Labour candidate suspended for 'transphobia'

I'm pondering how much canvassing Labour had done and whether they knew they'd lose and were looking for a scapegoat?
My local experience was that you'd have a good side before election day which seats you'd win or run close.

I doubt they would have deliberately wanted to piss off all the whiny misogynistic students nationwide by causing this kerfuffle.

This is probably a better indication of party split across the borough. The results of the recent Mayoral election:

The election turnout was 20.69% of the 180,205 electorate.

A total of 37,289 ballot papers were cast of which 15,731 were postal votes.

The full election results are:
Simon De Deney (Liberal Democrats) - Votes: 1,879
Zoe Garbett (Greens) - Votes: 9,075
Peter Smorthit (Independent) - Votes: 1,382
Simche Steinberger (Conservative) - Votes: 5,039
Annoesjka Valent (Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition) - Votes: 1,265
Caroline Woodley (Labour) - Votes: 18,474

ie
5% Lib Dems
24% Greens
4% Ind
14% Conservative
3% TUSC
50% Labour

I'm pondering how much canvassing Labour had done and whether they knew they'd lose and were looking for a scapegoat?
My local experience was that you'd have a good side before election day which seats you'd win or run close.

I do have sympathy for Laura. She'll struggle to contribute to Labour moving forwards and that's a shame as she had some experience to offer.

The poster below was right when they said some labour members would rather lose than have the "wrong type" of their own elected.

Yes he was Labour first then LibDem and is actually a nice bloke. I used to know him when I lived in Hackney.
I suspect he is more of a community than Party politician, he is a well known figure in the ultra orthodox population.

I think that although to those of us on FWR we might want to think the trans issue (solved by making their candidate humiliate herself) probably made very little difference to voters.

Hackney Council is seen as high handed and undemocratic. The LTN's were bought in areas under Covid emergency rules (ie not relevant to Covid at all) and after the plans had already been defeated in local consultations.

The LTNs aren't opposed by luddites but mainly by working people who would be unable to drop their children off at school, get to work, do unpaid caring for relatives, shopping etc., without a car ie primarily women in low paid work with antisocial hours. Let alone those with disabilities.

LTNs are any empty gesture to placate the posturing middle class because it doesn't stop the total traffic in London. It just means those with less social standing get more fumes, and bus routes (a number have been cut) slower.

Added to which, again despite the dilettante saying it is a top priority, the antisocial cycling routes and schemes have made life for pedestrians a night mare. And that includes local parks.

Additionally, despite newspapers making it all about the Police in fact Hackney has control over local schools and so was part of covering up what happened to the young woman stripped search ie it was the school who invited the police in and a member of staff in locus parentis who okayed the strip search.

So for 2 years parents were sending their daughters to a school which had failed to protect a young woman, inform the parents and instead call in the police. And then keep it secret.

The former Mayor did as he always did, ie hold some farcical on the Town Hall steps rally dominated by speakers from the SWP (remember Comrade Hilton) and Sister Space (you scratch my back I'll scratch yours). Many women from BME communities as both mothers and teachers came from other boroughs because they thought it would be an opportunity to look at entrenched racism in schools. Dut it ended up with Black Women on the platform being heckled by Black Women in the crowd.

Then there is the sordid cover up by the former Mayor of one of his Councillor's being accused and convicted of child pornography. And look how long it took him to resign.

Plus the seizing of land formerly used for social housing and sheltered accommodation that has been given to private companies, on the basis of a % being social housing (ie none) and the appalling standard of housing care for those still in council run housing (2nd only to Tower Hamlets).

And the increasing split between those who have a financial secure way of life colonising the area and the expense of the existing community.

But despite all this, voting is very stuck in a time warp, ie traditional Labour BME and working class communities being Labour, now added to by woke incomers, and then a few from other parties.

There were, prior to this election, only 5 Tory councillors, all of whom are members of the Jewish community.

List of councillors prior to yesterday's vote https://hackney.gov.uk/your-councillors

So despite what I have said, and anger at the existing Hackney constituents being sacrificed to rich, woke incomers, traditional voting patterns dont really chance.

About the only thing people in Hackney agree on about the Council is that its level of incompetence is staggering, not least its computer system being hacked, and the majoring think nothing will change.

Labour are 27% ahead in the last Yougov poll. Are people really going to choose 5 more years of this shitshow so they can stage the Wacky Races in a densely populated city?

This article is interesting in relation to what difference the new boundaries will make to the next election. The swing Labour now need is massive.

Dunno. I lived in Springfield ward , adjoining Cazenove. And I can remember the clamour for speed bumps after a child was killed in an accident. Come to think of it hardly anyone I knew had a car. That was part of the grievance , people using quiet residential streets as a rat run when traffic was stuck on busier roads.

I read somewhere that Haredi Jewish people don't like the 20mph limit on those streets. That surprised me tbh. I don't recall them as boy racers. They would trundle along in Volvo estates and mini buses. Still what do I know? The 253 was my taxi. Its true you could sometimes walk faster. And that was years before the LTN came in.

Labour are 27% ahead in the last Yougov poll. Are people really going to choose 5 more years of this shitshow so they can stage the Wacky Races in a densely populated city?

Nah. Labour blew themselves up. The Tories had a popular candidate. The Greens got a miniscule vote, ditto Libdems. No mad surge of radical haircuts propelling Micner into the council chamber. Steer Calmer doesn't have to worry about that lot. The cringebag.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12983229/Labour-lose-council-election-tearing-apart-trans-row-Candidate-suffers-shock-loss-Tories-east-London-forced-apologise-social-media-posts-claimed-trans-women-not-female.html

Incidentally Elliot Hammer, the Tory quoted, is one of the brave lawyers who were willing to take on the early GC employment cases. He represented the Tavistock whistleblower Sonia Appleby and others. i

I don't disagree at all; that's basically what I'm trying to say.

There is already good public transport in the ward (although of course it is subject to pressure and some delays from other road vehicles; but banning or restricting other vehicles would obviously help with that). For those who are reasonably healthy/mobile, it's fine. Buses are pretty affordable; the Overground is a bit more but still cheaper than the tube. For those who do need the tube, both of these link the area to several tube stations.

There is a smallish but vocal group of people in the area who are open about wanting to drive just because they can and they feel they should be able to – they don't even bother to argue that it's because of being disabled/transporting infirm people around etc, or that they need to get to places on time. I don't know how cheap and easy public transport would have to be made before this group would countenance using it. I'd bet my bottom dollar a lot of people who voted Tory yesterday voted at least partly on this issue. So why should the Tories change their stance on it? That's what I mean by it not being in their political interests.

Anyway, this is a bit of a derail, so I apologise.

I actually don't think it's ok to shit on poor and disabled people for a principle. The divide between rich and poor has never been wider.

I agree and Labour is going to have to deal with that sooner or later.

I actually don't think it's ok to shit on poor and disabled people for a principle. The divide between rich and poor has never been wider.

People aren't 'wedded to their cars' they have no other choice. I'd love to use public transport - but it takes literally 10x the amount of time of the car, and an unreliable 10x the amount of time. We went down to one vehicle and DH started getting the bus but it just wouldn't turn up - I can't count the number of times the bus simply hasn't turned up and I've had to taxi DH into work (so we've got another vehicle now).

And incidentally for those who are rich, they get to keep using their BMWs as can more than afford fines for breaching LTN zones and get resident parking near their million pound + houses in the centre. It's clearing the central area of poor people, and making the roads nice and clear for the rich.

Influencing Labour from the 'inside' is not going well.
Starmer continues to be unconvincing.

I've lived on the outskirts of a city in Europe where I didn't own a car and it worked - basically cars not really allowed in the centre. And I was all for that because public transport was cheap, plentiful and on time - even when there was a snowstorm. They basically pumped public money in to the public transport and it wasn't privatised. I never waited more than 5 minutes for a bus, tram or train.

That's what you have to do BEFORE you introduce the LTN, otherwise you're just making life nicer for rich people and harder for poor / disabled people.

You'll find that if you make it easy and cheap for people not to have cars, they won't. The problem is in this country it's imposing more and more restrictions for poor people. My local bus is on a main road with no pavement getting there (so unsafe to get to) and only once an hour (and often not on time by 30+ minutes). That is incompatible with most jobs. More and more elderly people where I live are isolated and other people can't afford to work any more because the buses are incredibly unreliable and expensive.

You're welcome to keep saying that, HPFA. Unfortunately, as other posters keep pointing out, Starmer won't be seen in public with the Labour Women's Declaration and I'm pretty sure I've seen Rosie Duffield say that he never speaks to her either. Joan Smith - loyal to Labour for years - tweets about how he ignores letters/emails. So you will have to forgive those of us who've become sceptical about influencing from the inside.

we ought to be focussing on the best way to influence a likely Labour government

Go for it. No one is stopping you. But your ‘we’ is people who want to and many know Labour isn’t listening

What are you doing?

It seems that there were other local factors involved - so while the confusion probably didn't help it might not have made much difference.

Quite likely the number of people who voted for her "for" her views on this issue and those who didn't for the opposite reason cancelled each other out, and weren't that numerous anyway.

As I keep saying, we ought to be focussing on the best way to influence a likely Labour government and not kidding ourselves that the number of people whose vote can be influenced by this issue is going to be anywhere near large enough to influence a General Election outcome.

I line in London (but not Hackney) and my usual mode of transport is cycling. So not wedded to the car (we have one, I drive it a bit, my DH hardly at all). In my experience many schemes aimed at LTN’s and improving cycling just mean in practice long queues of static traffic belching toxic fumes as they wait and angry drivers -not good IMO including for cyclists, pedestrians and residents.

At the Uxbridge by-election in July the Tories retained the seat despite losing two others on the same day outside London. Starmer blamed the ULEZ expansion entirely for the result and called on Khan to rethink.

Labour are very nervous about the effect of traffic measures on the GE in London. It looks like they should be

I hope this result, and the bizarre week before it, gives Keir the kick up the backside he needs to fix this issue before the election comes.

He cannot keep ignoring this issue.

We had a campaign nearby over LTNs I guess the next council election will show impact

I imagine the quieter streets might be different to those who did campaign

In this area it means traffic has been shunted on to a few particular roads, which are consequently clogged, making buses and emergency vehicles much slower. It has been vociferously opposed for this reason. Plus we have many small local businesses, who are feeling the effects because they and their suppliers can't drive or park conveniently.

I do understand these concerns and I think there should be provisions for delivery vehicles. And yes, LTNs can just mean people living on 'nicer' roads in bigger houses get the benefits while other people take the brunt of rerouted traffic. But the bigger picture IMO is that there should just be less driving/fewer vehicles on the roads full stop. I basically think the inner zones of London should be car-free and have excellent and cheap public transport and safe, clean bike lanes. I don't know what local councils can do about that.

Members of Hackney Council have in the past said (not to me but to a friend who is v involved with Extinction Rebellion) that they know LTNs aren't popular but they believe the principle to be important. I have to agree, and I have to applaud them for standing up like that, even though it seems to have meant they've got themselves voted out. I don't know what the answer is as long as people remain wedded to driving for its own sake/won't accept the small inconveniences of using public transport (yes I am prepared to be handed my arse for saying that), and, perhaps more to the point, as long as government and politicians with political and/or financial interests in fossil fuels keep acting in their own interests.

Sorry for the sermon on the Mount.

That was what I meant. I won't speak for Eresh but I'm pretty sure she meant the same thing!

I had no idea until I joined the Labour party just how many members were far more focussed on fighting internal 'enemies' than they were on winning elections. Indeed some of them hated being the party of government during the Blair/Brown years. I've not been a party member for some time but it sounds like little has changed.

These were constituency level members - I've no idea what it might be like higher up the ranks, but I never, ever underestimate Labour's capacity for self harm.

He may have done in the past but I think last time it was Labour.

Dd this same guy win it for Lib Dems?

I’m assuming it was previously Labour like many London councils