Key Points:
- Newham Council has spent millions on settlements involving staff since 2018
- 63 non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) signed between May 2018 and November 2021
- Mayor Rokhsana Fiaz took her own council to tribunal over race and sex discrimination
- A confidential report into Fiaz’s conduct has not been published
- £30,000+VAT of public funds paid toward Fiaz’s legal costs
- Standards Committee chair Reza Choudhury resigned over council’s handling
- Internal blame-game ongoing among mayor, officers, and committee
- Fiaz’s conduct has faced repeated allegations of bullying—denied by the mayor
- Labour Party faces pressure over whether Fiaz should stand for a third term
- Newham has spent £1 million on settlement agreements involving NDAs since 2021
- 17 complaints filed against councillors in two years—14 settlements made
- Transparency concerns persist despite Fiaz’s 2018 election pledges
- Fallout could lead to more legal action, costing taxpayers further
In a deeply unusual episode, Rokhsana Fiaz, the Mayor of Newham since 2018, took legal action against Newham Council last year. Her claim, made to an East London employment tribunal, alleged race and sex discrimination. The claims followed a tense meeting in 2022 in which fellow councillors reportedly criticised the budget Fiaz had presented. Specifics of the meeting remain unclear, but insiders suggest the dispute quickly escalated.
Following that meeting, a report was commissioned regarding Fiaz’s behaviour. That report remains confidential, with the Information Commissioner’s Office supporting the council’s decision not to release it. Critics allege the document casts doubt on Fiaz’s conduct, claiming it does not meet expected standards for someone in her position.
Despite the secrecy, Fiaz appears to have received an “apology of sorts” and a settlement that included legal costs. The council, in a joint statement with the mayor dated 20 December 2024, apologised for the “distress” she experienced and agreed to cover more than £30,000 (plus VAT) in legal fees—funded by the public purse.
Who is to blame for Newham’s toxic council culture?
Responsibility for the fallout remains contentious. The Standards Committee, which oversees councillor conduct, has been singled out. The joint council-mayor statement claimed the committee “could have dealt with things differently” in 2022.
That accusation prompted councillor Reza Choudhury, chair of the Standards Committee, to resign. In a strongly-worded email seen by The Covert Councillor, Choudhury rejected the narrative, calling it “devoid of reality” and accusing Newham’s monitoring officer of obstructing a special meeting he sought to call. He further stated some council officers were “easily leaned on”.
Although an informal group of councillors was reportedly consulted during the settlement process, one source claims their advice was largely ignored, with senior officers formalising the terms without broader approval.
What has Newham Council spent on NDAs and settlements?
Questions are also mounting about the council’s broader use of NDAs. Between 2018 and 2021, Newham entered into 63 NDAs with staff, with a total cost of £2.8 million, according to GMB union figures. Since then, a further £1 million has been spent on settlements involving NDAs from 2021–2024.
In the last two financial years, 17 complaints have been filed against councillors—three of which were directed at the mayor. Fourteen settlements were reached, although it remains unclear how many directly stemmed from these complaints.
These agreements, by design, limit what former staff can publicly say, raising transparency concerns within a borough already accused of lacking openness.
Could Labour block Fiaz from standing again?
The fallout comes at a sensitive time for the Labour Party. Fiaz, re-elected in 2022, may seek a third term—but party officials could intervene. Her tenure has been clouded by accusations of bullying, although she firmly denies them. With legal payouts growing and political divisions deepening, internal Labour discussions about her future are likely unavoidable.
As Open Newham has reported, discontent among councillors has grown. Some fear that settling the mayor’s tribunal claim could expose them to future litigation from Fiaz. Meanwhile, the original promises of “transparency” that Fiaz made in her first campaign are increasingly in doubt.
How does this compare to issues in other East London boroughs?
Newham’s turmoil mirrors problems seen in nearby Tower Hamlets, another East London borough under the microscope. In 2024, the UK government ordered a Best Value Inspection of Tower Hamlets to evaluate spending practices. The council considered a legal challenge, spending £85,592 on pre-action proceedings—ultimately abandoning the case.
It wasn’t the first time Tower Hamlets spent public funds on court efforts it didn’t pursue. A similar failed attempt in 2014 cost the borough nearly £39,000. Critics argue this trend of “lawfare” does not represent good value for taxpayers.
What questions remain unanswered about the Newham report?
At the heart of this controversy is the 2022 report into Mayor Fiaz’s conduct. If it supports her claims of discrimination, why hasn’t a redacted version been published? If it doesn’t support her allegations—or raises issues with her behaviour—why did the council settle at all?
Until the report is released, residents are left with few answers and growing frustration. With council tax rising by 8.99% and the borough seeking £51 million to avoid financial collapse, many are demanding greater accountability.
For now, the cloud of secrecy continues to hang over Newham Council—one that only a full disclosure, or perhaps a court ruling, may lift.
