Aug 02 2013

ILG says – It’s LABOUR which is in “disarray”

labour_rosePress release from the Harrow Independent Labour Group…

The competence of Harrow’s Labour Group to run Harrow Council must be called into question in light of the disarray of their selection process. Whilst some of their highly competent Councillors such as Bill Stephenson, Victoria Silver and Ben Wealthy appear to be stepping down and not running again, others such as former Cabinet members Cllrs Keith Ferry and Margaret Davine, have apparently been de-selected under Harrow Labour ‘s selection process.

Yet allegedly Cllr Navin Shah, his wife Rekha and his daughter Aneka have all been selected to run as well as Michael Borio, one of the tellers who signed a slip confirming Cllr Thaya Idaikkadar as leader then questioned his own decision and called for a recount. Cllr Kairul Kareema Marikar, who in a recent Council meeting displayed her persistent lack of knowledge by attempting to ask a supplementary question of a different Councillor, has apparently been selected to run again in West Harrow.

Cllr Thaya Idaikkadar, leader of the Independent Labour Group and Leader of Harrow Council said: “When Husain Akhtar left us, Labour group leader David Perry said that we were ‘in disarray’. So far at least three of his councillors are not standing again, his Deputy Leader, his Chief Whip and his Group Chair have been deselected, and he has lost nine to the ILG. Now that is what’s called ‘disarray’!”

It is interesting that Harrow Labour refuses to acknowledge the serious problems that led to nine Councillors leaving the Group. Calls for an Independent Inquiry have been ignored. Our information is that the selection panels have failed to follow Labour Party rules and guidance of reflecting the community they wish to serve.

(Visited 22 times, 1 visits today)


Skip to comment form

  1. Cllr. David Perry

    Well Well Well.

    Its seems the Independent Group running Harrow Council under Thaya Idaikkadar’s lack of leadership, have taken a leaf out of the book of their former colleague named Akhtar. They seem more interested in trying to throw mud at the Labour Party rather than concentrating on running the services that the people of Harrow rely upon.

    I must say it is laughable that after a break in the mud throwing, the Independent Group now want to start this game up again, when they know full well that on behalf of the people of Harrow, the Labour Group are holding them (quite rightly) to account for the decisions that are being taken at the Council.

    One minute the Independent Group are best friends with Akhtar, and the next minute they are publicly fighting with the person they were hell bent on pulling into the Labour Party 5 months ago.

    Can I suggest that the Independent Group use this weekend to go canvassing, just like our party will be doing, in order to talk to voters, pick up the issues on the ground, and follow them up promptly, just like Councillors should do.

    Leave the bitterness behind and get on with doing the job you were ‘not’ elected to do.

  2. ricky123

    I cant believe I have just read that comment from Cllr Perry, pot-kettle of the first order.
    I am amazed Labour have deselected Cllr Davine, and why is Cllr Silver stepping down, we need Cllrs like those. Then we see Rekha Shah has been selected, its baffling. Cllr Perry, I dont think you need to suggest anything to the Independent Labour Party as I think they are doing OK and a lot of people in Harrow are more than happy with the change as they now see things happening. After hearing all this bickering and back stabbing in the Labour party (if is true) and if the Independent Labour Party stand in the next election they will I am sure will give Labour a run for its money, they may even win.

  3. Jeff Anderson (@jande76959)

    The ILG have got it wrong again, they keep saying that Michael Borio called for a recount – he did not. I suggest they can get it right if Thaya asks Cllr Will Stoodley about this, he will be able to give Thaya full details!

    The ILG have also got their guesses wrong about who has been selected and who not, but all the candidates accepted the result of a democratic process, something Thaya proved he cannot.

  4. All things good

    ricky 123 would you kindly offer up some evidence to back your statement above of a lot of people in Harrow are happy with the Independent party? I for one am not and know a number of others who are not either!

  5. ricky123

    All things good, I am happy and I know a number of people who are, the same as you know a number of people who are not happy, so what if I asked you the same question. Why do we need evidence, evidence for what, it’s just what I hear and I suppose it’s just what you hear. Lets see what happens at the next election, I think there will be a surprise.

  6. AllThingsGood

    ricky123 what we need is an opinion poll of harrow residents but the Labour party and Harrow Council would be too scared to do that .After all they were cowardly to go in at a 2% Council Tax increase ( which need not have happened with Govt support and less wastage of our money) therefore just avoiding a local referendum.

  7. Thaya10

    OH, JEFF, come alive. It is Cllr Will Stoodley who told me it was Michael Borio who called for recount. If it was not him who called. You called the out going leader. Was it you on your own then?

    Cllr Perry was elected by about 18 councillors, I was elected by 35 councillors in the full council meeting. Why can’t you accept democracy?

  8. Cllr Willie Stoodley

    OMG where does one start?! Dave Perry accused ILG of being “in disarray” so ILG naturally respond with our own statement. That is “cut and thrust of politics” not “mudslinging”. And since when did calling 5 opposition Councillors “highly competent” constitute “mudslinging”? Also noted is a complete lack of reply by Dave Perry to the actual comments in ILG’s release, yet therein the false accusation that ILG were “publicly fighting” with Husain at the time he left – can we see that publicly fighting article please Dave?! And if Jeff Anderson’s statement is correct (which at least does indeed address some of the points raised in ILG’s release) then why didn’t Dave Perry say those comments in his comment? Because of yet more disarray one suspects…

    If Dave Perry hadn’t accused ILG of being in “disarray” ILG would not have exercised their right to reply – simple as that! This reminds me of the old adage – “IF YOU CAN’T TAKE IT, DON’T GIVE IT OUT”.

    And Jeff:
    1: Are you denying that Keith Ferry was not selected on his first attempt?
    2: Are you denying that Margaret Davine was not selected on her first two attempts?
    3: Are you denying that Rekha Shah has been selected?
    4: Are you denying that Aneka Shah has been selected?
    5: Are you denying that Michael Borrio has been selected?
    6: Are you denying that Kareema Marikar has been selected?
    Perhaps Navin is not standing – but you said “guesses” were wrong, which is plural – so come on then – which “guess” numbered 1 to 6 above is wrong?

    I would also like to clear up the matter of the recount. I am happy to swear on any religious book that Jeff Anderson, in what to me seemed like quite a panicked state, telephoned me to tell me that at one of Gareth Thomas’s get-togethers Michael Borrio had told Jeff that he (Michael) was not happy with the way the leadership votes had been counted (despite the fact that, as a teller, he had already signed them off as okay!). So either Jeff is lying or Michael is lying or they are both lying or they are both suffering from amnesia. Or let me put it another way – why the bloody hell would we have gone through all the hassle and embarrassment of another recount if someone hadn’t queried the way it had been done?! Are Jeff and Michael now saying that there was never any need for a recount, that the result was good, and that the recount was a complete and utter waste of time? Because if Jeff and Michael insist on denying that Michael queried the result with Jeff, and insist on denying that Jeff then called me, then the result wasn’t actually ever queried in the first place…according to Michael and Jeff…which makes the recount unnecessary; so in that case why did the recount happen?! More disarray, perhaps??!

    Over to you…

Comments have been disabled.