Your browser is no longer supported

For the best possible experience using our website we recommend you upgrade to a newer version or another browser.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We'll assume we have your consent to use cookies, for example so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more


  • Comment
One of the country's six mayoral races has suffered a set back after a recall of the ballot for the Labour nominati...
One of the country's six mayoral races has suffered a set back after a recall of the ballot for the Labour nomination followed the discovery of scores of ineligible voters.

Lewisham Labour Party members had already chosen former council leader Steve Bullock as its candidate over current leader David Sullivan by a 63-vote margin.

But the result was rejected by supporters of Mr Sullivan who say some voters had received multiple ballots and ballot papers had been sent to dead party members.

Investigations by the Greater London Labour Party revealed there were some 200 people on its list who were ineligible to vote.

It said the re-run of the Lewisham mayoral candidate selection ballot had been ordered because 'the membership list used was incorrect and breached party rules. The inaccuracy was on such a scale it may have had a material affect on the outcome'.

Labour Party general secretary David Triesman wrote personally to apologise to the candidates. In the letter he said: 'The party owes an apology to members in Lewisham, not least the candidates.'

Mr Sullivan said he was confident local party members would understand the reasons for having to re-run the ballot.

The mayoral elections are due to take place in May.

  • Comment

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

Please remember that the submission of any material is governed by our Terms and Conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions.

Links may be included in your comments but HTML is not permitted.