When Will the Standards Board Report?
Readers will recall that at a fractious meeting earlier this year, the former close comrades (Cllr Paul and Mayor Fiaz) found themselves in a hostile confrontation.
Basically, Paul suggested to Fiaz, quite strongly we are told, that her sums did not add up. Fiaz felt that being asked to justify her spending plans made her feel “unsafe”. She has declined to attend any further scrutiny meetings to justify her spending plans, because this too, it seems, would make her feel “unsafe”.
Five years ago, Cllr Paul was appointed as cabinet member for Finance, so it is reasonable to assume that he knows something about what he is discussing. When he was dropped by Fiaz following her re-election, (to a job she apparently, she didn’t want), the relationship between the two seems to have soured. Paul was replaced by Cllr Zulfiqar Ali.
It became evident that the Black cabinet members were being edged out and South Asian, particularly Muslim cabinet members were being appointed. Whilst this may have been entirely innocent and coincidental it did revive memories for some of the Black comrades about the way in which Asian party members had conducted coups in the East Ham and West Ham parties previously, removing all the Black senior officers from their posts and installing Asian members in their place.
Fiaz’s unwillingness to respond to questions, claiming that she was being bullied, came in stark contrast to her apparent willingness to bully colleagues. In the last council, some 18 members of her own Group wrote to the Labour Party asserting that she was bullying other councillors. To the best of our knowledge, the Labour Party never responded to this complaint, (mind you, they have had a lot on their plate).
Her use of the term “safe” or “unsafe” is interesting. It echoes concerns raised by other councillors. It appears that if she, or female cabinet members cannot answer or do not wish to answer a question from a colleague, all that they have to do now is utter the mantra, “this line of questioning is making me feel unsafe”. Variations on the theme are also acceptable.
Pressing the point can lead to allegations of misogyny. It’s a great way of shutting up the men and indeed putting them on the defensive. It’s also a great new political crime which seems to be measured by how one party felt (or says that she felt) rather than by what the other party did.
Whether this works in the long term will be seen in the way in which the standards board responds to two complaints.
Following the acrimonious Budget Scrutiny Commission meeting, Fiaz reported Paul to the Standards Advisory Committee for racism and misogyny. Paul in response has reported Fiaz for abusing the Standards Advisory Committee procedures.
The membership comprises an equal number of councillors and non-councillors:
Reza Choudhury (Chair)
Julie Van Bussel (Deputy Chair)
Gary Moses
What would once have been an acrimonious falling out between colleagues has been escalated to embrace the contemporary political offence of misogyny. (Misandry does not appear to be included in the list of contemporary political offences.)
It may be that this spat has little to do with the budget in Newham and much to do with the selections for the new parliamentary seat in Stratford and Bow. If Paul (a Stratford councillor) can be branded as a misogynist and a racist then he will be out of the running. This will leave the race rather more open for interested local politicians who fancy their chances.
Irrespective of the Stratford and Bow selections, the way in which the Standards Advisory Committee responds will have implications for the future operations of the council.