Has This Woman Destroyed Newham Labour?

There was a time when Newham Labour was a bastion which sent out canvassers to neighbouring boroughs to bolster their election attempts. We can recall dozens of activists from Newham supporting Labour candidates in Redbridge, Barking and Dagenham and further afield into deepest Essex.

The Labour presence in Newham was, to all intents and purposes, unassailable and Newham exported its activists to assist candidates who were facing tougher fights elsewhere.

How things have changed. Labour now struggles to get a dozen to support its own candidate, and half of these are councillors. And half the councillors no longer turn out.

Newham Labour suffered from a number of problems. Not least of these was that the previous regime had made it look easy. Anyone could do it. So, anyone tried.

An alliance of Leftist/Corbynistas with disgruntled mainstreamers who were aggrieved that their numerous talents either hadn’t been noticed or had been rejected, joined with an increasingly large number of Muslim members.

This history is being brushed under the carpet, but it is only a few years ago. This strange alliance of the religiously conservative, (not to say socially reactionary) and the secular far left contained within it, two unfortunate trends. The first was antisemitism and this website has covered the antisemitism of Muslim councillors and left wingers in Newham. Labour has tackled this but it would be something of an exaggeration to suggest that the problem has been solved.

The second problem was that large numbers of new(ish) members had problems with their membership status. This problem was not an issue in the Wales era because when the Wales camp raised the issue with the London Region office, the complaint was ignored. When raised in wider forums, they were accused of Islamophobia, which was a convenient way in which to shut down complaints.

However, no sooner had  Fiaz ascended to the post of mayor than she then fell out with some of her erstwhile supporters. Labour, having ditched Jeremy Corbyn by this time, then decided that it would conduct an enquiry into the membership. The numbers were never published, but our sources suggested that there were numbers in the region of 1000 members whose membership was suspect and who were subsequently expelled or left of their own accord. 

The problems were that members in full-time work were paying reduced fees; some were not living at the addresses they put on their applications; some were not registered to vote in Newham; and some did not live in the borough at all.

The belief is that they were there to ensure that Fiaz beat Wales in the party selection procedures. Having done this, it didn’t matter much; their memberships would in all probability have lapsed anyway. Historically, when this sort of thing happened a single individual would pay the membership fees for a group, therefore by paying at the reduced rate, he would save a considerable sum. It is not known whether this was the case on this occasion.

Her ascension to the role of mayor saw a change in policy. Out went the focus on finance and detail, along with a raft of initiatives associated with Wales. In came the politics of broad generalisations and wishful thinking. And the effect on the finances has been marked.

Fiaz was elected as the standard bearer of Corbynite Labour. As the political winds changed, so did she and she was soon at odds with some of those who worked assiduously to get her elected. Not the least amongst these was one Mehmood Mirza. 

It is a matter of continuing debate whether Mirza was expelled or chose to leave the Labour Party. In either case, the result was the same. He has been organising at the grassroots and now leads the opposition to Labour on the council.

When antisemitism rocked Labour in the Corbyn years, Newham was not immune, (see here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here).

The issues of widespread antisemitism and membership irregularities led to the suspension of both constituency parties. And so the situation has remained.

One of the unplanned consequences of this prolonged suspension is that the activist base of the party has withered.

In its place we have a line of young professionals who want to be MPs, (and some older hacks who will now never be), supported by a host of community minded individuals who would like to help the community but who have little knowledge of the workings of the council, let alone monitoring the spend of a billion-pound budget. And of course, there are also those who will sit back, take the money and contribute nothing.

The selection procedures for the 2022 slate of candidates reeked of nepotism (200 applicants, 70 or so interviewed!) and the chief requirement seemed to be an inability to criticise the mayor.

The problem with the cack-handed authoritarianism employed by Labour for 2022 is that it drives difference into opposition. Most notably, with the rise of Newham Independent Group. Mirza could reasonably have expected a council seat in 2018, if not a cabinet post for the efforts he put in to getting Fiaz selected. Instead, he was given the boot.

We have not seen the recent membership figures for Newham, but our suspicion is that they are dropping.

On top of this, we have two opposition parties that are actually picking up seats, and appealing to very different demographics. And Labour is looking increasingly tired, the performance of the current administration has been lamentable, its activists look dispirited and it has run out of ideas.

Sooner or later, members will ask, why are we in a party when they cannot take part in anything and cannot even choose their own candidates?

Or is the Labour Party merely there to provide a vehicle for the personal ambitions of individuals who would struggle to find work in the outside world, but find the idea of a sinecure in the political world enticing?