Red Herrings (05/05/14)
When I read this report from the BBC web site I was immediately reminded of the Labour Party's decision to refer the Falkirk vote rigging scandal to the police because this was a deliberate diversionary tactic, a complete red herring, since no one ever suggested that the law had been broken in Falkirk or that a criminal offence had been committed.
Instead the issue was about standards of behaviour and probity, whether or not the people involved in the allegations had acted properly or improperly, and in the event of the latter what the Labour leader, Ed Miliband, would do (under the rules) for potentially bringing the Labour Party into disrepute.
So the involvement of the police is ridiculous if you ask me, as the responsibility lay with the relevant Government Department or any public watchdogs acting on their behalf although I know from my own experience that many of these 'watchdog' bodies are really a waste of time - more like toothless tigers than fierce Rottweilers.
Tower Hamlets is one of four London councils with a directly elected mayor
There is "no new credible evidence of criminality" in files from an east London borough, to suspect fraud, the Metropolitan Police has said.
It follows claims broadcast on the BBC's Panorama that grants were made to charities in return for electoral support in Tower Hamlets.
Three files of material were handed to the police by the Department of Communities and Local Government.
The Met said there would be no new investigation into the files.
However the Met said there was an continuing investigation by police into alleged irregularity concerning money awarded by Tower Hamlets Council to an organisation within the borough.
'Welcome' news
Panorama had alleged the council, run by directly-elected mayor Lutfur Rahman, had diverted £3.6m of grants to Bangladeshi and Somali-run charities in return for political support.
A Scotland Yard spokesman said the files had been reviewed by a team of officers over the past six days.
It said: "In addition, officers have liaised with Pricewaterhouse Coopers LLP (PWC) who are conducting a full and wide-ranging audit of financial matters at The London Borough of Tower Hamlets."
Tower Hamlets Council insisted it had "seen no evidence" that its processes had been run inappropriately.
A spokesman for the council said: "The news from the Metropolitan Police is to be welcomed and Tower Hamlets will continue to work with the auditors and DCLG."
There is "no new credible evidence of criminality" in files from an east London borough, to suspect fraud, the Metropolitan Police has said.
It follows claims broadcast on the BBC's Panorama that grants were made to charities in return for electoral support in Tower Hamlets.
Three files of material were handed to the police by the Department of Communities and Local Government.
The Met said there would be no new investigation into the files.
However the Met said there was an continuing investigation by police into alleged irregularity concerning money awarded by Tower Hamlets Council to an organisation within the borough.
'Welcome' news
Panorama had alleged the council, run by directly-elected mayor Lutfur Rahman, had diverted £3.6m of grants to Bangladeshi and Somali-run charities in return for political support.
A Scotland Yard spokesman said the files had been reviewed by a team of officers over the past six days.
It said: "In addition, officers have liaised with Pricewaterhouse Coopers LLP (PWC) who are conducting a full and wide-ranging audit of financial matters at The London Borough of Tower Hamlets."
Tower Hamlets Council insisted it had "seen no evidence" that its processes had been run inappropriately.
A spokesman for the council said: "The news from the Metropolitan Police is to be welcomed and Tower Hamlets will continue to work with the auditors and DCLG."
Lutfur Rahman won in Tower Hamlets as an Independent, in 2010
Panorama had said it found Bangladeshi-born Mr Rahman had more than doubled funding recommended by officers for Bengali-run charities.
In a statement, it said: "We continue to stand by the programme's findings which uncovered serious concerns about the use of public money, which are still being investigated by the government.
"Our programme did not say there was evidence of criminality."
The inspection by PWC is continuing to look into the authority's payment of grants, the transfer of property, spending decisions in relation to publicity, and other contractual processes, from 25 October 2010.
It has been asked to report back to Communities and Local Government Secretary Eric Pickles by 30 June.
The Met Police said before the three files were handed to officers a report concerning irregularity was made to police by Tower Hamlets Council on 20 March.
Tower Hamlets Criminal Investigation Department is currently investigating irregularity concerning money awarded to the Brady Youth Forum in January and April 2013, which was identified in an internal review by the council.
There are elections in London on 22 May, including for the directly-elected Mayor of Tower Hamlets. A list of candidates will be published after the close of nominations next week.
Here is the Guardian's take on the leaked Labour Party report into the Falkirk vote rigging inquiry.
Now the Guardian is a Labour friendly paper and does its best to dilute some of the most damning conclusions - describing them as desk-bound research.
But even on the Guardian's partial analysis the following conclusions are both stark and clear:
Labour party's Falkirk membership inquiry report – analysis
The eight conclusions of the investigation into voting irregularities in the Scottish constituency
By Rajeev Syal
The Falkirk report arrives at eight conclusions in its executive summary, leaked to the press and widely interpreted as damning proof of forgery, bullying and "machine politics" by Unite, the union. The subsequent furore resulted in Ed Miliband inviting the police to investigate the claims and the suspension of two members, Stevie Deans and Karie Murphy.
But there is only limited evidence in the report which supports these conclusions. There is a reference to a related "initial investigation" but this appears to be only statistical desk-bound research.
Conclusion 1 says that "deliberate attempts were made to frustrate these interviews" – which appears to be an exaggeration. There is only one example of action that could be interpreted as a form of obstruction to the inquiry: when the investigator Jane Shaw was confronted by Stevie Deans at the house of his relative Brenda McDermott. Shaw claims that Deans insisted McDermott no longer wished to speak. Friends of Deans say he did not frustrate the interview process.
Conclusion 2: "There is evidence that members were recruited without their knowledge." That is supported by evidence. The Labour party's investigator gathered evidence from at least three people saying they were unaware that they had been recruited before they were contacted by the party.
But a subsequent party investigation has cleared anyone of any wrongdoing on the grounds that the party memberships were bought as a gift, which is within the rules. The question remains: why weren't the report's authors aware of this when they they came to this damning conclusion?
Conclusion 3: "There is evidence that the join date of members was set to the first receipt of forms even though those forms were incorrectly completed." That is not blamed on any individual within the report, leaving it open to the possibility that the problem lay with the process. The report also shows that Labour officials were reliant on union officials at times to verify when forms had been processed.
Conclusion 4 – "There is evidence that members were pressured into completing direct debit forms" – is only partially backed by evidence. A questionnaire filled in by Lorraine Kane, a recent recruitee and a relative of Deans, claims that Karie Murphy "badgered" her until she signed the document. However, Kane's claims have since been "clarified", leading the party to conclude that there was no breach of rules. Murphy denies any wrongdoing.
Conclusion 5 – "There is evidence that members were persuaded to supply financial details without being aware they were completing a direct debit mandate." But the party's inquiry does not appear to have conclusive evidence to back this claim.
Conclusion 6 – "There is evidence that signatures were forged on either application forms or direct debit mandates or other documents" – overstates the evidence within the report. While the investigators say they found discrepancies on both the direct debit mandate forms supplied by the Kane and McDermott families, there is no evidence of forgery within the report.
Conclusion 7 – "There can be no doubt that members were recruited in an attempt to manipulate party processes." There is no hard evidence to back this claim. Although there is no doubt that Murphy and Unite were engaged in a recruitment drive, so were other candidates who wished to gain the party's nomination, such as Gregor Poynton.
Conclusion 8 – "Whilst it is likely some members were recruited or joined during this period in compliance with current rules and procedures, there is sufficient evidence to raise concern about the legitimacy of members qualifying to participate in the selection under the current freeze date of 19 May 2013." There is evidence in the report that raises concerns about the legitimacy of members. As a result, the joining date for members eligible to vote was changed.
Panorama had said it found Bangladeshi-born Mr Rahman had more than doubled funding recommended by officers for Bengali-run charities.
In a statement, it said: "We continue to stand by the programme's findings which uncovered serious concerns about the use of public money, which are still being investigated by the government.
"Our programme did not say there was evidence of criminality."
The inspection by PWC is continuing to look into the authority's payment of grants, the transfer of property, spending decisions in relation to publicity, and other contractual processes, from 25 October 2010.
It has been asked to report back to Communities and Local Government Secretary Eric Pickles by 30 June.
The Met Police said before the three files were handed to officers a report concerning irregularity was made to police by Tower Hamlets Council on 20 March.
Tower Hamlets Criminal Investigation Department is currently investigating irregularity concerning money awarded to the Brady Youth Forum in January and April 2013, which was identified in an internal review by the council.
There are elections in London on 22 May, including for the directly-elected Mayor of Tower Hamlets. A list of candidates will be published after the close of nominations next week.
Falkirk Inquiry (5 February 2014)
Here is the Guardian's take on the leaked Labour Party report into the Falkirk vote rigging inquiry.
Now the Guardian is a Labour friendly paper and does its best to dilute some of the most damning conclusions - describing them as desk-bound research.
But even on the Guardian's partial analysis the following conclusions are both stark and clear:
- There is at least one example of the inquiry being obstructed
- There is evidence that members were recruited without their knowledge
- There is evidence that Labour officials were relying on union officials to verify issues
- There is evidence that members were pressurised into completing direct debits
- There is evidence that signatures were forged
- There is evidence in the report about the legitimacy of members
Labour party's Falkirk membership inquiry report – analysis
The eight conclusions of the investigation into voting irregularities in the Scottish constituency
By Rajeev Syal
The Falkirk report arrives at eight conclusions in its executive summary, leaked to the press and widely interpreted as damning proof of forgery, bullying and "machine politics" by Unite, the union. The subsequent furore resulted in Ed Miliband inviting the police to investigate the claims and the suspension of two members, Stevie Deans and Karie Murphy.
But there is only limited evidence in the report which supports these conclusions. There is a reference to a related "initial investigation" but this appears to be only statistical desk-bound research.
Conclusion 1 says that "deliberate attempts were made to frustrate these interviews" – which appears to be an exaggeration. There is only one example of action that could be interpreted as a form of obstruction to the inquiry: when the investigator Jane Shaw was confronted by Stevie Deans at the house of his relative Brenda McDermott. Shaw claims that Deans insisted McDermott no longer wished to speak. Friends of Deans say he did not frustrate the interview process.
Conclusion 2: "There is evidence that members were recruited without their knowledge." That is supported by evidence. The Labour party's investigator gathered evidence from at least three people saying they were unaware that they had been recruited before they were contacted by the party.
But a subsequent party investigation has cleared anyone of any wrongdoing on the grounds that the party memberships were bought as a gift, which is within the rules. The question remains: why weren't the report's authors aware of this when they they came to this damning conclusion?
Conclusion 3: "There is evidence that the join date of members was set to the first receipt of forms even though those forms were incorrectly completed." That is not blamed on any individual within the report, leaving it open to the possibility that the problem lay with the process. The report also shows that Labour officials were reliant on union officials at times to verify when forms had been processed.
Conclusion 4 – "There is evidence that members were pressured into completing direct debit forms" – is only partially backed by evidence. A questionnaire filled in by Lorraine Kane, a recent recruitee and a relative of Deans, claims that Karie Murphy "badgered" her until she signed the document. However, Kane's claims have since been "clarified", leading the party to conclude that there was no breach of rules. Murphy denies any wrongdoing.
Conclusion 5 – "There is evidence that members were persuaded to supply financial details without being aware they were completing a direct debit mandate." But the party's inquiry does not appear to have conclusive evidence to back this claim.
Conclusion 6 – "There is evidence that signatures were forged on either application forms or direct debit mandates or other documents" – overstates the evidence within the report. While the investigators say they found discrepancies on both the direct debit mandate forms supplied by the Kane and McDermott families, there is no evidence of forgery within the report.
Conclusion 7 – "There can be no doubt that members were recruited in an attempt to manipulate party processes." There is no hard evidence to back this claim. Although there is no doubt that Murphy and Unite were engaged in a recruitment drive, so were other candidates who wished to gain the party's nomination, such as Gregor Poynton.
Conclusion 8 – "Whilst it is likely some members were recruited or joined during this period in compliance with current rules and procedures, there is sufficient evidence to raise concern about the legitimacy of members qualifying to participate in the selection under the current freeze date of 19 May 2013." There is evidence in the report that raises concerns about the legitimacy of members. As a result, the joining date for members eligible to vote was changed.
