Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Labour Party Selection Fraud in St Ann's
After it was discovered at the St Ann's Labour Party selection candidate selection meeting that there were people present and voting who should not have been, I came home from the pub (where I'd heard about it) and wrote this article. It has subsequently been edited by site admins to remove the names of people who were embarrassed or in the final case where a journalist said it was potentially libellous. Well here I will attempt to summarise what we have subsequently found out and hopefully take people's attention away from my original appalling rant.
Back in May (The Ward AGM):
- The St Ann's Ward AGM was convened on Thursday the 23rd of May instead of the usual first Wednesday of June by the then Ward Secretary, Barbara Blake.
- Protests were made by members about this but they were rebuffed by the Ward Chairman.
- At this meeting The current Ward Secretary resigned and there was bloc voting to decide the new Ward Secretary.
- A person in the bloc opposing John Blake turned up late and was prevented from voting despite there being nothing about this in the Labour Party rules.
- John Blake was elected Ward Secretary by one vote.
The Selection Meeting:
- The meeting was run by The Secretary of the St Ann's Labour Party , and Steve Hart from Hornsey & Wood Green.
- A candidate who arrived early noticed the five members arrive with Ali Gul Ozbek, sensed that something was up and mentioned it to Barbara Blake. When the other candidate seemed unhelpful they mentioned it to Steve Hart. Then the candidate went looking for the five people but was barred from entering the room (3o minutes before the selection) by the Ward Secretary.
- By the time one member I have spoken to arrived, the five members were seated at the back of the room. Four men and one woman (who works in Ali Ozbek's Pharmacy).
- A blonde woman turned up before anyone had started speaking but was barred from entering the room by the Ward Secretary, despite remonstrating with him.
- Barbara Blake won in the first round (to select a female candidate) against Zena Brabazon and Emine Ibrahim by two votes. It was 11/1/14. Everybody voted.
- It is alleged that one candidate knew the questions in advance and had prepared answers.
- At the appropriate point in the meeting the secretary asked if everyone was OK with the others in the room and everybody laughed.
- There were various factions voting together in the room; the five new members, Charles Adje's family, Zena and David's people and the Ward Secretary's people.
- In the final round Ali Ozbek and Peter Morton were selected, beating Zena by one vote.
- Ali is a local chemist and businessman on Green Lanes who seemed very passionate about what should be done with St Ann's and spoke eloquently about the need to reduce business rates. He is also a property developer.
- At the time Peter worked as head of press for the Labour Party.
- Barbara is a trade union official and ex Ward Secretary.
After the Selection Meeting
- A fellow councillor calls David to commiserate with him.
- David Browne and Zena Brabazon did some investigation using the St Ann's Labour Party membership list and the electoral roll.
- They discovered that nineteen new members signed up that year did not actually live in St Ann's and that they had either given Green Lanes business addresses when they signed up or claimed addresses in the ward.
- Not one of these new members, many of whom were recruited on the 8th of July gave an address in the ward at which they are eligible to vote, which is required by party rules.
- Five of these members were "eligible" to vote because they signed up before the cut off date of the 30th of April, however they should have been barred from voting because they do not actually live in the ward.
- Zena and David wrote to their local Labour Party officials who sent their evidence on to the London Labour Party.
- Nobody can tell me for sure where Ali Ozbek lives but he claims an address in Finsbury Park Avenue.
- Ali Ozbek has donated money to the Labour Party.
- According to a twitter exchange with a Labour councillor in another ward, the membership list should have been gone through before the meeting by the person running it to make sure this kind of thing did not happen, it was certainly done in their ward.
- When one of the five members who voted was called at his home his partner informed the caller that he had been in Turkey for a while and was not due back yet.
- In Harringay several new Labour Party members were registered using Green Lanes business addresses but not before the cut off date.
- Barbara Blake has told local traders that it is OK to register as a member in the Labour Party from a business address (it is definitely not) and the Tottenham Membership Secretary has expressed a similar view in a meeting, only to be corrected.
The "Corruption in Haringey Labour" article.
- After I wrote the original article, in which I also made some allegations against Claire Kober, the only phone call to site admins was to remove the Secretary of the St Ann's Labour party's name from the discussion.
- There was a lot of comment on the original thread and as of Saturday the 12th of October it appears to have been viewed more than 7000 times, although I dispute that as a useful metric (I think the actual figure is much lower).
- After some badgering it was picked up by an overworked Stephen Moore at the Tottenham Journal, here.
Trying to get a re-run
- I have pushed the councillor who commiserated David on his loss on Twitter to join calls asking for a re-run of the election but they have resolutely refused, to the point where it's all a bit weird and "la la la, I can't hear you".
- As it stands the London Labour Party have agreed that the five people were not eligible to vote but they say that this was not picked up before or during the meeting so the result stands. Their investigation consisted of speaking to the Ward Secretary and Steve Hart. Steve Hart lied because someone did speak to him before the meeting.
- The London Labour Party have the attendance list and will not release it, presumably because it shows that people were not identified correctly and that at least two of the five were imposters.
- Appeals to the NEC have all been rebuffed, even with the full acknowledgement of what went on.
The Labour doorstep in Harringay
- The St Ann's Labour Party have a great deal of trouble getting members to help them out with canvassing. A photograph has been tweeted showing more than 20 people out in Harringay Ward above the same session in St Ann's, with just two.
- When David Lammy, after a lot of badgering apparently, stepped out in St Ann's for the Labour doorstep he was met by a picket of local men calling on him not to support the St Ann's fraudsters. As I understand it he will not be going out with them again.
The Police are involved
- On Monday the 10th of February Haringey MPS made a visit to me on behalf of the secretary of the St Ann's Labour Party and his partner.
- It was alleged that I had called him filth on Twitter (which I have not, that was someone else) and that I said "I know I'm hassling you but...". I was served with a Notice of Harassment Letter which will now appear in extended CRB checks.
*An individual has asked that their name be replaced with their function in this post on the grounds that they are not seeking public office. This has been done.
Tags for Forum Posts: election2014, labour, st ann's labour, stanns
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Keith Waterhouse on
-
Legal advice, private detective, national newspapers; time to fight back. To accuse someone of racism publicly and in front of the imperious leader deserves redress. Have you been suspended from the party for your alleged racism? Have you been asked to leave the party because of your racism? This lot see menace in their own shadow and you should take them to task legally. This is an utter disgrace.
-
Permalink Reply by John McMullan on
-
Oh I am not a party member! If I was a party member I would be whipped into silence. It was before Ed Milliband arrived too so only in front of another party member.
Basically for any of these people to tell the truth I will have to get them before a judge in a libel case and risk quite a lot. I'm confident that they won't all perjure themselves.
-
-
They should be grabbed by the motts and swung by the grotts.
-
Permalink Reply by Alan Stanton on
-
This is very odd, John.
Accusing you of racism demeans Mr Hart, not you. And I'm surprised that an intelligent fair-minded person - which I assume Steve Hart must be - wasn't at least curious to hear what you had to say. Not necessarily to agree - though he might. But at least to find out the basis for your views on Labour's candidate selection for St Ann's ward.
As a prominent trade unionist, I also assume that Mr Hart is very familiar with the problems faced by whistle-blowers. I previously mentioned Helena Morrissey's report about allegations within the LibDem national party which discussed similar processes. (Although of course, with a wholly different issue raised.) Helena Morrissey linked what she found to other abuses of power.
On a Quaker website in a piece called Why are whistle-blowers treated so badly? Adrian Melia suggests that a whistle-blower's: "conduct, performance, motive and credibility are all put into doubt". He observes, that: "the whistle-blower's colleagues routinely close ranks with the wrongdoers for many reasons, not least of which is a fear of being treated as the whistle-blower if seen to support their view."
The fact that this is "normal" behaviour in many organisational settings makes it easier to understand. Though no less hard for the St Ann's ward whistle-blowers. And for their supporters who are simply asking Labour Party members and staff to "stand up for decency in British Politics" - the phrase used by Ed Miliband in his battle with the Daily Mail.
(Tottenham Hale ward councillor. My partner Zena Brabazon is one of the two deselected St Ann's councillors. The other is David Browne.)
-
-
In fairness I guess I doorstepped him a bit and he just spouted the line that they came up with if anyone objected in the selection meeting. I am not the least bit afraid of his solicitor although someone asked me if I was worried about pissing off a certain local political group.
-
-
Presumably, John, that "certain local political group" which you don't name is the Elvis-is-Alive-&-Living-in-Wood-Green-Party"?
Well, there's no need to worry about them. They're like trekkies. A bunch of over-enthusiastic fans. Whatever story they spun, they really know that Elvis doesn't live in Wood Green.
Though having sixteen Elvis lookalikes trying to sign up for the Woodside branch Labour Party was a joke too far. Fortunately the branch secretary spotted that they'd all given Heartbreak Hotel, Arcadian Gardens as their address.
-
Permalink Reply by Alison P on
-
What's the logic for saying you're being racist? (Not remotely saying is any sense to it it am still not clear why that's the line being taken). Is it to do with the ethnicity of the candidate?
-
-
Yes it is. They must have sat in a room thinking "If anyone in the room objects we can call them racists! Yeah!". They have forgotten that we are not in this room anymore and we do not need to judge people by their ethnicity (and nobody ever has), merely their address and in one case their age.
They USED Ali Gul Ozbek and his five people to get their candidates selected and they want this all to be about those people's ethnicity, not what they did. They are able to keep it a secret because of data protection laws.
-
-
Tragic. There are so many things wrong with this story but racism really doesn't seem to be one of them.
I think you're right, by the way, to point out that one of the real problems is the fact that engagement with local party politics is so low, and that if this wasn't the case it would have been far harder for something like this manipulation to happen.
But then it's hard to imagine who is going to engage from scratch with Labour in Haringey when this is how they operate.
Anyway, better things to think about on a Saturday night surely!
-
Permalink Reply by Julie on
-
First let’s address the ‘racism’ angle. Serving councillors, members of St Ann’s and contributors to the thread, have been accused, both online and behind their backs, of racism towards people of Kurdish/Turkish origin. This is desperate stuff. How, for example, could anybody then explain why it is that the ward has always selected council candidates from diverse origins, including three former Turkish speaking candidates. In fact, the disputed candidates this time possibly form the least diverse slate ever put up, that I can recall. Calling those who dispute the process ‘racist’ is not just childish, it’s extremely serious. This is not about race or ethnicity. This is about probity and the democratic process.
Then there’s the approach being taken that says, ‘the result is the result.’ This is extremely offensive to people who actually mind about what went on at the selection process. There is suspicion and rising anger amongst those who see the ‘selected candidates’ as invalid. Objectors to the outcome at St Ann’s range from those who think it was a bit of a mess to those who think it stank to high heaven. There are differences of opinion across the board but only a handful of people, including those who ran the meeting and the candidates, seemingly, are OK about it all.
Is it possible that this has all been generated by sour grapes? This is not simply an internal Labour Party matter as Labour candidates in a ward like St Ann’s have a very strong likelihood of romping home as duly elected Labour councillors on May 22nd. Have our councillors taken St Ann’s for granted and then been dumped and got cross? Well, they would have been very silly to rely on our ward. We have a track record of changing councillors; it’s not a sinecure. We’ve had upsets and disappointments in the past but that’s politics. You don’t always get, or keep, the person you want.
Let’s focus on the issue. It is believed, rightly or wrongly, that as many as 5 people who took part in a meeting of 26 people, were ineligible to be there. Whether they wandered in in good faith, or schemed for months to take part in the process, is irrelevant. Their ethnic origin is irrelevant. The point is that nobody had ever seen them before and there is suspicion about whether they were eligible to take part. Part of this view is based on research into claimed addresses, and entries on the electoral register.
Now, if all 26 people in the room were genuine members of the party, who paid their own subscriptions, took part in the meeting under their own names, reside in the ward at the addresses they have given to the party and are registered to vote from those addresses if eligible to do so, then there is a simple way to close the situation down. A list of members present was kept and ID’s were checked as people arrived, apparently (I say this because mine wasn’t and because some members were in the room quite a while before the start of the meeting so I don’t know if theirs were checked.) This list will clarify which members were present. Sight of the attendance list and minutes, would surely put that aspect of the matter to bed and exonerate those that say their reputation has been sullied, yet also seem to say there is no purpose in releasing this information.
There is so much unhelpful rumour online that misses the point. This could have been resolved by conducting a proper investigation at an early stage. However the investigation appears to have consisted of a conversation with those who ran the meeting, rather than with any of the six people who lodged complaints and it also seems not to have included examination of key evidence gathered. Now, everyone’s busy and there are allegations of entryism, personation, incompetence, malpractice and howls of disappointment from all over London. But the Labour Party could come out now and say, ‘you know what? On reflection we didn’t give these complaints the attention they needed at the time and as people are still submitting complaints and there is possibly evidence that perhaps hasn’t been considered, we’ll arrange to have it looked into in more depth. It’s bound to be fine, but just to be sure, and to silence the doubters.’
Let’s stick to the matter in hand and not get side tracked by those crying foul. This is also an isolated situation. Labour candidates in all of the other wards have been selected in fair and open processes which are much more democratic than other parties practise.
-
-
I am beginning to think Russell Brand is on to something if all of this is true.
-
-
I would still seek legal redress for the racial slur, have they learned nothing from Gordon Browns remarks?
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
