Leaked emails expose attempt to whitewash Enfield council group meeting suspension

Enfield council leader denies meetings of Labour group suspended by Labour – and that meeting this month had regional director in attendance only because she had asked for it. Leaked emails prove otherwise

Earlier this month, the SKWAWKBOX reported that Enfield council’s Labour group had been banned from meeting without ‘express permission’ of the party’s National Executive Committee (NEC). The ban was imposed as an investigation proceeded into allegations – by a broad spectrum of Labour councillors and officials – of serious ‘irregularities’ in the selection of councillors and of attempted intimidation of dissenting councillors.

An 11 March meeting of the group was allowed to proceed with the attendance of Labour’s regional director.

But Enfield council leader Nesil Caliskan has denied that the group’s meetings have been suspended – and claimed that the regional director’s attendance was at Caliskan’s request. She told the Enfield Independent:

[Reports that meetings have been suspended] have probably been fuelled by a handful of people who are working against the successes of Enfield Council.

Enfield’s Labour Group had scheduled meetings on March 11 and the next one on April 1. The meeting on March 11 went ahead and the meeting of April 1 will go ahead.

I asked for the Labour Party regional director to be present at our Monday (March 11) meeting because in recent weeks a number of our BME (black and minority ethnic) councillors, including myself, have been concerned about the intimidatory behaviour towards us.

Ms Caliskan’s use of racism and intimidation are interesting, given that the NEC’s investigation included complaints of intimidation and racism connected to the ‘irregularities’ when she was secretary of Enfield’s ‘LCF’ (local campaign forum’.

However, two leaked emails have exposed the falsehood of claims that meetings have not been suspended and that the regional director was there by invitation.

The emails, sent by Labour’s Governance and Legal Unit (GLU), are explicit that meetings are not allowed without permission – and that an already-planned meeting on 11 March could only go ahead with the regional director in attendance.

Email 1 – the ban

The initial email sent by GLU to the Enfield Labour group states explicitly that the suspension of meetings is a Labour governance decision – and that it is directly linked to the investigation into allegations of serious wrongdoing:

Email 2 – the permitted meeting and the condition

The second email, sent a couple of days later, gives permission for the 11 March meeting to ‘be allowed to take place’ – but specifies that this is conditional on the attendance of the regional director:

A request has been received that the Labour Group meeting scheduled for Monday 11th March should be allowed to take place and we give consent for that to happen with the attendance of the Regional Director

No requests for her attendance – just a condition of granting the request for the meeting to be ‘allowed’ to go ahead.

A senior Labour figure in the borough told the SKWAWKBOX:

Nesil Caliskan is spinning so much she must be getting quite dizzy. The Skwawkbox story was accurate and the leaked emails from the Labour Party’s Governance and Legal Unit prove it.

Nesil Caliskan has previously told the SKWAWKBOX she does not wish to be contacted for comment.

SKWAWKBOX comment:

Attempts have been made to persuade the public that there was no suspension of meetings imposed by Labour – and that the regional director was at a meeting that was allowed to take place at the request of one of the people under investigation.

The leaked emails put the matter beyond debate or credible denial.

The SKWAWKBOX needs your support. This blog is provided free of charge but depends on the generosity of its readers to be viable. If you can afford to, please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal or here for a monthly donation via GoCardless. Thanks for your solidarity so this blog can keep bringing you information the Establishment would prefer you not to know about.

If you wish to reblog this post for non-commercial use, you are welcome to do so – see here for more.


  1. So she blatantly lied AND made bogus and false allegations…… surely THAT is more than enough to warrant being suspended.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: