City of Westminster (Parliament Politics Magazine) – A Westminster councillor has defected from Labour to the Tories, citing Sadiq Khan’s ‘vanity projects,’ including Oxford Street pedestrianisation, as the cause.
Councillor Paul Fisher claimed that the Mayor of London was more concerned with planning plans “than addressing crime and the very real fears that many local people have about their safety” when he announced his intention to join the Conservatives.
The Labour Government’s aspirations “to tax, spend, and borrow its way to prosperity” were another thing he said he disagreed with.
In the 2022 local elections, Labour took control of the flagship central London council for the first time.
However, the party has lost three local by-elections since then. The losses were partially attributed to Sir Sadiq’s decision to take over Oxford Street from the municipal government and partially pedestrianize it.
Currently, Labour has 28 Westminster Council seats compared to the Conservatives’ 26.
Barrister The West End ward, which includes Oxford Street, Regent Street, Bond Street, Fitzrovia, Marylebone, Mayfair, and Soho, has been represented by Mr. Fisher since 2022.
He said:
“I am joining the Conservative Party for three reasons: Stagnation, Sadiq and Security.
Under a Labour government, our country is being pushed into economic stagnation with a tax on jobs stifling economic growth. Labour’s “solution” to Britain’s problems is to tax, spend and borrow its way to prosperity.
As Mayor, Sadiq Khan has failed London. He is more focused on vanity projects such as Oxford Street pedestrianisation than addressing crime and the very real fears that many local people have about their safety and security.”
He added:
“I am disappointed that the Labour Party I have worked hard for over many years is not delivering solutions to the problems we all face.
The Conservative Party in Westminster has shown me they are listening, and they have a passion for finding pragmatic answers to the problems of our City.”
Fisher was concerned with Labour’s national economic strategy, which he said was causing “economic stagnation” through policies that emphasized borrowing, spending, and taxation. According to him, these policies hinder economic expansion and fall short of offering practical answers to the nation’s problems.
Fisher underlined that his residents’ main interests are safety and security. He charged that Labour was ignoring these issues and not addressing the “very real fears” that locals had about the escalation of crime.
His departure highlights the growing discontent with Labour’s local and national governance, especially in issues like economic management, public safety, and urban planning.
Leader of Westminster council Adam Hug told the Standard:
“We are deeply disappointed to hear of Paul’s decision, despite his being elected less than three years ago by Labour voters in the West End.
As a council we are committed to taking action to address crime and anti social behaviour through investing in CCTV, new city inspectors and other measures after the Tories withdrew from the scene on these issues.
We will continue to stand up for local residents whilst growing the local economy and improving the performance of our services.”
What are the potential consequences for labour in Westminster due to Paul Fisher’s defection?
Labour’s capacity to influence local policies and decisions may be weakened as a result of Fisher’s defection, which lowers their representation in Westminster Council. If other council members follow suit, this might be especially important.
Public confidence in Labour’s unity and leadership may be damaged by the defection, particularly if it is interpreted as an indication of internal strife or discontent with national Labour policy.
Labour may have trouble holding onto or winning seats in the next local elections because people may think the party is less cohesive or stable. Opponents of the Conservative Party may use Fisher’s defection to draw attention to Labour’s internal conflicts.
Labour might find it more difficult to implement their policy plans with fewer members, especially if they depend on a small majority or coalition support.