‘Anything goes’ was Woolas plan
Date published: 15 September 2010
Election Court Day two: the historic case is being heard at Uppermill Civic Hall, and is expected to last all week. If High Court Judges Mr Justice Griffith Williams and Mr Justice Nigel Teare agree with Elwyn Watkinss’ petition, Phil Woolas could be debarred for three years and a by-election held.
The Representation of the People Act prohibits making false statements of fact in relation to the personal character or conduct of a candidate for the purpose of affecting the result. It is designed to ensure the integrity of the electoral process and enable people to make a free choice.
OLDHAM MP Phil Woolas was so desperate to retain his seat he adopted an “anything goes mantra” and deceived voters to win the election, it was alleged.
On the second day of a week-long election court, James Laddie QC, for Lib-Dem candidate Elwyn Watkins, said Labour MP Mr Woolas “peddled falsehoods” about his opponent’s character and personal conduct in a bid to “galvanise the white Sun-reading vote”.
Mr Laddie claimed Mr Woolas had set out to “make the white folk angry” by distributing election leaflets that said he had received death threats from extremist groups that supported Mr Watkins.
Stir-up
The literature went on to say that Mr Watkins had spent more than £200,000 on his campaign and that he had reneged on his earlier promise to live in the constituency.
It was also claimed that Mr Watkins had refused to condemn the actions of extremist group, the Muslim Public Affairs Committee (MPAC), which was handing out leaflets outside mosques urging Asian voters to opt for Mr Watkins.
Mr Woolas, who won the May 6 election by only 103 votes, admitted he had sanctioned leaflets attacking his rival but fiercely rejected claims he had set out to destroy his personal character with false allegations.
The former Immigration Minister said he had simply employed tactics commonly used by candidates during the election campaign — pointing out his opponent’s flaws while in turn highlighting his own policies.
Mr Woolas said the fight for the Oldham East and Saddleworth seat was a three-horse race.
He said he was aware that some Tory voters did not want to vote for the Asian Conservative candidate Kashif Ali and he wanted them to switch allegiance to Labour rather than defect to the Lib-Dems. During the course of the election, Mr Woolas said he received death threats which were reported to the police and he was offered police protection, which he declined as he thought this would create further problems.
The case — which is the first of its kind for nearly 100 years — centres on three publications distributed by Labour: a pamphlet on May 1, an eight page newspaper called The Examiner shortly after and a leaflet called The Rose on May 5.
The Examiner, which the campaign team said could be a risky move, was created mainly by Mr Woolas’s communications lead Stephen Green and his election agent Joe Fitzpatrick.
The court heard of an exchange of emails between Mr Green and Mr Fitzpatrick where the pair agreed to zone-in on the extremist groups that were calling for Asian voters to support Mr Watkins and agreed that Labour literature should “go strong” on militant Muslims.
The email exchange suggested that confidence in Mr Woolas’s ability to retain his seat was wavering and the last few days of the campaign were all or nothing. Mr Woolas said that his strategy had always been to provide support and leadership to the Muslim community and that he had spoken to many Asians who were very concerned about the impact of the MPAC leaflets. The MP said that he was confident of securing votes from within the Asian community and had held several rallies in areas that were made up of predominantly Asian households.
Mr Woolas admitted that the final draft of The Examiner was altered from earlier drafts as he, and other members of the campaign team, had felt that one of the stories devised by Mr Fitzpatrick and Mr Green could have been “incendiary” and that this had caused some upset within the party.
Blatant
Mr Woolas said this was not a strategy he wanted to pursue and that he simply wanted the leaflets to inform the constituents what the extremist groups were up to.
One story contains the word “extremist” 15 times and “militant” eight times which Mr Laddie said was a blatant attempt to hammer home the “mad Muslims” strategy and cause a frenzy by telling the voters Mr Woolas was “not only in danger of losing his seat but also his life.”
Mr Woolas told the court that he had been a target for extremists since he had taken up his position as Immigration Minister.
