This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/davehillblog/2015/jun/05/nerves-and-defiance-in-re-run-tower-hamlets-mayoral-race
The article has changed 5 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 0 | Version 1 |
|---|---|
| Nerves and defiance in re-run Tower Hamlets mayoral race | Nerves and defiance in re-run Tower Hamlets mayoral race |
| (about 1 hour later) | |
| You’ll have heard of Lutfur Rahman. He’s the now former mayor of Tower Hamlets who was heaved out of the Town Hall six weeks ago after a legal judgement found that his unexpected victory at last May’s mayoral election had been tainted by “corrupt and illegal practices” namely the bribing of electors with community grants, the payment of canvassers, the false portrayal of his Labour rival John Biggs as racist, the bringing of “undue spiritual influence” to bear on Muslim voters and the casting of invalid votes. Richard Mawrey, the senior QC who sat as judge in the election court, lacerated Rahman, accusing him of “ruthless ambition” and of being “almost pathologically incapable of giving a straight answer.” | You’ll have heard of Lutfur Rahman. He’s the now former mayor of Tower Hamlets who was heaved out of the Town Hall six weeks ago after a legal judgement found that his unexpected victory at last May’s mayoral election had been tainted by “corrupt and illegal practices” namely the bribing of electors with community grants, the payment of canvassers, the false portrayal of his Labour rival John Biggs as racist, the bringing of “undue spiritual influence” to bear on Muslim voters and the casting of invalid votes. Richard Mawrey, the senior QC who sat as judge in the election court, lacerated Rahman, accusing him of “ruthless ambition” and of being “almost pathologically incapable of giving a straight answer.” |
| The outcome of the case means the election is being re-run next Thursday, June 11. You might expect that Rahman’s legal drubbing would condemn to defeat any candidate associated with him. You might believe from much of what you’ve read that had dodgy votes not been cast for him, Rahman would not have been declared the winner of last May’s rancorous mayoral race, the re-elected independent incumbent who’d held off the challenge of Labour’s formidable London campaign machine. You might anticipate, as I did on the day of Rahman’s downfall, that Labour will surely win this time around. Perhaps they will and Biggs, who is their candidate again, will finally prevail after much unpleasantness and many reverses. But there are good reasons for not assuming it. | The outcome of the case means the election is being re-run next Thursday, June 11. You might expect that Rahman’s legal drubbing would condemn to defeat any candidate associated with him. You might believe from much of what you’ve read that had dodgy votes not been cast for him, Rahman would not have been declared the winner of last May’s rancorous mayoral race, the re-elected independent incumbent who’d held off the challenge of Labour’s formidable London campaign machine. You might anticipate, as I did on the day of Rahman’s downfall, that Labour will surely win this time around. Perhaps they will and Biggs, who is their candidate again, will finally prevail after much unpleasantness and many reverses. But there are good reasons for not assuming it. |
| Mawrey’s 200-page judgement - an absorbing and instructive document - does not demonstrate that 3,252 votes cast for Rahman, his narrow but clear winning margin in the now void 2014 ballot, should not have counted. The election court could not determine an exact figure and neither was it required to. As Mawrey wrote, just “one bogus vote, if arranged by the candidate or someone who is in law his agent, will unseat the candidate, however large his majority.” He added that given the size of the Tower Hamlets electorate - about 180,00 - the list of ballot papers subjected to his scrutiny would “clearly…represent a drop in the ocean.” | Mawrey’s 200-page judgement - an absorbing and instructive document - does not demonstrate that 3,252 votes cast for Rahman, his narrow but clear winning margin in the now void 2014 ballot, should not have counted. The election court could not determine an exact figure and neither was it required to. As Mawrey wrote, just “one bogus vote, if arranged by the candidate or someone who is in law his agent, will unseat the candidate, however large his majority.” He added that given the size of the Tower Hamlets electorate - about 180,00 - the list of ballot papers subjected to his scrutiny would “clearly…represent a drop in the ocean.” |
| It can’t be assumed from this that the amount of dodgy voting was trivial. But nor can it be brandished as proof that it was extensive enough to have prevented Biggs from coming out on top. Mawrey wrote: “Even if voter fraud is established, neither the parties [to the case] nor the court have any idea whether it is the tip of a large iceberg or the few rogue items in an otherwise impeccable poll – or somewhere in between.” | It can’t be assumed from this that the amount of dodgy voting was trivial. But nor can it be brandished as proof that it was extensive enough to have prevented Biggs from coming out on top. Mawrey wrote: “Even if voter fraud is established, neither the parties [to the case] nor the court have any idea whether it is the tip of a large iceberg or the few rogue items in an otherwise impeccable poll – or somewhere in between.” |
| It’s worth reflecting on the figures from last year. Mayoral elections are held under the supplementary vote system (SV), which means voters can express a first and a second preference on their ballot papers just as they can when choosing a London mayor. Rahman was accredit with 36,539 first preferences compared with 27,643 for Biggs. Even if more than one in five of those Rahman votes were invalid, Biggs would still have trailed him at that stage. | It’s worth reflecting on the figures from last year. Mayoral elections are held under the supplementary vote system (SV), which means voters can express a first and a second preference on their ballot papers just as they can when choosing a London mayor. Rahman was accredit with 36,539 first preferences compared with 27,643 for Biggs. Even if more than one in five of those Rahman votes were invalid, Biggs would still have trailed him at that stage. |
| Labour’s man closed the gap dramatically once second preferences came into play, indicating that 6500 non-Labour supporters in Tower Hamlets who wanted Rahman gone had understood how SV works. Nonetheless, however disagreeable some may find the idea, it seems very likely that many thousands of Tower Hamlets residents voted entirely legitimately for Rahman. He was a popular East End politician. | |
| That reality was not lost on John Biggs last year. He allowed that, while believing he could have done better, the council under Rahman was not in most respects badly run. He also rightly described as “rubbish” the impression created by too much media coverage of Tower Hamlets in recent years that the borough is a hotbed of Islamist fanatics. | |
| Other sensible Labour people express similarly measured views, recognising that many Tower Hamlets residents might have thought their mayor was doing a reasonable job in difficult circumstances, ignored or simply took little notice of the gathering storm clouds of scandal, and voted accordingly. They also see that many voters who share Rahman’s Bangladeshi roots and Muslim faith see his as a success story they can in part call their own and regard him as having been picked on by his many enemies in the media, others in national government and by Labour, which dumped him as its candidate for the first Tower Hamlets mayoral election in 2010 in a manner Mawrey described as “utterly shameless.” | |
| The campaign Biggs is running this time round is wisely seeking to assure Bangladeshi East Enders, who comprise around a third of the borough’s population, that he has their interests at heart as much as those of everyone else in the borough. Already he has announced that he’ll have three deputy mayors, two of whom are Bangladeshi. The local Bengali press, from which Rahman has enjoyed sustained (and sometimes discreditable) support down the years, will soon carry a letter of support for Biggs from London’s three Bangladeshi MPs, Rupa Huq, Tulip Siddiq and Rushanara Ali, who represents one of the two Tower Hamlets constituencies. Expect to see them backing Biggs on the ground too in the coming days. | The campaign Biggs is running this time round is wisely seeking to assure Bangladeshi East Enders, who comprise around a third of the borough’s population, that he has their interests at heart as much as those of everyone else in the borough. Already he has announced that he’ll have three deputy mayors, two of whom are Bangladeshi. The local Bengali press, from which Rahman has enjoyed sustained (and sometimes discreditable) support down the years, will soon carry a letter of support for Biggs from London’s three Bangladeshi MPs, Rupa Huq, Tulip Siddiq and Rushanara Ali, who represents one of the two Tower Hamlets constituencies. Expect to see them backing Biggs on the ground too in the coming days. |
| Biggs is an able, experienced and industrious politician who represents Tower Hamlets, along with two other east London boroughs, on the London Assembly. He has what it takes to be a good mayor and if he wins it will be a just reward. But it is hard to know how the battle will end. His main rival, running as an independent, is Rabina Khan, a councillor who was Rahman’s cabinet member for housing. By general consent she was one of Rahman’s most able lieutenants and communicates well with ordinary people. | Biggs is an able, experienced and industrious politician who represents Tower Hamlets, along with two other east London boroughs, on the London Assembly. He has what it takes to be a good mayor and if he wins it will be a just reward. But it is hard to know how the battle will end. His main rival, running as an independent, is Rabina Khan, a councillor who was Rahman’s cabinet member for housing. By general consent she was one of Rahman’s most able lieutenants and communicates well with ordinary people. |
| At a rally in Whitechapel Road’s Jagonari Women’s Centre on Tuesday, she spoke with force and personality of her determination to succeed and make Tower Hamlets a national beacon of resistance to austerity and defiance in the face of political mainstream prejudice. Local health and education campaigners addressed the gathering in her support, as did an unrepentant Rahman. Khan thanked Rahman for encouraging her to join the Labour Party that has since disowned them both and for giving her the confidence to progress in politics. She lauded the record of Rahman’s administration in helping the least well off with free school meals and education grants and denied she would be controlled by the former mayor. She blamed Labour for its recent general election defeat, saying they had “become so much like the Tories, you couldn’t tell the difference.” | At a rally in Whitechapel Road’s Jagonari Women’s Centre on Tuesday, she spoke with force and personality of her determination to succeed and make Tower Hamlets a national beacon of resistance to austerity and defiance in the face of political mainstream prejudice. Local health and education campaigners addressed the gathering in her support, as did an unrepentant Rahman. Khan thanked Rahman for encouraging her to join the Labour Party that has since disowned them both and for giving her the confidence to progress in politics. She lauded the record of Rahman’s administration in helping the least well off with free school meals and education grants and denied she would be controlled by the former mayor. She blamed Labour for its recent general election defeat, saying they had “become so much like the Tories, you couldn’t tell the difference.” |
| Her manifesto contains a section on transparency and accountability, promising to give more time at council meetings to take questions from the public, to introduce peoples’ question time meetings and to be fully open to public scrutiny. Rahman’s critics complained that he was evasive and bunkered, preoccupied above all else with survival. I asked Khan if her pledges implied that she had taken these criticisms on board. She defend Rahman’s record in these respects, spoke up for her own, and said: “People have different leadership styles. Lutfur Rahman always went out to meet people, I will be doing it through the peoples’ question time.” An accomplished politician’s riposte. | |
| Neither Biggs nor Khan can be sure of the outcome next week, but turnout is expected to be key. When Rahman first won the mayoralty in October 2010, he did so by a distance. Turnout was low. It could be low this time as well. Labour strategists are nervously aware that Khan could be as good at mobilising support as Rahman was. If Biggs wins, it will be a huge relief to him and to Labour in the East End. If Khan wins, it will be sensational. | Neither Biggs nor Khan can be sure of the outcome next week, but turnout is expected to be key. When Rahman first won the mayoralty in October 2010, he did so by a distance. Turnout was low. It could be low this time as well. Labour strategists are nervously aware that Khan could be as good at mobilising support as Rahman was. If Biggs wins, it will be a huge relief to him and to Labour in the East End. If Khan wins, it will be sensational. |