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.
*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
Sorry about that, I was about to ask "when can you start"
Don't you think that this is what the Labour Party think that they are doing? Riding roughshod over their own rules so that they can get some right wing candidates in to "clean the place up". When our Dear Leader (Claire Kober for the benefit of Google) runs one of the most dysfunctional organisations I have ever heard of. This is not boardroom politics it's student politics.
They are holding firm on one rule only: the opportunity for members at Selection Meetings to challenge the eligibility of other people in the room. But how odd that they seem so unobservant, unconcerned or incurious about observation of several other rules. Such as the need to live in and to be on the Electoral Register in the ward you join.
There are a few more interesting rules one of which, John, you highlighted yourself. Who should pay full and who reduced membership rates? These rates are publicly set out on the Party's website as follows.
If you want to see a crazy ranting nerd throwing his toys out of his cot and hopefully hitting some high ups in the Labour party, check out Twitter.
So the letter from the Labour Party to the "losing candidate", yes they do make that distinction, says that it's all tickety-boo with the selection because they rang John Blake and Steve Hart and they said it was all right and proper, apart from the people who didn't live where they said they lived. The solution to that is to ensure they they change their addresses, for next time.
I'm torn about publishing the actual letter because it says "private and confidential" but I've spent ages typing it in from the copy I found lying in Jam in a Jar tonight so if anyone is interested just say and I'll publish. I think John Blake (history teacher and runner of dodgy selection meetings) would agree that the above paragraph is a pretty good paraphrasing of it though.
I can't wait for the first picture of Barbara, Peter and Ali from the #labourdoorstep feed on Twitter.
#labourdoorstep feed on Twitter? Someone recently pointed out to me the comically upbeat tweets of all doorstep canvassers.
Fantastic response on Transylvania Ward doorsteps this pm. LibDem betrayal on blood bank issue say residents at Castle Dracula.
So didn't the canvassers meet a single resident with something even mildly critical to say? Apparently not.
"Residents praising Haringey parks to the skies. Though a few comments about shade of begonias. Haringey listens. Cross-pollination soon."
Meanwhile LibDem Canvassers are out meeting the same residents yet getting a similar message.
Cheering crowds turn up on Haringey LibDem action day. Residents sprinkle rose petals & lay down cloaks in my path. Landslide predicted. -lf
Alan-I have lived in St Anns Ward for seventeen years and I can honestly say that ONLY the lIb Dums have rang my entryphone. They have leafleted three times leading up to all elections. At the last by-election Labour leafleted once. The Tories on all accounts have not bothered. Canvassing is anathema to the lot! That is why at a crisis time such as this in regards to selection/de-selection the community needs Claire Kober and others to come out of the white tower and meet and greet and listen. All this stodge about rules and regulations is getting monotonous. Time to get out and meet the people, time for street meetings in St Anns ward, especially at weekends. One hour in a public library is rubbish.Motivate.
Thanks, Keith, I assume "one hour in a public library" means what's called an "advice surgery" where people can go along and talk to their local councillors about confidential personal issues. You're right that this is not the appropriate forum to discuss St Ann's ward selection.
Whether or not this whole issue will be taken into the wider public arena as you suggest, depends entirely on the Labour Party's NEC (National Executive Committee). Zena Brabazon and David Browne, along with some other members of St Ann's ward branch have put in complaints. They are doing what the Party expects them to do: taking it though the formal machinery.
The NEC still has an opportunity to do the decent thing and order a rerun of this selection. Or they can do nothing and endorse the view of the party's paid staff who'd like it all to go away. I'd guess these apparatchiks are counting on people thinking that it's some technical issue - "stodge about rules". Hoping that six months is long enough for people to get bored and forget it. Expect to read phrases like "line in the sand" and "the need to move on".
But the issue is not about technical rules. It's whether people have a moral compass. And whether or not they'll condone a cover-up. To say there’s nothing to investigate because members should have challenged this at the selection meeting, is smoke and mirrors. And it's not what the Labour Party’s rules actually say.
Keith, you may have missed the analogy I gave in Part 1 of this thread. (Apologies for repetition if you did see it.)
Imagine you turn up to Gatwick and your airline says your luggage is over the weight limit and you owe them £20. So you pay - making a mental note to buy new bathroom scales. Six months later you read in the paper that "75 of a total 330 weighing scales at Gatwick Airport were inaccurate or broken for up to three years". You contact the airline and ask for £20 back. Do they:
(A) Refuse, saying you should have challenged the £20 charge at the time?
(B) Ignore your letter or email?
(C) Send you a cheque for £20 with an apology and an assurance they've fixed all their scales?
Response (C) Shows a reputable company which values its customers and doesn't behave like a dodgy trader at a car boot sale. (A) and (B) show the current position of the London Regional Labour Party.
(Tottenham Hale ward councillor. My partner Cllr Zena Brabazon is one of the deselected candidates for St Ann's ward.)
Alan- still I look for a commitment to communicate with the community and still I see none. Street meetings are long overdue. I see no leadership but only a figurehead. I see brick walls being built and not bridges, I see red tape strangling the ward, I see baggage in the shape of old grudges and bad feeling. I do not see multi tasking where needed to promote confidence and still fight the battle over the buckled and distorted selection process.
© 2025 Created by Hugh. Powered by
© Copyright Harringay Online Created by Hugh