Out and about for Labour in Boleyn

 

This morning after my West Ham ward Councillor surgery, I cycled over and joined Labour colleagues in Boleyn ward to deliver Direct messages to local residents. I missed the local MP, Sir Stephen Timms who had been with teams earlier but did join the Mayor, Candidate Sofia Patel and local Councillors and activists, walking up and down stairs delivering these messages. 

Most of the activity took place at the site of the Old West Ham FC stadium. The picture top right is I think where the centre of the pitch used to be.

It was pretty hot and a real treat to finish this session with ice cream! 

"On the knocker for Labour" in Custom House with Lyn Brown MP & Unmesh Desai AM

 

This afternoon I went out door knocking with our MP, Lyn Brown and our East London Assembly Member, Unmesh Desai. 

We split into 2 teams. One led by local Councillor, James Beckles, with Party activist John Morris and the other by myself and activist Martin Warne. 

It was cold but dry. I was using the Labour Party doorstep app so did not speak to that many residents but it was clear from feedback that we had significant support for Labour but a few had reservations. Our former leader, Jeremy Corbyn was brought up as a reason by some why they lost faith in Labour as a potential alternative government  but it was good that Keir Starmer was getting positive comments

But the only whelming reaction was that our residents were pleased that we were there knocking on their doors in December, listening and talking to them about their concerns.

Afterwards some of us went for a drink in the historic Black Lion pub in Plaistow and we shared some sea food from the local stall. The pub was busy with West Ham FC fans, who were obviously happy with the home win over Chelsea FC. 

I had a little bit of  jellied eel, which was tasty but has a very strong flavour (the jelly puts me off) so I stuck to the pint of prawns and crab sticks. 

West Ham to Victoria Park via Olympic Park circular lockdown walk

 

Following last weekends enjoyable walk to Valentines Park in Ilford, Gill and I decided to go in another direction to Victoria Park in Tower Hamlets. 

We started off at the Memorial Recreation Park, E15 (the original home of West Ham FC?) then joined the Greenway and turned left towards Olympic Park (on top of a cross London Victorian Sewer outlet) which Mahatma Gandhi used to walk along to enjoy the views. 

We went past the imposing Victorian Abbey Mills Pumping station to cross over Stratford High Street. I used to walk or cycle along this route from my home to my housing office near the Roman Road in Bow pre 2012. Much has changed since. In fact incredible change. 

We stopped off at the Viewtube to check out what what was going on (outdoor music, takeaway cafe,  fresh bread & cakes stall). 

West Ham FC played Liverpool FC at the London Olympic Stadium today (no crowds allowed due to Covid). We walked past and could see activity and hear stadium announcements. Liverpool won 3:1. 

Then we walked to Victoria Park past British Second World War anti tank  invasion defences (and the scene of the first ever UK Railway murder). 

After lunch on a outdoor picnic table overlooking East Lake, we made our way back via the Hereford Union Canal then turned right to follow the River Lea to the historic Three Mills Island. 

We paid our respects to the workers memorial statute at Three Mills Green then re-joined the Greenway via the river weir (and past the site of the first "Big Brother" TV location) and then back to Memorial Park. 

A lovely walk which lasted 8.25 miles and took 3 hours and 16 minutes (could be shortened by leaving out stretch to Victoria Park).  Recommended. 

Sir Robin Wales speaking at Forest Gate ward meeting 4th January 2018

Dear John

 Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year from Forest Gate North Labour Party.

Our next meeting is in January and will be a BIG EVENT. See details below:

Forest Gate North Branch Meeting
Speaker: Sir Robin Wales will be speaking on the Olympic legacy and recent issues about the stadium.
Thursday 4th January 2018 8.00 p.m. Durning Hall,
Earlham Grove, Forest Gate London E7 9AB

Come along and hear Robin Wales speak and ask questions.
We want to hear your point of view. 

Carel Buxton, Secretary Forest Gate North Labour

email: xubcb@yahoo.com

(I understand that he will be speaking to Stratford & Newtown branch immediately beforehand on that day)

Update on Newham Council London/Olympic/West Ham FC Stadium loses

On Thursday 14 December I was at the meeting of the Newham Council Investment & Accounts meeting.

I had a chance to question the Newham Council Finance Director on matters arising from the joint audit meeting on the 27 September 2017.

At that time we knew that the £40 million loan (& £4.4 million interest payment due) was "impaired" (no value) and that an unknown amount of other money ("working capital") was also at risk of being "impaired".

Since then of course the Council has admitted to losing some £52 million of money (original loan and working capital) in the stadium. Apparently we will still have some legacy regeneration benefits for the next "100 years".

However, leaving aside for the moment that the stadium does not have a shelf life of 100 years, I understand that West Ham FC nor any other user have no contractual obligations to do anything for the community but no doubt they will offer some charitable benefits that they see fit to provide. Plus, there was always going to be possible benefits from the redevelopment but this could have happened anyway without us risking our money.

I asked the Finance director for an update on the "impairment" shown in the accounts (which means that the £40 million loan had currently no value) and was told that the loan was not being "written off" but instead converted into some form of "Debt for Equity" swap? Whatever that means? I assume that the £40 million loan which I think is currently valued as being Zero is being converted into a shares into what must be a bankrupt company? Need more information.

I will ask further questions about the lost £4.4 million interest charge, the £5 million loan for investments in the Olympic South Park and the £12 million of "working capital" (I think) that has also be "lost".

Watch this space.

Mentioned in the Council accounts and during the joint audit meeting I had brought up the reference to a possible significant criminal fraud in Newham Council procurement, which I must also chase for an update. What has happened? Are internal audit involved and have the Police been informed if there is evidence of criminality?

http://www.johnslabourblog.org/2017/09/former-olympic-stadium-stratford-report.html

http://www.johnslabourblog.org/2017/09/the-stadium-loan-and-questions-to.html

Former Olympic Stadium Stratford report by Cllr Conor McAuley to his ward

Councillor’s Report to Custom House Branch Labour Party September 2017.

Former Olympic Stadium Stratford

I have been approached by a few Party members concerned about the stories they have seen in the local press about the apparent loss of the £40 million Newham Council investment in the stadium, prior to West Ham United Football Club moving in.

Members have asked me how and why Council came to invest such a large sum of money in the stadium and is the money really lost?

There was extensive discussion prior to the Olympic Games in 2012, as to the future of the Stadium once the games were over. There were two extraordinary meetings of Newham Council in November 2011 and March 2012 at which this was discussed. (I was prevented from taking part in these debates as I was a member of the Olympic Delivery Authority’s Planning Committee and it was deemed that I might have a ‘prejudicial’ interest in the matter – so I took no part in the decision making).

Under the heading ‘Securing a Community and Regeneration Legacy for the Olympic Stadium’ members of the Council agreed to create a company ‘Newham Legacy Investments’ to which it would lend £40 million. This company would then enter into a Limited Liability Partnership (LLP) with the Olympic Park Legacy Company for the purposes of managing the legacy of the Olympic Stadium and island site around the stadium. The £40 million would then be invested into this new partnership.

Outside of the Council there has been much debate as to why it was necessary to invest £40m into a stadium which would be used primarily by West Ham United, a wealthy Premiership football club owned by two multi millionaires.

The Mayor has argued ‘This is not just for a Premier League football club, this is for community benefit. If it was purely about the football club I could not justify doing this’.’We are not sacrificing anything for this. We are doing prudential borrowing but we cannot use this borrowing for anything else and it does not affect our borrowing capacity or what we can spend. It has no negative impact’.

He said.

"Of course this is not entirely true. We could have used the money to invest in other community priorities like social housing or refurbishing some of our now closed community centres (like the Upton Centre). Sir Robin was also quoted as saying; “even on the most disastrous figures, even if everything goes wrong we still make a profit on this. The risk is really, really minimal.”

So where is the money now?

It is shown in the Council’s recently published accounts as an ‘Impairment’ totalling £44.4m of a Long Term Debtor in one of the Council’s group undertaking, Newham Legacy Investments Ltd. 

‘These charges are subsequently written-off to the Capital Adjustment Account.’

The Mayor and one or two other councillors are arguing that an ‘impairment’ is not a ‘write off’ but they are contradicted by the very next line in the accounts which states that these charges are subsequently written off.

I am appalled not only by the loss itself but by the fact that we had to study the annual accounts to find this information.

Such a fanfare was made about the original investment, one might think that the Council was seeking to bury the loss.

It tends to remind me of the £4.3+ million lost in the Council’s investment in 2012 in the London Pleasure Gardens project that was supposed to animate the Silvertown Quays area south of the Royal Docks. The Council lost every penny of this investment and it even had to pay the winding up costs of the company.

As I understand it, Newham’s Overiew & Scrutiny Committee has never looked at this loss, so I doubt their commitment to look at the Stadium debacle,

The Council’s draft accounts will be discussed further at the Council’s Audit Board on 27 September. It could be a difficult meeting.

Frankly I believe the whole Stadium deal deserves a proper scrutiny by an independent agency. Perhaps Mayor Sadiq Khan can deliver this.

Cllr Conor McAuley

20/09/17

(John Gray - This is a huge issue also to my constituents - I posted sensible concerns about this issue by Cllr Rachel Tripp here"

"The Stadium Loan" and Questions to Council Meeting

See below today's blog post by Newham Council Cabinet member, Cllr Rachel Tripp, on the controversy regarding the "The Stadium loan". Also, my questions on this subject that have been sent to the Newham Full Council meeting being held tomorrow. 

"Rachel writes…Introduction

I want to write a blog post here about the Olympic stadium, because I want residents in Forest Gate North to be able to have one place where they could read the facts, and to know how they are being represented, all laid out clearly in one place.

Without wanting to sound worthy, I’m also writing this because it’s so important for public bodies and the people who work in them to be transparent. I am a cabinet member at Newham, and I take that seriously, but I am also one of your elected representatives in Forest Gate North, and I don’t feel I would be doing my job properly if I wasn’t always trying to be open, even when the topics are challenging and feelings run high.

Timeline

Last week (Thursday 7th September) there was a cabinet meeting at 5pm. That afternoon before the meeting, I read on social media that the £40m loan that the Council made to the Olympic stadium had been ‘written off’ and that this formed part of that cabinet report and was being decided that evening.

I assumed that this must be in the agenda item Medium Term Financial Strategy, a report which is regularly updated and sent to Councillors. This report gives a commentary and information about where the Council’s finances are.

But in fact the report that contains the reference to the stadium loan is not one that was on the agenda for that evening. It is in the Draft Statement of Accounts 2016-17, which is due to go to the next Investment and Accounts Committee later this month. The draft statement of accounts which contains the reference is here.

The bit of this report that is particularly relevant is on page 12 which reads, ‘Impairment totalling £44.4m of a Long Term Debtor in one of the Council’s group undertaking, Newham Legacy Investments Ltd. These charges are subsequently written-off to the Capital Adjustment Account (Note 26)’

I was extremely concerned when I read this, as were many other residents. This was the first time I had seen this kind of assumption made about the Olympic stadium loan.

The Council’s statements

The Council has subsequently released a statement which I will reproduce in full here, saying:

“The council’s draft accounts for 2016/17 were first published on our website on 3 July and were then open to the normal period of public scrutiny until 11 August. These draft accounts are currently with our auditors for their review. The finalised accounts are due to be considered at a scheduled meeting of our Investment and Accounts Committee on 20 September.

“Our draft accounts, which are subject to change and approval, show a prudent, responsible and regulatory compliant treatment of a Council loan related to the London Stadium. The loan is shown, for accounting purposes, as currently ‘impaired’, or damaged, due to the current financial performance of the Stadium. It is not a write off of the loan.

“The financial performance of the Stadium in its first full year of transformed operation is a matter of public record and it was widely anticipated that the first full year of trading would be particularly challenging. Newham Council is working with the Greater London Authority, the London Legacy Development Corporation and our other Stadium partners on a range of options to improve the financial performance of the Stadium. The future value of our loan, and its treatment in our accounts, is directly linked to that future performance.”

end of statement

Other information given to journalists said:

1. The £40m loan is a repayable one over 40 years.

2. The Mayor of London has commissioned an independent review into the London Stadium and that to inform this work, all partners in the stadium are looking at options to improve commercial performance.

3. There has been a successful summer programme in the stadium, including three major concerts and World Championship Athletics and Para Athletics.

4. Newham residents have enjoyed benefits as a result of the council’s investment in the form of ticket giveaways. This includes 5,000 free tickets to West Ham United’s Carrbao Cup game on 19 September against Bolton Wanderers. These tickets are being issued to residents through community neighbourhoods, community groups, a ticket ballot, and to volunteers and staff.

Other information

I have subsequently also been told that:

– impairment is an accounting term and is not a write-off. If a substantial loan were to be written off, it would come to Mayoral Proceedings, which is a public meeting with a paper.

– there is a precedent for this, as during the financial crisis, loans made by Newham to Icelandic banks were ‘impaired’ by 100% but were subsequently revalued as the position changed, and were paid off.

– there are commercial negotiations ongoing which are currently confidential, and more information will be released as soon as an agreement is reached.

What happens next

This information takes us up to now. So I also wanted to set out clearly here what I think should happen next.

Firstly, I’m surprised that this is the first we’ve heard that there was doubt about the value of the loan. Although I have heard various conversations about the profitability of the stadium, and ways in which this could be improved (the costs attached to moving the seat going is a relatively well known barrier to making money, just for example), previously the information about the loan has been what a good deal the Council has.

To summarise my understanding of this, we borrowed the money at a relatively low rate of interest, and have loaned it to the Stadium who pay us a commercial (higher) rate of interest. This means that we get back: the original investment, the difference in the two interest rates, the community benefits (community days, free tickets for residents) and also 30% of the profits in perpetuity. Although this loan has been controversial, I have always been assured that the terms of the deal were beneficial to us.

Secondly, I mentioned transparency above, and I think transparency is even more important when the topic is controversial. The impression given here, rightly or wrongly, is that the information has been hidden, and I think this is a great shame. I’m surprised that there wasn’t more explanatory text in the accounts document, and am even more surprised that the term ‘written off’ was used without anyone realising that if the accounts use these words, then residents reading it may – not unreasonably! – not understand the financial term ‘impairment’ and assume that the loan has indeed been written off. So I think we need more public information (where it’s possible to publish it, and recognising that commercial negotiations do sometimes need to be confidential for reasons that are entirely right) so that financial decisions and changes to financial circumstances can be not just published, but explained and understood.

Thirdly, I need to learn more about the loan, which increasingly appears not to be a loan at all but more akin to an equity share, despite having been consistently referred to as a loan. Apparently, the difference this makes includes the terms under which the interest is payable. Generally on a loan the interest is payable whatever happens. With our loan/equity share, I understand that interest payments are only made once the stadium is profitable.

Other considerations

For fairness, there are a few other things I need to point out which are points that have been made to me.

The investment that Newham made in the stadium was key in ensuring that it would become a multi-use venue in its own right, and not fail after the Olympics. Having a venue like this in Newham, bringing sporting and musical and other events into Newham, is really important to the borough and very positive in terms of employment, place-making, sporting opportunities, visitors, and much more.

Although no one else has made this connection, I also keep remembering the O2, which started life as the entirely ill-fated Millennium Dome, referred to with seeming certainty as a white elephant, but now reimagined as a thriving music venue. Obviously I understand that the analogy is not perfect, but it does show what can be done.

Also, I think it’s worth re-emphasising that since I have become a councillor in 2014, the Newham budget has been cut by around 30%. It’s difficult to overstate what an enormous impact this level of cuts has had on local government across the UK, and the signs of it are everywhere, from libraries closing (not in Newham, thankfully) to the increase in street homelessness. Local authorities are making commercial decisions and in many cases are making capital investments in order to secure longer term income so that they can continue to provide services.

The money invested in the stadium is capital investment not revenue, and was borrowed by LBN in order to invest. So while it’s still public money, and important to remind ourselves of the vulnerable people the Council has a duty to support, it’s not the case that, for example, ‘that £40m could have been spent on social care’. Also, the consultation that we held in the summer 2015 about makings savings was about cuts to our revenue, so this was absolutely not a consultation asking residents what they wanted to cut in order to fund the stadium.

I’m also reminded that previous investments the Council has made have been successful. The building at Dockside, for example, has risen in value significantly, whereas at the time the purchase of it was also controversial with strong feelings expressed against it in some cases.

Summary and conclusion

Overall for me the things that need to happen now can be summed up into: the ‘what’, the ‘how’ and the ‘what now’ . The ‘what’ being the money – when do we find out more, was it a good investment, can we be assured that the money comes back, what further information do we need? The ‘how’ being how this information was and is communicated, and the ‘what now’ being, well – obviously – what happens next.

The joint meeting of the Audit Committee and the Investment and Accounts committee (which approves the accounts) is due to take place on the 27th September. The Council’s statement above refers to the 20th, but this date has since been changed. I’ll attend it, and report back here as to what is discussed. This is the next important date, but it is not within this committee’s gift to ‘decide to write off’ the loan. The impairment is an accounting term which should reflect current financial values and assumptions, and should be a neutral not a political decision. It will nevertheless be interesting to listen to the discussion of the accounts, and find out more.

Along with all my colleagues, I will do my very best to get all the information I can, and will share whatever I’m able to. I have spoken to the Mayor already, and will do so again, and am going to sit down with my colleague Lester Hudson who is the political lead for Finance to talk to him. I should point out that although this blog post is mine (and I’m responsible for any errors in it) I am certainly not the only council member who wants to find out more. Here in Forest Gate North, we have a blog, and many of our residents are on social media, so it makes sense for me to share this here. Other councillors are doing the same things, but off line and in different ways.

As ever, I am happy to discuss any part of this, and will answer any questions that I’m able to. Please don’t hesitate to get in touch. I won’t release or leak confidential information but I will always be up front about what I am and am not able to share.

I really hope this post is useful".

Next my (John Gray) questions to Full Council

Stadium impairment & write off

Dear Kim (LBN Chief Executive)

This question is to Mayoral advisor on Finance Cllr Lester.

1. I am writing as a Newham Councillor about the “impairment” and “write off” of £44 million in (NLI) Newham Legacy Investments (page 12 in draft statement of accounts 2016/17).

I was very disturbed to have only found out about this while reading the accounts and that Councillors/Investments & Accounts were not told beforehand that there were any problems or issues with our investment in the NLI. Please explain why this was not done?

2. What is your opinion on our NLI investments and our potential liabilities? For example do we know how much money E20 Stadium LLP has lost this financial year, if so how much and what is the projection for year end. 

Have we made any other loans to the NLI or E20 stadium LLP ? If so what has happened to them. 

Including what has happened to our £5 million South Park investment and confirm that it has been invested in accordance with the report approved by the full Council.

Regards
Cllr John Gray

(hat tip picture Evening Standard)

Boleyn By-Election Saturday

Picture from yesterday afternoon's meeting point for Labour supporters. Veronica Oakeshott (centre with rosset) is the Labour candidate for the by-election in Boleyn ward, East Ham, London pictured alongside Newham Mayor, Sir Robin Wales and local activists.

The statue is the "World Cup  Sculpture" and celebrates the famous victory scene photographed after the 1966 football final, featuring Bobby Moore, Geoff Hurst, Martin Peters and Ray Wilson. Three of them played for West Ham FC at the Boleyn ground just across the road.

It was the first cold day of the season and I had forgotten to bring any gloves, so of course, I was volunteered "to run the board". This means sending activists to call at particular addresses to ask residents their voting intentions and to record the results. It is more difficult than it sounds, especially when you have a large team and don't know the area that well.

We were calling on postal voters, so there was a lot of walking in between addresses which kept us warm. My philosophy when running a board is just to get on with it. Speed ahead and force the pace. Don't let canvassers stand around amongst themselves chatting and gossiping, when they could be knocking on doors and speaking to real people. The sooner we get it over with the better.

I must admit that when I am not running the board, I have a somewhat different attitude. Standing around engaging in political debate and discussion (aka gossip) amongst canvassers is an important and vital part of the door knocking process.

Anyway, yet another really successful canvass for Labour and for Veronica, who is working her socks off in this election and deserves all our support.

Today (Sunday)  - two more sessions: morning session and 1.45pm meet @ Bobby Moore Statue in Barking Road, E6 1PW  - opposite the Boleyn pub. I think that there will be canvass sessions all next week at 5.45pm and telephone canvassing at the Trinity Centre, East Ave, London, E12 6SG. All with 10 minutes walk from tube stations. Will update later.

West Ham Councillor Report: November 2015

Councillor Report to West Ham Ward

WEST HAM WARD LABOUR PARTY tel: 07432 150 *** or email John.Gray@newham.gov.uk

 

Ward meeting 5 November 2015 

 

• Leafleting Ward for Sadiq Khan to be London Mayor & door knocking last weekend.
• There is a By-election in Boleyn ward East Ham on 3.12.1.  Veronica Oakeshott is the excellent Labour candidate.
• I attended the memorial service to murdered PC Nina Mackay on 24 October in Arthingworth Street, West Ham. Plan for next year as a wider community event?
• Car parking chaos off the Portway, E15. Need CPZ urgently. Resident Petitions to present to next full council.
• Complaints about closure of Greenway. I have cycled around division and made representations. Planning to meet Newham Cyclists to discuss further.
• Walkabout with residents in Dirleton Road, E15 about Parking, Environmental and ASB.
• Walkabout with residents and Council officers in Brasset Point Tower block about communal repairs, environmental and ASB
• The school governing bodies for Rebecca Cheetham Nursery School and Ranelagh Primary School are merging. (I am an authority governor at RCNS)
• Housing. Key surgery issue. I dread to think what will happen with “pay to stay” and “right to buy” to Housing Associations stealing properties from London Councils to fund election bribes in Tory shires, who have got rid of all their council housing.
• Section 106 money taken away to fund so called “start-up” homes that in London can only be afforded by the rich.
• Investigating complaints that West Ham homeless families kept in Bed and Breakfast hotels beyond statutory limits and impact of Council tax demands on low income families.
• I moved the UNISON motion on “The Housing Crisis” at the TUC Congress this year.
• Tax credits. Never thought I would say thanks for the House of Lords. West Ham worse hit in the country. Strivers and hard working families’ tax credits being taken away to fund tax breaks for millionaires.
• Disgusted to see that West Ham FC Vice Chairman, Baroness Brady, voted with the government to take away tax credits from working families, even though around 40% of working families rely on the credits and nearly half of all children in Newham are growing up in poverty according to the Campaign to End Child Poverty.
• Planning. “Stop notice” on Plaistow Road Muslim Education and Community Centre. I don’t think that the State should interfere in the right to worship except in exceptional circumstances.
• Voted against council accounts 2014/2015 on Investment and Accounts Committee, since I was not given the opportunity to attend joint meeting with audit and question auditors. Also not satisfied with budget governance.
• Pensions for mayoral advisers. Do not believe that at a time of savage cuts to our budget, mayor advisers (or backbench Cllrs) should be gaining a 14% increase in allowances. Attended first Council Scrutiny “call in” in possibly 10 years over issue.
• Special purpose vehicle for Council pension scheme. Spoke against at cabinet. Public money spent before any scrutiny. Also attended “call in”.
• LOBOs. ‎We are spending millions of pounds in excess interest rates on capital loans. We are being ripped off by Banks. I have contributed to a joint article on Labour list and worked with Cllr Whitworth on disclosure.
• I have complained to the Council CEO and the monitoring officer about the continued refusal of Council officers to disclose important information on financial matters to elected members for no substantive reason.
• Finally. Labour Party conference and leadership. Jeremy Corbyn and Tom Watson deserve a chance to develop and build the Party in order to win the General election in 2020.

Karren Brady: hands off West Ham fans' tax credits

To: Baroness Karren Brady

"Stop voting to cut the tax credits that hard working West Ham fans rely on to get by.

Why is this important?

I'm a former season ticket holder and lifelong West Ham fan. I was disgusted to see that West Ham's Vice Chairman, Baroness Brady, voted with the government to take away tax credits from working families, even through around 40% of working families rely on the credits.

Nearly half of all children in Newham are growing up in poverty according to the Campaign to End Child Poverty, so why is Baroness Brady taking it out on our community, instead of supporting the people of West Ham?"

 Graham Copp

If you agree sign 38 Degrees petition 

Murad Qureshi AM on West Ham and the Olympic Stadium

It is the last chance tonight to watch the BBC investigation "When the Hammers struck Gold" on iPlayer.  The programme was first shown on August 6th and alleged that the UK taxplayer has been ripped off in the deal over the use of the Olympic Stadium in Stratford and the private owners of West Ham FC have made a fortune out of it.

"It's costing taxpayers hundreds of millions to convert the Olympic Stadium into a home fit for West Ham Football Club. With the amount spiralling, BBC Sports Editor Dan Roan investigates a deal that is shrouded in secrecy, and that could make the club owners even richer while leaving us to foot the bill".

This clip is from the programme and shows London Assembly member, Murad Qureshi, being interviewed about the secret deal between the London Mayor and West Ham FC. Murad quite rightly questions why the deal has to be secret when a similar arrangement with Manchester Council and Manchester City FC over the Commonwealth Games Stadium was open and transparent.

Murad is standing to be the Labour Candidate for the GLA seat "City and London". He has the support of Greater London UNISON and his stance over the Olympic Stadium shows he is very capable of holding the Mayor to account. 

Labour Today in West Ham

Picture collage is from last Saturday's Labour doorstep in West Ham ward.

The "gang of three" on the left are West Hammers John Whitworth, Ron Manley and yours truly.

One proud resident had the West Ham Football Club motif on their wall (top right).

As well as door knocking we were delivering the latest newsletter "Labour Today". 

There was a debate with residents whether the emergency locksmith number illegally stick on everyone's letter plate in this street and elsewhere (bottom right) was a failed locksmith business venture or a "sophisticated new scam" (see Daily Mail) by burglar's to identify vulnerable properties.

I have phoned the number but it has been constantly engaged. 

I have been told that placing the stickers on doors is probably criminal damage but there is no evidence that this was part of any wider criminal conspiracy.  Surely this not mean that the Daily Mail was telling porkies?