Discussion
Just to provide a little balance, if I may.
I live in TH. My polling station had representatives of the parties outside handing out leaflets. They were not intimidating.
There is a sizeable Bangladeshi population. Thanks to the mobilising efforts of (mostly white, radical) activists in the 1960s and 1970s, Bangladeshi immigrants were not spread throughout the city (as was the policy of the GLC at the time) but, instead, were (through a process of mass-squatting and other measures) allowed to carve out an enclave in what was (at the time) little better than a slum. They tend to vote for those from their own community; in this they are not at all unlike many other social and ethnic groups (in the UK and around the world).
Lutfur Rahman has been much-maligned. However, his mayoral record on substantive issues has actually been fairly good. He undoubtedly has his "pet causes" and, in that, I doubt he differs greatly from many other directly-elected executive mayors.
In the 8 years I've been living here, the levels of racial aggression, violence, crime, disorder, petty lawlessness and so on have declined markedly. That process has been faster during Rahman's period in office. (note: correlation does not necessarily imply causation).
I have met the unsuccessful Labour mayoral candidate twice during the campaign. He did not impress me and, frankly, did not deserve to win.
I believe it is not at all impossible to win against THF / Rahman in TH; it is impossible to win by mud-slinging, lazy campaigning, or the selection of poor-quality candidates. An "anti-Rahman" stance (which has characterised the last 2 Labour mayoral campaigns) just won't work; rightly so, IMHO.
The conduct of the counts and the policing of some electoral procedures has undoubtedly been poor. I would favour non-TH staff for the next election. I am hoping for firm intervention from the Electoral Commission on this. But the "chaos" is no different to that witnessed in certain other countries, which is perhaps unsurprising given the proportion of immigrants involved in the process. National standards need to be applied from a national standpoint to ensure compliance; hand-wringing will get nowhere.
Although I am no great supporter of Rahman's, I do believe the best (of a rather bad lot) won the mayoral election.
I live in TH. My polling station had representatives of the parties outside handing out leaflets. They were not intimidating.
There is a sizeable Bangladeshi population. Thanks to the mobilising efforts of (mostly white, radical) activists in the 1960s and 1970s, Bangladeshi immigrants were not spread throughout the city (as was the policy of the GLC at the time) but, instead, were (through a process of mass-squatting and other measures) allowed to carve out an enclave in what was (at the time) little better than a slum. They tend to vote for those from their own community; in this they are not at all unlike many other social and ethnic groups (in the UK and around the world).
Lutfur Rahman has been much-maligned. However, his mayoral record on substantive issues has actually been fairly good. He undoubtedly has his "pet causes" and, in that, I doubt he differs greatly from many other directly-elected executive mayors.
In the 8 years I've been living here, the levels of racial aggression, violence, crime, disorder, petty lawlessness and so on have declined markedly. That process has been faster during Rahman's period in office. (note: correlation does not necessarily imply causation).
I have met the unsuccessful Labour mayoral candidate twice during the campaign. He did not impress me and, frankly, did not deserve to win.
I believe it is not at all impossible to win against THF / Rahman in TH; it is impossible to win by mud-slinging, lazy campaigning, or the selection of poor-quality candidates. An "anti-Rahman" stance (which has characterised the last 2 Labour mayoral campaigns) just won't work; rightly so, IMHO.
The conduct of the counts and the policing of some electoral procedures has undoubtedly been poor. I would favour non-TH staff for the next election. I am hoping for firm intervention from the Electoral Commission on this. But the "chaos" is no different to that witnessed in certain other countries, which is perhaps unsurprising given the proportion of immigrants involved in the process. National standards need to be applied from a national standpoint to ensure compliance; hand-wringing will get nowhere.
Although I am no great supporter of Rahman's, I do believe the best (of a rather bad lot) won the mayoral election.
skwdenyer said:
Very interesting stuff.
Thanks for that - a genuinely useful contribution.I agree that external oversight is required and, frankly, it seemed obvious prior to the recent vote. One would hope that in future we are able to find a way to serve the interests of majority immigrant populations in the UK - Bangladeshi or otherwise - without dismantling the very fabric of our much envied and (generally) fair democratic process.
z4RRSchris99 said:
it's Thursday night. I've been having a drink and as such a takeaway from my fav place in tower hamlets
they have tried to apply for a booze lience and were told for £40k to the mayor it would be fine
until tribal politics ends there will be no democracy
Interesting. TH recently opted to reverse the presumptive basis of alcohol licensing (as they are allowed to do); it is now for the applicant to convince the authority that there is no downside to the application. There have been a large number of (justified) licence reviews in order to reign in other negative effects.they have tried to apply for a booze lience and were told for £40k to the mayor it would be fine
until tribal politics ends there will be no democracy
Since the Mayor doesn't have a majority on the licensing subcommittee then I'm a little confused as to what benefit the £40k would serve. There may be a bent licensing official somewhere, and such people should be rooted-out. Using the Mayor's name is a good ruse but where's the evidence that the money would in fact go to Rahman?
Will your local place be making a complaint? If a licensing application is refused, an appeal to a Magistrates' Court is available. Unless I misunderstand, any Magistrates' Court will do, so one could even appeal to a Court outside of TH. I know many non-Bangladeshi, uncorrupt recipients of licences in TH FWIW.
z4RRSchris99 said:
it's Thursday night. I've been having a drink and as such a takeaway from my fav place in tower hamlets
they have tried to apply for a booze lience and were told for £40k to the mayor it would be fine
until tribal politics ends there will be no democracy
I call BS on that I'm afraid mate, are you basically saying the owner was told to bung the Mayor £40k and they would get a licence? I think this would have made the national press if it was the case.they have tried to apply for a booze lience and were told for £40k to the mayor it would be fine
until tribal politics ends there will be no democracy
z4RRSchris99 said:
just relaying what I was told by my favourite takeaway.
maybe hes chatting s
t
It is quite possible that this is what he has been told, by somebody claiming to be (or actually) associated with the Mayor. Or it is possible that there is a corrupt licensing officer in the Borough (in the context of which it bears observing that most of the officers I deal with on a wide variety of commercial issues are of any other extraction but Bangladeshi). He doesn't have to be lying for the truth of the matter to be not as he portrayed it to be.maybe hes chatting s
t
Telegraph reveals more on the Tower Hamlets shennaniganshttp://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10867666/...
Yazar said:
Telegraph reveals more on the Tower Hamlets shennaniganshttp://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10867666/...
Edited by eccles on Sunday 1st June 08:43
skwdenyer said:
Lutfur Rahman has been much-maligned. However, his mayoral record on substantive issues has actually been fairly good. He undoubtedly has his "pet causes" and, in that, I doubt he differs greatly from many other directly-elected executive mayors.
In the 8 years I've been living here, the levels of racial aggression, violence, crime, disorder, petty lawlessness and so on have declined markedly. That process has been faster during Rahman's period in office. (note: correlation does not necessarily imply causation).
Ah, a nice bit of comedy from Pistonheads, once again. Statements such as the above are so far from the truth I don't know where to start. Let's kick-off with notion that crime in Tower Hamlets has dropped since Rahman came to power. Less than 15 seconds on Google gives me the following Guardian link (let's remember that The Grauniad has a history of being pro-Rahman): In the 8 years I've been living here, the levels of racial aggression, violence, crime, disorder, petty lawlessness and so on have declined markedly. That process has been faster during Rahman's period in office. (note: correlation does not necessarily imply causation).
http://www.theguardian.com/uk/datablog/2012/apr/12...
Tower Hamlets is the only London borough in the survey that has seen an increase in crime.
Rahman's record on 'substantive issues' is fairly good, is it? I struggle to find a single issue, 'substantive' or not, on which he has shown himself to be anything other than a disaster. Cleanliness of streets? Nope. Housing? The bits paid for from central government, yes - but Rahman takes (false) credit for those. Nope. Schools? Yes, but again those are paid for from central government. Crime? Well, let's look at that Grauniad link again. Community Cohesion? Stop it, you're making me laugh so much I'm struggling to stay on my chair.
Rahman is a divisive racist who serves the interests of a single community. He is a manipulative liar who has no regard for the democratic process or the truth. He claims to have been a solicitor, so one would expect him to know better - only the Law Society has never heard of him. Do you want me to go on?
Oli.
Edited by zcacogp on Sunday 1st June 21:24
eccles said:
Nothing in that article is a surprise if you've ever read the Rotten Boroughs column in Private Eye. I think the only surprise is that nothing ever seems to be done about it!
Spot on, eccles. Pickles has much to answer for in this respect. It's a disgrace, and the more that is known about it the better. Oli.
skwdenyer said:
In the 8 years I've been living here, the levels of racial aggression, violence, crime, disorder, petty lawlessness and so on have declined markedly. That process has been faster during Rahman's period in office. (note: correlation does not necessarily imply causation).
But it's still a 3rd world sh8thole albeit with 3rd world community policing. Whilst people aspire to live in places like Hackney they don't generally want to live in TH. I do frequent the good restaurants though but I don't attribute their on-going success to anything being done by Rahman.I'm not a fan of this mayor but much of what is being described I've seen happen all over the country
- elected members making sure that their pet projects are funded and thereby ensuring votes
- elected members making sure that their mates all get on the key committees
- elected members involved with/sympathetic to racists, sexists and homophobes
- politicians at all levels using a divisive narrative to secure support from one section of a community
- the dodgy use of postal votes
This area does have a high profile female Labour MP. She managed to win inspite of the 'First' party's antics and is on record challenging all this dodgyness. Perhaps if the Labour party put forward stronger candidates at a local level then this Mayor would be beaten. Tower Hamlets is genuinely diverse and even if the Bengali vote exclusively turned out for Rahman, which clearly isn't the case, a genuine alternative that reached out to a wider demographic would see Rahman beaten.
- elected members making sure that their pet projects are funded and thereby ensuring votes
- elected members making sure that their mates all get on the key committees
- elected members involved with/sympathetic to racists, sexists and homophobes
- politicians at all levels using a divisive narrative to secure support from one section of a community
- the dodgy use of postal votes
This area does have a high profile female Labour MP. She managed to win inspite of the 'First' party's antics and is on record challenging all this dodgyness. Perhaps if the Labour party put forward stronger candidates at a local level then this Mayor would be beaten. Tower Hamlets is genuinely diverse and even if the Bengali vote exclusively turned out for Rahman, which clearly isn't the case, a genuine alternative that reached out to a wider demographic would see Rahman beaten.
zcacogp said:
skwdenyer said:
Lutfur Rahman has been much-maligned. However, his mayoral record on substantive issues has actually been fairly good. He undoubtedly has his "pet causes" and, in that, I doubt he differs greatly from many other directly-elected executive mayors.
In the 8 years I've been living here, the levels of racial aggression, violence, crime, disorder, petty lawlessness and so on have declined markedly. That process has been faster during Rahman's period in office. (note: correlation does not necessarily imply causation).
Ah, a nice bit of comedy from Pistonheads, once again. Statements such as the above are so far from the truth I don't know where to start. Let's kick-off with notion that crime in Tower Hamlets has dropped since Rahman came to power. Less than 15 seconds on Google gives me the following Guardian link (let's remember that The Grauniad has a history of being pro-Rahman): In the 8 years I've been living here, the levels of racial aggression, violence, crime, disorder, petty lawlessness and so on have declined markedly. That process has been faster during Rahman's period in office. (note: correlation does not necessarily imply causation).
http://www.theguardian.com/uk/datablog/2012/apr/12...
Tower Hamlets is the only London borough in the survey that has seen an increase in crime.
- I have lived here for >8 years;
- where I live crime, disorder, petty lawlessness, "aggro" and so on have declined markedly and visibly ;
- where I live white people no longer routinely get stabbed in the street, assaulted or verbally abused;
- etc.
You'll also note that I explicitly did not link Rahman to this change - correlation, not causation.
zcacogp said:
Rahman's record on 'substantive issues' is fairly good, is it? I struggle to find a single issue, 'substantive' or not, on which he has shown himself to be anything other than a disaster.
Cleanliness of streets? Nope.
Where I live and in the areas I visit elsewhere in TH, subjective street cleanliness has improved markedly. There is a very proactive grafiti team (who clean and/or repaint premises), there are proactive waste enforcement teams (I spent some time talking to one this morning), and so on.Cleanliness of streets? Nope.
zcacogp said:
Housing? The bits paid for from central government, yes - but Rahman takes (false) credit for those. Nope.
The spinning-out of TH's council housing into Tower Hamlets Homes has - again, subjectively, resulted in increased attention to detail, fixing of problems, redocoration and repair, and less social problems. I am not a THH tenant, but I live close to several very large (and previously "sink") estates.The link you give mentions all-but nothing of housing; it is no more or less a statement of personal opinion than my post. It happens to support your position, but not with anything objective.
zcacogp said:
Schools? Yes, but again those are paid for from central government.
Paid-for and managed are different things. Are you saying Rahman and the Council has no sway in local education?zcacogp said:
Crime? Well, let's look at that Grauniad link again. Community Cohesion? Stop it, you're making me laugh so much I'm struggling to stay on my chair.
See above. The basis of my observations is subjective, and openly so. There is much greater police presence now than 8 years ago; that has helped with street crime, but has also increased detection rates.I would also observe, from my direct experience of my neighbours and those I work with, crime reporting is far more likely than 8 years ago, not least because fear of reprisals is much-reduced and faith in the police is much-increased.
zcacogp said:
Rahman is a divisive racist who serves the interests of a single community. He is a manipulative liar who has no regard for the democratic process or the truth. He claims to have been a solicitor, so one would expect him to know better - only the Law Society has never heard of him. Do you want me to go on?
I'm very confused. You seem to have mistaken me for a supporter and/or apologist of Rahman's. I haven't adopted that position, here or elsewhere. I've met the man; I've also met the most recent of his principal opponents, someone who rightly did not get elected.But you appear to believe that the personal failings of the man render the direct observations of those who live in TH redundant and irrelevant. I would beg to disagree.
I characterised his record as "fairly good." I've lived under much, much worse councils. I've also lived under better ones. But I will categorically stand by my personal observations of the improvements in the quality of life where I live during (but not necessarily directly due to) Rahman's first term.
fido said:
skwdenyer said:
In the 8 years I've been living here, the levels of racial aggression, violence, crime, disorder, petty lawlessness and so on have declined markedly. That process has been faster during Rahman's period in office. (note: correlation does not necessarily imply causation).
But it's still a 3rd world sh8thole albeit with 3rd world community policing. Whilst people aspire to live in places like Hackney they don't generally want to live in TH. I do frequent the good restaurants though but I don't attribute their on-going success to anything being done by Rahman.
skwdenyer said:
I'm very confused. You seem to have mistaken me for a supporter and/or apologist of Rahman's. I haven't adopted that position, here or elsewhere. I've met the man; I've also met the most recent of his principal opponents, someone who rightly did not get elected.
OK, fair enough, although your post (and indeed the part quoted above) show that you have a level of support for the man - are you trying to deny that? Let's qualify my position as well; I've lived in LBTH for over 20 years and have seen improvements in that time, although most of them not in the last four years. It is also striking that in the last ten years the areas just outside LBTH have improved markedly more than any part of TH. Parts of Hackney have become very desirable, as have swathes of Newham and much of Islington. TH is lagging behind these by a country mile, to put it mildly. My impressions of Rahman from several meetings with him have been that he would make a poor junior manager in well-run council. Biggs may not be wonderful but he is a lot, lot better - and that's before you start to look at the various proven allegations about Rahman, corruption, IFE links and so on.
Oli.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff