Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Councillor Gideon Bull Suspended
Below is the email sent to party members. His crime? He asked questions about the risk to old people if the Haven Day Centre closes.
Democracy is officially dead in Haringey.
Dear redacted
Re: Suspension (removal of the whip) of Councillor Gideon Bull
Please see below emails (verbatim) from the Chief Whip of the Haringey Labour Group regarding the suspension of Councillor Gideon Bull.
I am conscious that the Tottenham CLP has many new members and there maybe confusion about what this means. By way of a brief explanation and foresee questions you may have:
- The CLP only deals with the disciplinary of members if the case they have been accused of is in regards to their membership of the Labour party.
- All Councillors belong to a Labour Group (as well as a CLP), in Haringey they belong to the ‘Haringey Labour Group’ as Councillors are borough-wide based on the geographical boundaries of Haringey Council. (i.e. there is no such thing as a Tottenham Labour Group as Tottenham is a Parliamentary Constituency boundary not a Local Council Boundary).
- If a Councillor is subject to disciplinary based on their role as a Councillor (not as a member of the party), then the case is dealt with by the [Haringey] Labour Group.
- The Labour Group can impose action on the membership of Councillors to the Labour Group and not his Labour Party membership.
- As Councillor Gideon Bull’s case is about his role as a Councillor it has been dealt with by the Haringey Labour Group.
- Councillor Gideon Bull’s suspension is a suspension from the Haringey Labour Group and not from the Labour Party. Gideon still remains a full member of the Labour Party.
- A suspension from the Labour Group means he is still a Councillor for the London Borough of Haringey as he has been elected to serve for 4 years.
- The technical term for this action is called the “removal of the whip”.
- The ability to remove Councillors from their role is covered by the Local Government Act and Representation of the People Act which has specific rules when Councillors can be removed from their role as Councillors.
- The decision to ‘remove the whip’ (suspend) is not an action that can be taken by one person, it is subject to a vote by the whole of the Haringey Labour Group. In this case the vote concluded to suspend Councillor Gideon Bull.
- The local MPs, the Assembly Member and MEPs have no vote and no decision making powers over the removal of a whip of a Labour Councillor.
As Gideon is still a full member of the Labour Party, he remains the Vice Chair of the Tottenham CLP and Secretary of the White Hart Lane Labour branch.
Councillor Gideon Bull has the right to appeal the decision to London Regional Board. If Councillor Gideon Bull decides to appeal and is successful then the suspension is withdrawn and you will be informed.
I hope my attempt to explain has helped.
As this is a decision by the Haringey Labour Group and not by the Tottenham CLP, I cannot not respond to any questions about the decision and I am writing to you solely to share the information.
Regards
Seema Chandwani
CLP Secretary | TottenhamEmails from Liz McShane - Chief Whip of the Haringey Labour Group To Be Shared With Members.
(Please note there are two emails)Dear Seema
This is to formally notify you that the whip has been removed from Cllr Gideon Bull, following the Special Labour Group meeting on Thursday 21st January, where the Labour Group voted for the recommendation.
The period of suspension is for 3 months, from 21st January 2016 to the end of the day on 21st April 2016.
I have written to Cllr Bull to confirm this and to formally notify him of the terms of his suspension.
Regards
Liz
Second Email [Following Request for Reason]:
Dear Seema,
You can say it's because of Gideon’s intervention at the Cabinet meeting on 10th November, where he spoke out against an agreed group decision, that the Labour Group voted on a recommendation to withdraw the whip based on concerns about comradely behaviour and collective responsibility in accordance with the Party’s rules and our own group standing orders.
Regards
Liz
Link to the meeting http://www.haringey.public-i.tv/core/portal/webcast_interactive/191461 the relevant part is 1 hour and 22 minutes.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Gordon T on
-
Out today. And that's not a political comment!
Vote Trump! banner above picture of DT pointing to his head/hair with speech bubble 'It's a no-brainer".
-
-
Permalink Reply by Michael Anderson on
-
Yes, that's the way the Cabinet system works. The decisions, and the preferred outcomes, go to the ruling group's meeting, in this case Labour group, before Cabinet formally meets. That tends to be the private, shouty meeting. After that Cabinet takes the decision. It's the same in all authorities with a Cabinet model and one of the reasons I dislike it so much (along with elected Mayors) as it takes away what power ordinary councillors had under the committee system. Local authorities had little choice but to adopt it though. Apart from retaining some of the quasi-legal committees such as planning I can't think of a local authority that still has the old committee system.
-
Permalink Reply by Alan Stanton on
-
Michael, can I please suggest we avoid speculation about what Gideon Bull may or may not have said at previous meetings and what he knew or didn't know would happen when he spoke at the "Cabinet".
Will Hoyle, a former Tory Candidate - (Billy Hole) attempts to paint Gideon Bull's intervention as cynical attention seeking antics. Based on what? Nothing at all it seems except Mr Hoyle's own cynicism. This is anther blatant example of his ignoring the substance of the issues and making personal insults about an individual.
There are several very interesting aspects of this event. The international reach of the petition is one of them. The potential of social media to amplify and multiply the responses to public events is another. Haringey Council should have learned - it really needed to learn - lessons about this by comparing the public outcry over the deaths of Victoria Climbié and Peter Connelly. Events separated by only a few years but years when internet access and social media use had already begun to grow exponentially.I also think, Michael, that calling this a "badly handled local spat" is to misunderstand and underestimate the very significant underlying anger and despair of some of the people involved locally, as they see services for themselves and family members being destroyed.
I'm not going to speculate about Gideon Bull's feelings and motivations. He and I have barely spoken for many years and I won't pretend otherwise. But I do know that when talking to people who live in his White Hart Lane ward - admittedly random and small numbers - I've heard only positive views about his work on their behalf.
Friends in the Labour Party who I do know and trust, and who also know Gideon, tell me that he is speaking from genuine conviction and concern. Why not accept that this is someone with a passion for a cause they believe in?
In my view the issue is not just about defending three Day Centres. (Or in Sheila Peacock's case services for children.) It's about deciding to say 'no' to further dismantling and privatising of the Welfare State. I think it's taken a lot of people time to realise that the so-called "reforms" have a far wider and deeper agenda.
-
-
Alan, I can't see where I've speculated about what Cllr Bull did or did not say. Perhaps you could point this out?
-
-
Mr Hoyle stated that: "Cllr Bull am sure had made those objections at previous meetings and knew his speech would get him suspended so was a pointless gesture ..."
Your comment agreed with Will Hoyle's comment. "Yes, that's the way the Cabinet system works."
If in every Local Authority authority the "cabinet" system means that non-cabinet councillors from a Majority Party Group face suspension if they speak out at a cabinet meeting, other than to endorse the private (i.e. secret) pre-meeting of the Cabinet councillors then, yes, "Democracy is officially dead in Haringey". And in every other local Council.
Over 50,000 signatures on the petition. Maybe it'll all blow over; maybe it won't. Either way the "default position" of the Council leadership should not be 'shut-up-or-face-punishment'.
-
-
I was responding to "I could be wrong....am sure someone who knows the process better will correct me but.....wasn't this meeting to rubber stamp the decision?"
I don't know if I my knowledge of the Cabinet system is better than that of BH, but I do know it, as an ex-local government employee. If you read what I wrote it is solely about how the Cabinet system operates. As I have no idea what Cllr B said or did not say at previous meetings there is no way I could agree or disagree with the statement you quoted.
-
-
Thanks, Michael, plainly I read your "agreement" far too widely. (As did Will Hoyle.
http://www.harringayonline.com/xn/detail/844301:Comment:833671)Is the "Cabinet" a meeting "to rubber stamp the [previous] decision ?" Well yes, in Haringey that's what generally seems to happen. A practice which is undemocratic and dysfunctional.
As well as insulting and disrespectful to residents who come to speak, hoping to change minds. It turns their contribution into a largely pointless ceremony. A piece of theatre like Council meetings. "We've made the decision in secret and we'll just sit here doing our emails or playing Candy Crush on our aren't-we-smart-phone, while you waste your breath for five minutes."
It's many years since I attended one of the secret pre-meetings. In the olden days Cabinet members had deputies. (Now abolished.) And at different times I was deputy to the then Housing and Finance cabinet councillors. Perhaps no more than two or three times I deputised at the private/secret meetings. I arrived having read the papers closely and thought about what was being decided. I expected to take part in a real discussion. How naive.
There's an old saying that fish rot from the head down.No meeting of any organisation should demand that its staff or its Board of governors arrive with totally-closed minds, ready to nod through decisions made by the boss; or the ruling clique; the Chief Executive; or a charismatic leader; or a closed-minded ambitious right-wing bureaucrat.
-
-
I think you're being rather down on Haringey. The Cabinet model in all local authorities positively discourages debate and collective decision making. Have look at the history where it came from and why.
-
-
-
A bunch of foreigners?
-
-
BTW, Michael, Mr Hoyle's assumptions/description of how things work in Haringey Labour are not accurate -at least for the years I was on the Council (1998-2014).
-
-
Always, always, silly insults and a little drop of poison.
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
