The scene in Tower Hamlets is beyond messy—it’s a public farce. When you watch the feeble attempts of the Tower Hamlets council to govern, you can’t help but wonder if anyone is there to serve the residents. Resignations, backdoor deals, and a scramble for the cash perks that come with committee chairs: this is a system fuelled not by public interest but by personal gain, thinly veiled in political pretence.
Imagine a council where members jump ship with dizzying frequency, where party allegiance is claimed by some to be as fragile as the next allowance, and where council members play musical chairs with no real intention of oversight. This is not governance; it’s a drama of the absurd, with the residents of Tower Hamlets paying the price for an executive mayoral system that makes accountability optional and rewards loyalty over competence.
Aspire and Labour jostle for the committee chair positions because these come with special responsibility allowances—extra cash in pocket for positions of influence that should, in theory, serve the public good. But what do we see in practice? A self-serving few taking advantage of a closed system, exploiting every procedural loophole to keep council scrutiny toothless. Aspire’s apparent panic at losing control of these chairs isn’t about fear of lost oversight; it’s about fear of lost income.
And as if that weren’t enough, what’s the role of the unaligned or “independent” councillors who’ve left Labour and Aspire. They have the leverage to make a difference, to finally bring some level of accountability. Yet Former Independent and Conservative Councillor Andrew Wood and Former Labour Councillor (since resigned) Puru Miah claim they have become just another pawn in a game with no winners, least of all the public.
This was all set out in a recent conversation recorded on YouTube. In it we hear from two individuals who may have their own axes to grind. After all, Andrew Wood has historically taken issue with both Labour and Aspire’s handling of local governance, as well as also having resigned acrimoniously from the Tories. He went onto run as an Independent candidate in the last local election securing just shy of 5% of the vote.
This background could give him an interest in presenting both the Labour Party and the “Independents” as complicit in Aspire’s dominance, potentially as a counter-narrative to mainstream views. One possibly steeped in his self-perceived long-standing advocacy for transparency and accountability over how both parties have wielded power in the borough.
Meanwhile Puru Miah has publicly criticised Labour over the Gaza crisis. He also recently featured at an event shortly after the YouTube recording titled “Zionism’s Double-Threat: Genocide in Gaza & Repression in Britain”, alongside David Miller and Aaron Maté. The former being someone who even Socialist Appeal has described as antisemitic. While the latter someone who went on Piers Morgan to claim that the allegations of rape on October 7th were false. Despite widely accepted evidence to the contrary.
Miah’s earlier resignation from Labour underscores his discontent with the party’s direction. His critiques of both Labour’s, Aspires, and the Independent`s actions in Tower Hamlets are likely to reflect both personal frustrations with his former party and a desire to differentiate himself politically. Both have shown clear disdain for the independent councillors who have left either parties. But why did they leave?
Leaning into their own reasons Councillor Kabir Hussain, resigned in September over the council’s homelessness policy, which Mayor Lutfur Rahman subsequently u-turned on. Councillor Ohid Ahmed, who resigned from Lutfur’s cabinet in 2023 over a “pre-orchestrated political obstruction” of debate on the Conservative government’s anti-immigration bill, subsequently went onto leave Aspire shortly after Hussain citing the “loss of its principles concerning accountability, transparency, and service to our community”. The current speaker Councillor Saif Uddin Khaled also resigned, having voted against Aspire on a motion concerning the very same homelessness policy.
This council, ostensibly representing a diverse, dynamic borough, some argue has devolved into a siloed playground for political insiders more focused on financial incentives and career posturing than public service. It’s little wonder that Tower Hamlets, historically a Labour stronghold, is viewed as a cautionary tale of political dysfunction. With all the time wasted on internal posturing, Tower Hamlets residents are left to fend for themselves, while their so-called leader Mayor Lutfur Rahman keeps the public at arm’s length, spending more time in private deals and WhatsApp gossip than delivering on public promises.
This is a council where “scrutiny” means whisper campaigns and “leadership” means clinging to power by any means necessary. It’s a public scandal, yet those in power continue to manipulate the system, knowing full well that residents are left largely powerless in the executive mayoral model. Tower Hamlets doesn’t need a new set of committee chairs or more internal squabbling over allowances. It needs a complete overhaul, a break from the pervasive culture of self-interest and an injection of genuine accountability. Anything less, and Tower Hamlets will continue to be the poster child for all that’s wrong with local governance in London today.
