Cara, her infamous Labour attack dog).

West Ham ward and the wider West Ham CLP are "safe" Labour seats but it is humbling how much support we get. It is also amazing the number of residents who tell us that they are Labour Party members. This does not mean that everything is perfect and I picked up as a local Councillor, casework from residents.

Also, I picked up loud and clear from a number of Party members and residents that they expect that there will be an open selection process for the next Labour candidate to be the Newham directly elected Mayor.

I am trying to record on my smart phone the number of "steps" that I do while campaigning but I forgot to check after we finished with coffee and yummy chocolate cake (thanks to Lyn) in the Sawmills cafe. I suspect that the consumption of cake outweighed the steps that morning but I had completed 7,036 steps by the end of the day (which included some other campaigning elsewhere in the borough).

So on balance I think it is still true to say "Go campaigning, Get fit with Labour". 

Newham mayor ‘trigger ballot’: GMB union says it followed the rules as it affiliates more branches locally

Check out former Guardian journalist, Dave Hill's website "OnLondon" about the latest twist in the Newham Mayoral Trigger saga. Leaving aside this important issue for the moment, what is happening with excessive trade union affiliation to local Labour Party's is a national issue which in my view threatens to completely destroy members democracy in the Party.

For whatever reason the GMB has recently decided to affiliate 26 branches to West Ham Labour Party. I understand that a similar number of GMB branches was also affiliated to East Ham.

What this will mean that it will be pointless for any local Labour Party wards or Branch to vote in future MP or other Trigger ballots since they will be completely outvoted. In West Ham there is only 10 branches. They will be completely swamped by the 26 GMB branches or maybe Unite or another union might affiliate say 50 branches? It only costs £6 for a trade union to affiliate each branch.

Also, it will be a complete waste of time in most Local Labour Parties for its members to turn up to its Annual General Meetings since they will be outvoted by trade union affiliates. This happened recently in the East Ham Labour Party AGM, when all positions and nominations were decided purely by GMB delegates.

I am strongly in favour of trade unions being involved in the Party but this makes us look at best ridiculous. The Labour Party is already in a mess and unless this issue is sorted it could even finish it off and destroy us.

This is a Labour Party issue and the party needs to urgently review its rules on affiliations.

"A London GMB official has explained why he believes his union followed correct procedures in the Labour Party process that led to the selection of Sir Robin Wales to seek a fifth term as Newham Mayor but which 47 party members in the borough have claimed contained many “procedural irregularities” that “made a material difference to the result”.

Gary Doolan, a GMB political officer, says his union was fully entitled to its four votes in the affirmative nomination or “trigger ballot” process, all of which backed Sir Robin going forward unopposed as Labour’s mayoral candidate for 2018, and that he suspects the challenge to it is largely the product of “old political battles” and “twitchiness” arising from local political circumstances. Sir Robin won the ballot, conducted between 25 October and 4 December last year, by 20 votes to 17.

In a sometimes strongly-worded letter sent to Labour’s governing national executive committee (NEC) in January, the 47 complainants listed three alleged “major failings” in in process, including the fact that some affiliated unions, the GMB among them, cast votes for each of their branches affiliated to Labour locally while others cast only a single vote no matter how many of their branches had affiliated.

They stated that “it is not our purpose, in general, to question the internal affairs of affiliates” but asserted: “It cannot be right that the NEC accepts this stark variation in practice within the franchise of the process,” which they attributed to “a different interpretation of the rules” brought about by “unclear” procedural guidance. The NEC declined their request for an inquiry to be held into the running of the process and some votes to be declared void or held in abeyance pending its outcome.

Doolan said his union correctly followed its own rules relating to all trigger ballot processes, which sitting MPs too must undergo. These include votes to which branches of the union become entitled when they affiliate to Labour CLPs being cast on their behalf by the London region rather than by the individual branches themselves.

Another locally-affiliated organisation, Newham Fabians, have been informed by the Fabians at national level that their procedure for deciding how to vote in the ballot breached the society’s own rules. The union Bectu, which had a branch affiliated in Newham at the time of the ballot (but which has since disaffiliated from Labour altogether), has said that no affiliation fee was paid in 2016.

Both Newham Fabians and the Bectu branch voted “yes” to Sir Robin going forward automatically. It is understood that the 47 complainants, who are drawn from both of Newham’s CLPs, West Ham and East Ham, are awaiting legal advice before deciding on their next move.

In January, the GMB increased the number of its London branches affiliated to Labour in Newham by more than 20 as part of what Doolan says is a new political strategy for increasing working class participation in grassroots politics across the capital and wholly unconnected to the dispute over the trigger ballot process. He wrote to West Ham CLP in mid-January listing 26 branches that wished to affiliate to it, enclosing a cheque for £156 to cover the required fees.

Many of the 26 branches are in workplaces outside Newham, including Barking, Bromley, Hendon, Woodford and the borough of Kensington and Chelsea, but Labour Party rules permit branches to affiliate to CLPs if a member of it is also party member who is “resident or registered as an elector within the constituency”.

The trigger ballot process allowed each of Labour’s 20 wards in Newham a single vote and 17 in all for affiliates. Two others unions cast more than one vote and four cast only one. Of the 20 wards, 9 voted “yes”to Sir Robin going forward automatically with 11 preferring the alternative, an open selection battle in which other hopefuls could have contested him for the nomination. The affiliates, comprising unions and other organisations, voted “yes” by 11 to 6.

The complainants’ letter to the NEC argued that “if trade union affiliates are allowed more than one vote, it presents a situation where trade union affiliates are able to affiliate as many branches as they want to any CLP, thereby completely out-voting party branches and the democratic expression of branch members’ wishes”.

OPINION: Community Links life-president Kevin Jenkins wonders how Newham can maintain services on a council tax freeze

This article was in last weeks local Newspaper, the "Newham Recorder". I have had no contact with Kevin about this but it would appear that this highly respected former senior Councillor shares some of my my concerns about the recent budget. 

"Once again the Mayor of Newham is recommending to Newham Council a budget which includes no increase in the Newham element of council tax - for the ninth year running, no additional precept for social care and saving of £80.08 million without cutting frontline services. I’m sure such a budget will be very popular with the electorates.

Probably much less popular will be my view, that perhaps the freeze on the council tax and not taking the opportunity to raise additional resources for social care is one freeze and one missed opportunity too many. I am conscious that I do not have view of the detailed data that the mayor and council have, my instincts are based on a combination of the data I can see, my year round observations and personal experiences. My key concerns

are:

1. Although this year’s budget proposals may retain the current frontline services, these frontline services are a lot less than they were three, four or five years ago, for example, there are a lot less youth clubs, holiday playschemes, advice services, more erratic street sweeping in residential roads, poorer quality and less used parks etc.

Similarly, although a frontline service is still there, if the essential criteria required to access the services is raised, fewer people will benefit from the services even though they are still there. More worryingly, over a period of time, services that were originally preventative become reactive due to the ever increasing access criteria, meaning that problems and issues are dealt with when they are much more deep rooted and much harder to resolve, costing more money to do than they would have done at a much earlier stage.

2. It’s always easier and more popular to cut the back office, however, the frontline services do need back office support. I fear that the back office services in Newham are creaking and may not be able to continue supporting the frontline due to the continuous cuts they are enduring.

3. Although the restructuring on the repayments of the council’s debt is welcome, the actual overall level of council debt (and growing) is concerning, especially in the medium to long term.

4. The most concerning, is the failure to take the opportunity of raising additional funds for social care. The level of real genuine need in Newham far outstrips the services available, which no restructuring or new ways of doing things will cure. These services which effect the most vulnerable in the borough need additional resources to deliver the quality of care that the people need and deserve.

Although I applaud the efforts of the Mayor and council to balance the books, there does come a time when you need to increase the pot rather than rearranging inadequate resources within the pot".

Newham mayor ‘trigger ballot’: union confirms that affiliation fee not paid

Check out Guardian Journalist, Dave Hill's blog.

A second organisation whose vote helped Newham mayor Sir Robin Wales go forward unopposed as Labour candidate for next year’s mayoral election in the borough has effectively substantiated a complaint by local party members about an aspect of the candidate selection process.

Inquiries by national officers of Bectu, the media and entertainment union, have concluded that a branch affiliated to Labour locally had not paid the required fee for 2016, the year the vote took place. In a letter to Labour’s governing National Executive Committee (NEC) sent in January, 47 Newham members had argued that the Bectu vote be declared void partly on those grounds.

Last month the national Fabian Society informed its Newham branch, which also voted “yes” to Sir Robin automatically becoming the candidate for 2018, had breached the society’s own rules for determining how votes in Labour affirmative nomination or “trigger ballots” should be cast.

Sir Robin won the trigger ballot by 20 votes to 17 in a process held in the latter months of last year, in which ward branches of Newham’s two constituency Labour parties (CLPs) and local branches of national organisations affiliated to Labour participated. Bectu, which says its head office had no involvement with the Newham ballot, has since become a sector of another union, Prospect, and disaffiliated from Labour. The union has informed On London that no local affiliation fee was paid by the Newham branch delegate and that it was not invoiced for it.

The Bectu and Fabian trigger ballot votes were among seven of the 20 “yes” votes cast which the 47 Newham party members, who include ten Labour councillors, asked the NEC to either hold in abeyance or declare void. Their 13-page letter further claimed that there were “many failures of process/propriety and procedural irregularities” in the trigger ballot process as a whole and that these had made “a material difference to the result”.

At a meeting held last month the NEC did not take up the 47 members’ request that it hold in inquiry into the overall process. Labour general secretary Iain McNicol told one Newham member in an email that the issue had been “raised very briefly” but that there was “no discussion about pausing or changing the result” and that two NEC members had agreed to visit Newham and speak to party members there about what lessons could be learned for the future.

A date for the visit is understood to have been set for 21 February, but no meeting has taken place, apparently due to a difference of view over whether party members who were satisfied with the process and its outcome should be present along with those who are unhappy about them. Labour’s London region has previously stated that “the process in Newham was carried out in line with established rules and procedures”. Signatories of the letter to the NEC are considering their options for further action.

Newham is exceptional in that all 60 of its borough councillors are Labour. Sir Robin is now set to seek a fifth consecutive term as mayor, having won the inaugural mayoral context in 2002. Some councillors and other members believe his incumbency has been too long and that his command of the Town Hall’s workings make it difficult to scrutinise or place appropriate checks and balances on him. However, the signatories to the NEC letter said they would support him his candidacy for 2018 if they regarded it as obtained “as a result of an open and fair re-selection process”.

Contact On London via davehillonlondon@gmail.com.

Labour NEC asked to inquire into Newham mayoral 'trigger ballot'

On the whole a fair article but it does not report on the complaints of many members that this ballot was rigged.

The Guardian Dave Hill on London "Nearly 50 party members in the east London borough want their national ruling body to examine claims that the process for reselecting Sir Robin Wales was flawed

Labour Party members in Newham unhappy with the “affirmative nomination” process that saw the borough’s directly-elected mayor Sir Robin Wales declared the narrow winner of a “trigger ballot” to decide whether he should automatically go forward as their party’s mayoral candidate next year have sent a 13-page letter to Labour’s national executive Committee (NEC) asking it to establish a “full inquiry” into what it claims were “many failures of process/propriety and procedural irregularities” that took place on the way to the outcome and to halt the confirmation of Sir Robin as 2018 candidate until such an inquiry is complete.

Signed by 47 members of the east London borough’s two constituency Labour parties (CLPs), including ten Newham councillors, the letter sets out at length its case that “a number of [individual] ballots should be declared void or held in abeyance” and that the conduct of the process, which ran from 25 October to 4 December 2016, “made a material difference to the result”, tipping it in favour of Sir Robin by 20 votes to 17.

The trigger ballot offered a two-way choice between voting “yes” to Sir Robin being re-selected unchallenged as his party’s candidate for the next mayoral election to seek fifth consecutive term in a post he first won in its inaugural year of 2002, and voting “no” to that so that an open contest to become the candidate would be held instead.

Each of the 20 electoral ward Labour branches in Newham’s two CLPs, East Ham and West Ham, had one vote in the ballot and a further 17 votes were cast by Labour-affiliated organisations, most of them trade unions. Of the 20 wards, 11 voted “no”, meaning they favoured an open selection contest. However, 11 “yes” votes were cast by the 17 affiliates, which got Sir Robin over the finish line.

The letter to Labour’s NEC raises what it calls “three major failings” in the running of the ballot process, concerning the differing numbers of votes cast by different unions “because of a different interpretation of the rules”, the conduct of individual balloting and “conflicts of interest between the different roles of those charged with the management of the process”.

The results as published show that the GMB union cast four votes, the CWUand Unite two, while the four other unions involved – TSSA, BECTU, USDAW and Unison - cast one each. All four GMB votes were “yes” to Sir Robin going forward automatically. Two of the CWU’s votes were “yes” and the third was “no”. Other “yes” votes came from USDAW, BECTU and TSSA. Both Unite votes were for the “no” side, as was Unison’s.

The letter asks that the single votes of two other affiliated organisations “be held in abeyance and not counted”, including that of Newham Fabians which voted “yes”. The Fabian Society nationally has confirmed that it is still “seeking further information” from its Newham branch and has received “a number of complaints” that the correct trigger ballot procedure was not followed. The NEC is also requested to look into the way three of the ward “yes” votes were arrived at. Two of these wards reached their decision on the strength of a majority of just one member.

A source close to Sir Robin has denied that the ballot process or its outcome are questionable and a spokesperson for the London Labour Party said: “The Labour Party does not comment on internal selections but the process in Newham was carried out in line with established rules and procedures.” The national Labour Party has not responded to a request to confirm that the NEC has received the letter and whether it will be addressing the matter. The next full meeting of the NEC is on Tuesday.

Newham is exceptional in that all 60 of its councillors as well as its mayor are Labour, leading to jokes by other London politicians about the borough becoming a one-party state, but also to complaints among some local members that Sir Robin has been in the job too long and become difficult to hold to account. However, the letter says that if he is confirmed as the 2018 candidate “as a result of an open and fair re-selection process, we and other members would all support (in full and without equivocation) his candidacy”.

"Protest over Newham mayoral election result"

The report below is from this weeks Newham Recorder about the lively but peaceful protest outside the Mayor's Christmas Party at Stratford Town Hall. I stopped and spoke to the protesters about why they were there and what they thought should happen. They said they were outraged at what they see as a "fraudulent" and "rigged" election process. I knew many of the 30 protesters who come from all parts of Party. Most were long standing party loyalists. I tried to reassure them that the Labour Party would investigate their complaints fairly and properly. 

"Campaigners protested outside a council party last night to voice their anger following the reselection of Sir Robin Wales as the Labour candidate for the 2018 Mayor of Newham election.

The action was staged on the steps of the Old Town Hall, Stratford, where Sir Robin and councillors were gathered on Thursday.

About 30 people stood in the street calling on Sir Robin to consider his position and allow other candidates to be involved in an open selection process.

Tahir Mirza, Labour party secretary for Little Ilford, said: “I joined this protest because Robin Wales has lost the confidence of the members.

“He lost 11 wards and just won nine. He has split the party. It’s very important to go to open selection.”

Protesters also expressed their anger after the votes of affiliate organisations swung the ballot in Sir Robin’s favour, with claims some voted even though they had failed to pay their affiliation fees to the party.

“The idea affiliate organisations which haven’t met in years can have such a big part in democracy in Newham is shocking,” Stuart said.

The group want Sir Robin to recognise a concern among Labour members and residents that by holding out he is damaging the party.

Standing out in the cold, they made an appeal to the mayor’s sense of fairness to allow an open process, calling on him to stand on his record alongside other candidates.

“He should step down to ensure an open selection takes place,” Tahir said.

“Any irregularities are going to be damaging to the Labour party. It seems like he’s the one who’s going to divide the party.

“He should’ve come along. He knows he has lost the confidence of our members.”

But a steadfast Sir Robin remained inside the town hall throughout the protest, refusing to answer his antagonists’ calls to join them.

And Stuart, 46, asked: “What’s he afraid of?”

A Newham Labour Party spokesperson was approached for comment by the Recorder but declined to make a statement".

Second affiliate says it is checking Newham mayoral vote

Check out latest report in the "Newham Recorder". Tonight at my Councillor surgery I had angry and upset residents coming to see me about what they believe to be a "rigged" Mayoral trigger ballot. 

"A second affiliate organisation has confirmed that enquiries are being made about its voting process following Sir Robin Wales’ reselection in the Mayor of Newham 2018 election.

TSSA (Transport Salaried Staffs’ Association) voted “yes” to keep Sir Robin Wales as Labour’s candidate for the mayor in the recent trigger ballot process held across Newham.

However, a source close to the transport union told the Recorder: “A complaint has been made to TSSA that a TSSA branch may have voted in East Ham Constituency Labour Party without the necessary affiliation requirements being in place.

“TSSA will now conduct an inquiry into the matter and report any irregularities to the relevant authorities should it prove necessary.”

A spokeswoman for TSSA confirmed enquiries were underway but didn’t wish to comment further.

The Recorder has been informed that the complaint made concerns about the eligibility of the TSSA branch in Newham.

It is allegedly not allowed to vote because the annual application fee for 2016 has not been paid and the executive branch was not officially informed of a vote taking place.

The controversy follows the Fabian Society’s acknowledgement last week that it is “seeking further information” about its vote.

Members complained a “yes” vote had proceeded despite the society’s Newham branch not having met for four years.

Sir Robin Wales’ victory in the trigger ballot centered on affiliated organisations – comprising trade unions and socialist societies – which voted 11 to 6 in favour of keeping him.

In contrast, 11 out of 20 Labour wards voted for a choice of entrants.

A spokesperson for Trigger Democracy, which campaigned for an open selection process, said “this is now the second affiliate vote that appeals to be unravelling under scrutiny”.

They said: “The mayor ignored the democratic will of members in favour of these votes from affiliates which are now being called into question.”

A representative for Sir Robin Wales was approached for comment but declined to say anything.

Newham Mayor Candidate - Why we need a leader to make a hard decision

I must admit that I agree with much (but not all) of the angry polemic below by Newham @triggerdemocracy. I too have been overwhelmed by complaints by local Party members about what has gone on and will support the call for a proper and independent enquiry into the many allegations of criminal forgery and deception about the affiliate vote.

However, I do think that the Party is hopeless split and divided and that the only way to unite the Party is for the current Mayor to be a leader and agree to put himself through an open selection process. 

I genuinely fear for the Party locally if this is not done. Party unity is key and the only way I think this can now be achieved is if the Labour Mayoral candidate is elected by one member, one vote. 

Unknown undemocratic affiliates

"Robin Wales has no mandate from Labour members for an automatic 5th term as Mayor of Newham. He is ignoring the will of party members in favour of nominations made by unknown and undemocratic affiliates. Labour members in Newham call on Robin Wales to agree to an open and democratic selection to choose Labour’s candidate for Mayor.

Full results – below

Newham’s Local Campaign forum sat in a small room and quietly announced to themselves that Robin Wales has been re-selected as Labour’s candidate for 2018 with 20 branches/affiliates voting Yes and 17 No.

The results demonstrate Robin Wales has no mandate for an automatic 5th term from Labour members in Newham. He is claiming a technical victory made up of unknown and undemocratic affiliates. Members went to their meetings in good faith and voted for what they believed was best for Labour and Newham. We call on Robin Wales to listen to them and to agree to an open selection, that would include himself, which would result in a  democratically selected Labour candidate for Mayor of Newham that everyone in the party would support.

Below is a breakdown of the votes. Remember, the question was “Do you want to reselect Robin Wales”. Labour members overwhelmingly voted for an open re-selection (by voting No), but more affiliates, most of which aren’t made up of members but have an equivalent weighting to a branch, returned nominations to automatically re-select Robin Wales (voting Yes).

Wards (11 No and 9 Yes)

Of the 20 ward branches in Newham –  11 voted No, for an open selection, and 9 voted Yes (full list at end).
775 Newham Labour members went to their ward meeting – 424 voted No and 351 voted Yes – so No won by a majority of 73 votes.

Affiliates (6 Yes and 11 No)

1) Co-op Party – No (37 voted No and 36 Yes, many Co-op members are also Labour party members so this was a 2nd or even 3rd vote for many)

2) Women’s Forum – No (46 voted No and 36 voted Yes, all Women’s Forum members are members of the Labour party so this was a 2nd or 3rd vote for many)

3) Newham Fabians – Yes (members state they were not invited to a meeting so it’s not clear how this nomination was made)

4) Christians on the Left – Yes (members were invited to a discussion on ‘Working with Faith Groups’ which had a ‘we will also canvass opinion on the Mayoral Trigger Ballot’ as an aside. They returned a Yes vote)

5) CWU – No (no meeting of members)
6) NAHT – No (no meeting of members)
7) UNISON No (no meeting of members)
8) Unite – No (no meeting of members)
9) GMB Yes (no meeting of members)
10) GMB Yes (no meeting of members)
11) GMB Yes (no meeting of members)
12 BECTU Yes (no meeting of members)
13) CWU  Yes (no meeting of members)
14) CWU Yes (no meeting of members)
15) USDAW Yes (no meeting of members)
16) TSSA Yes (no meeting of members)
17) GMB Yes (no meeting of members)

Some unions have more than one vote as they have more than one branch affiliated.

Ward branch results:
Beckton: Yes (Yes 16, No 3)
Boleyn: No (Yes 3, No 36)
Canning Town North: No (Yes 17, No 21)
Canning Town South: No (Yes 6, No 8)
Custom House: Yes (Yes 7, No 6)
East Ham Central: No (Yes 29, No 31)
East Ham North: No (Yes 20, No 23)
East Ham South: Yes (Yes 26, No 8)
Forest Gate North: No (Yes 13, No 30)
Forest Gate South: Yes (Yes 34, No 21)
Green Street East: No (Yes 5, No 32)
Green Street West: Yes (Yes 36, No 32)
Little Ilford: No (Yes 23, No 36)
Manor Park: Yes (Yes 29, No 28 (recount first was 30/30))
Plaistow North: No (Yes 27, No 17)
Plaistow South: No (Yes 12, No 19)
Royal Docks Yes (Yes 11, No 1)
Stratford & New Town: No (Yes 11, No 34)
Wall End Yes (Yes 20, No 18)
West Ham: No (Yes 8, No 20)

It has been nearly 15 years since Labour members last got to choose who they wanted to be Newham’s Mayor. 11 wards have now voted FOR an open selection.

Dear Robin (time to say goodbye or face an open election)

Dear Robin,

The results of the Mayoral Trigger Ballot have already shown that the Labour Party in Newham is deeply divided over the question of your automatic re-selection as mayoral candidate for the election of 2018. The majority of members taking part in the Trigger Ballot have voted ‘No’, including 10 wards, which is a resounding vote for democracy and shows that the party does not support your sole candidacy. The party wants an open and democratic selection process to commence immediately.

We request that, if you wish to continue to seek the nomination, you agree to take part in an open selection contest. This competition will be open to any member of the Labour Party in Newham, including ourselves which would produce a result that will be accepted by all members. 

We believe that a contested selection will unify the local party as all members will be involved, whether the winner will be yourself or someone else. We propose that the terms for the election be one member one vote (OMOV). Newham Labour Party members clearly want an open process, so we should replicate the process adopted for the selection of the Labour candidate for London Mayor.

We therefore call upon you to accept an open selection process, conducted under the terms of OMOV, so that the wishes of the party members can be clearly heard and the result accepted by all. In this way, the Labour Party in Newham will be able to pursue its mission of serving the community and improving the lives of all the residents of this borough.

Yours sincerely,

Cllr Kay Scoresby & Cllr John Whitworth

Councillor says Newham mayoral trigger ballot process is ‘neck and neck’

Check out reporter Kat Hopps latest from the Newham Recorder

"Campaigners from opposing sides of the Labour candidate Mayor of Newham 2018 election process say they are confident of winning.

Sir Robin Wales has so far won nine trigger ballots and lost three in votes which took place in wards across the borough this
week.

However, Cllr John Gray, who is campaigning for Labour members to vote “no” in the ballots – in order to give other candidates the chance to run rather than Sir Robin being automatically selected – said the “close” results had already caused an “earthquake”.

He said: “It is neck and neck because the wards that were always more likely to vote yes were held this week.

“The wards that are more likely to vote no are more likely to vote next week.

He added: “There is already an earthquake in Newham politics and there has never been a challenge like this in Newham wards.”

The wards that have voted “yes” to keeping Sir Robin as the party’s candidate are Beckton, Custom House, East Ham South, Forest Gate South, Green Street West, Plaistow North, Royal Docks, Wall End and Manor Park after a initial tie led to the vote being re-run.

Wards that have voted no are Canning Town, East Ham North and Forest Gate North. A further 12 affiliated organisations are also in the process of voting and have yet to declare.

So far there have often been just a few votes difference in the results.

The Recorder has been told by a spokesman speaking on behalf of the Labour Party that Sir Robin Wales and his supporters “are feeling confident that they are in a position to win”.

A spokesperson for Trigger Democracy disagreed. She said: “Compared to 2013, lots of wards have been voting “No” or have been really close.

“We’ve achieved a lot in a short time with lots of members visiting our web, Facebook and Twitter and we’ve had members coming along to meetings talking about and voting for an open selection.”

Although the Recorder has yet to receive official confirmation, it understands that only two wards voted against Sir Robin being automatically reelected as the Labour Mayoral candidate for Newham in 2013.

A decision to set the six-month “freeze date” on new Labour members being able to vote four months earlier than in 2013 is also proving controversial with an official complaint being raised with the Labour Party.

Cllr John Gray has said “hundreds of new members in Newham will be disenfranchised” from the vote who may be more likely to opt for a multiple candidate option.

East Ham Labour Party vice chairman, Tahir Mirza, even raised the issue with Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn at Saturday’s London Labour Conference.

A representative for the Newham Local Campaign Forum (LCF) said the timetable and freeze date for Newham’s mayoral trigger ballot “were set according to the proper rules and procedures of the Labour party”.

The breakdown of the results are as follow

Beckton: Yes 16, No 3; Canning Town South: Yes 6, No 8; Custom House: Yes 7, No 6; East Ham North: Yes 20, No 23; East Ham South: Yes 26, No 8; Forest Gate North: Yes 13, No 30; Forest Gate South: Yes 34, No 21 ; Green Street West: Yes 36, No 32; Plaistow North: Yes 27, No 17; Royal Docks Yes 11, No 1; Wall End Yes 20, No 18.

In Manor Park a first vote declaring a tie of Yes 30, No 30 was re-run with the second vote resulting in Yes 29, No 28.

(Photo not from the Newham Recorder but "Je Suis Whitworth for Mayor Campaign". Play "Spot the Mayoral Advisor" game. Also note the "Labour Party" will not have made any statement about Sir Robin "feeling confident". His paid appointees may have done)

Candidate for Newham Mayor Kamran Malik jailed for six months

"Mr Kamran MALIK, age 47, managing director of K.M. Legal Advisory, Romford Road, London, was sentenced today (5 June 2014) to six months' imprisonment by the Westminster Magistrates' Court on for illegally providing immigration advice and services.

Malik is the leader of the Communities United Party and stood for election in 2012 for a seat on the GLA and recently for election as an MEP.

The Immigration Services Commissioner, Suzanne McCarthy, prosecuted Malik after receiving various complaints about his activities.

In sentencing, District Judge Ikram said, "Your activity certainly had the hallmarks of exploitation. You exploited the vulnerable and demanded more money. These offences are so serious that I cannot deal with this by any other way than an immediate custodial sentence."

Speaking about the decision, Suzanne McCarthy said, "The OISC is here to ensure that people seeking immigration advice are treated fairly by people they can trust. We have clear standards outlining what we expect in terms of the fitness and competence of regulated advisers. Mr Malik chose to operate outside the law.  I am delighted with the outcome of this case, and I hope it sends a clear message to other people considering providing immigration advice - either act within the law or you will find yourself in court."