Dirty Tricks in Newham Labour?
We have covered the underhand dealings in the Labour Party in east London, specifically as they related to the suspension of Redbridge Council Leader Jas Athwal. Readers will recall that Athwal was suddenly suspended by the Labour Party in the run up to the selection of a candidate to replace Mike Gapes, who had left Labour in disgust to join Change UK.
Athwal was suddenly accused of sexual impropriety and the Labour Party immediately suspended him.
As a suspended member he was not eligible to stand in the party selection process. This left an open door for the Momentum preferred candidate, Sam Tarry to get the nomination. Athwal it seems was not without friends and support and as we reported in late 2022, he ousted Tarry, who has suddenly decided that he no longer supports the mandatory reselection of MPs, at least, not when they are Momentum supporters.
Closer to home, we have uncovered the story behind the deselection of popular Green Street councillor, Hanif Abdulmuhit.
Abdulmuhit had dallied with the far left earlier in his life, both with Militant and George Galloway’s Respect Party, (for whom he had served as a councillor in Newham), but as he grew older, he settled into the mainstream of the Labour Party.
Under the Wales regime he established himself as a leading community councillor, both active in listening to his constituency and in representing the council to the ward. He was returned as a council candidate in 2018 by a branch in which he had significant support at a time when many of those who had supported Wales were ousted.
He recognised that his willingness to offer criticism to the new mayor would not endear him, but he nonetheless anticipated fighting the same seat for Labour in 2022.
What he did not anticipate was the level to which some people in the Labour Party would sink in order to displace him.
Being aware of the possibility of dirty tricks being used against him he took the precaution of having a conversation with Deputy Whip, Jane Lofthouse, a couple of days before the panel interview. Lofthouse went through the report with him, a report that the Whip’s office compiles for every sitting councillor, and was quite clear. There were no complaints about Abdulmuhit and he had done his work as a councillor adequately and properly. The report was then (as far as we understand) sent on to Chief Whip and former Momentum employee, Anamul Islam.
Two days later, and approximately one hour before his interview on the 19th February, Abdulmuhit received an email from Jack Price, a Labour Party officer, stating that there were two complaints against him.
The substance was that he supported residents and shopkeepers in their dispute with the council on the new parking regulations; some readers might actually think that that was his job as a local councillor. (Readers might note that the council subsequently back-tracked and adopted most of the changes that locals were seeking).
Additionally, he was accused of publicising support that could be given to households without recourse to public funds during the Covid crisis from a voluntary organisation which was not the group that the council was working with. It would be interesting to discover what rule this broke, but as is the way these things were done, the details were somewhat opaque.
So the substance of the complaints were that he did his job supporting the views of residents to the council AND he offered support to a voluntary group who were giving food to people who had no access to public funds.
Only in the Labour Party, we suspect, could these matters be considered offences.
The greater part of his interview consisted of an interrogation about these ‘complaints’.
Abdulmuhit recognised that the knife had been put in and it came as no surprise to find that he was not selected as a candidate for the 2022 local elections.
Somewhat aggrieved at his treatment, Abdulmuhit wrote to the Chair of the selection panel, Gurinder Singh Josan. We have obtained a copy of his letter and reproduce it below.
Dear Gurinder,
Hope you are well. You chaired the panel that interviews led me for the Newham Council selections back in February. [Name redacted] suggested I send you this request.
During the interview some time was spent exploring 2 allegations against me which the Whip stated had been lodged with the Labour Party (Legal & Compliance) and was so serious that if selected the Whip would be removed.
I made it clear to the panel that I had never been informed of any allegations/complaints until 30 minutes before the interview. I think it was unfair for these to be raised on the day, knowing it was likely to unduly influence or affect my interview, which it clearly did. You cannot expect anyone to perform as well as they would with these alleged complaints looming over them minutes before an interview starts.
I am sure that the panel would also have been influenced by the fact that the allegations had been made in the report.
Despite this, I respect and accept the Panel's decision fully.
However, I now need to get to the bottom of this situation. I am concerned that there are allegations against me held at the Labour Party, about which I have little detail and about which I have still not been formally notified.
You stated during the interview that you are only going by what the Whip has written and you assured me a query will be raised with the Legal & Compliance to verify if there are outstanding complaints against me.
For closure, and my future work with the party, I would appreciate if you would help me with the following please:
Please Could you let me know the outcome of any enquiries made by the panel directly or indirectly regarding this issue with any unit of the Labour Party organisation and how that influenced your decision.
I would like details of any complaints or allegations against me held by any level of the Labour Party organisation, from the local party, the Whip's office, Regional Office and Legal & Compliance at Labour HQ.
I would also like to know the process for investigating these complaints or allegations, and how I can go about clearing my name.
This will help me greatly, to clear my name, defend myself against any accusations or clarify any outstanding issues. I believe this will be fully in line with natural justice, and our party values which I hold dear.
I hope you are able to help me and look forward to receiving some news from you and the relevant department within our Party.
It became evident that Josan had not contacted the Legal and Compliance Unit of the Labour Party.
We would like to reproduce Josan’s reply, but there isn’t one. Nor was there a reply to the follow up requests over the next few months.
He also submitted a Subject Access Request to the Labour Party. This got the same treatment.
If the analogy of the mushroom suggests itself to the way in which party members are treated, we can only concur.
Abdulmuhit complained to the ICO about the failure/refusal of the Labour Party to respond to his Subject Access Request and the ICO found in his favour, finding that the Labour Party had “not complied” with its obligations. They declined to take any further action, it seems they are somewhat overwhelmed by complaints from members of the Labour Party.
Informally, from relatively senior members of the party, Abdulmuhit has been told that the Labour Party recognises that there is no substance to any of the allegations, but they cannot say that publicly because it would shift the focus to what was said between Mayor Fiaz and Chief Whip Anamul Islam.
And that, it seems, would be embarrassing.
Abdulmuhit believes that his deselection was because he would not brown-nose to Fiaz.
We reported earlier that Fiaz had a list of 30 councillors she wanted rid of. It seems, we are told that she was informed that she could get rid of some, but 30 was too many. Abdulmuhit, it seems, was one of those that the Labour Party didn’t mind seeing go.
And go he has. After decades in the Labour Party, Abdulmuhit has resigned.
Who can blame him?