A report just published by the Standards and Privileges Committee of the House of Commons upholds a complaint by Tory council candidate Duncan Crossey. Mr Crossey brought a complaint after it had been raised by a local resident in the Shadwell ward of the London Borough of Tower Hamlets. Mr Crossey complained that Mr Galloway had failed to include the George Galloway Legal Fund in the MPs' Register of Interests. The Fund had financed the Respect MP's successful libel actions against the Daily Telegraph and the Christian Science Monitor.
For weeks Mr Galloway has been hypocritically complaining about a lack of transparency in the Labour Party's financial affairs and he has now been found to be less than upright in his own affairs. The Committee concludes:
"We agree with the Commissioner that Mr Galloway should have registered the Legal Fund under Category 10 and the four individual donations that exceeded the registration threshold for Category 5 (Gifts). We therefore uphold Mr Crossey’s complaint. In the light of this conclusion, Mr Galloway should register both the Legal Funds and the relevant donations accordingly, within seven days of the publication of this report. In accordance with our usual practice in cases of failure to register an interest, we have asked the Commissioner to ensure that these entries appear in the next published Register in a distinctive form. If Mr Galloway fails to comply, we reserve the right to give further consideration to this case, and to report again to the House."
The outcome of the Tower Hamlets elections will be one of the most interesting of races to watch next Thursday night. ConservativeHome's on-the-ground sources predict that half of Labour's ruling cabinet will probably lose their seats and the council may, come Friday morning, have a roughly equal split of Labour, Tory, LibDem and Respect councillors.
Mr Cameron also unveiled plans to transform the party by ensuring that a tenth of candidates in winnable seats were from ethnic minorities. Addressing parliamentary journalists at Westminster, he made no apologies for setting up a secret group to promote the selection of women by announcing that the new "priority list" of top-quality candidates would have more women than men on it.
The list of up to 150 names had originally been expected to be split evenly between the sexes but Mr Cameron said that "more than 50 per cent will be women".
Posted by: No more men | April 26, 2006 at 11:24
Can you please post your thoughts, "No more men", on subject.
Posted by: Editor | April 26, 2006 at 11:29
Galloway is a joke, but unfortunately a joke that some people take seriously.
Posted by: Chris Palmer | April 26, 2006 at 11:31
Hats off to Duncan Crossey for doing the leg work on this. Puts some of our employed CCHQ staffers and assorted hangers on to shame and shows that activists who are tenacious can lead the news agenda.
Posted by: Mark Clarke | April 26, 2006 at 12:08
Yeah, well done Duncan! Top chap.
Posted by: Edward | April 26, 2006 at 12:23
This isn't strictly on point, but it concerns Tower Hamlets: Galloway's criticism of the Labour council as running a banana republic election seems to be ringing true this time round - my partner and his best friend have both got postal votes for the St Dunstans and Stepney ward (next to Shadwell actually) - only there is no Envelope 'B' there. We think that submitting the vote as it is would probably invalidate it, and the council's response this morning was: I'll speak to my superior and get back to you.
great.
I also raised an eyebrow when i saw that only 2 of the 3 Conservative Party candidates on the ballot paper have the logo by their names. I'm not sure if this is deliberate on one candidate's part, a screw-up on her part or a screw up on the council's part. I shall watch the results with even more interest than I already had...
Editor, apologies for going off topic but I am really hacked off by how poorly our council does anything, including run an election!
My personal feeling is that Labour will suffer calamitous losses on all 3 fronts. And if not for Respect, the Lib dems could spring an absolutely massive victory.
Posted by: James Turner | April 26, 2006 at 13:19
It used to be the Libdem's flagship borough, didn't it? When I lived in Bow they were down to 3 wards - I *think* (but don't know) the liberals were burned by flirting with a "community based" housing policy (a euphemism; but probably not a million miles away from what Frank Field has been discussing re combating discontent).
Posted by: Graeme Archer | April 26, 2006 at 16:24
I find it strange that the RESPECT have failed at attract as much hostile attention as the BNP despite some equally repellant views. The radical Islamic element has views on homosexuals and women quite at odds with the Communist element that wants a violent revolution to overthrow capitalism.
Posted by: Richard | April 26, 2006 at 19:26
Richard, dont you think it may be because Respect is an absolute joke? And its leader even more so? I cannot get the image of a Cat out of my mind I'm afraid.
Posted by: Annabel Herriott | April 26, 2006 at 23:33