Shneur Odze, the Orthodox Jewish candidate who wants to be Ukip's first Manchester mayor

Shneur Odze.

According to a 2015 YouGov poll, Ukip voters are more likely to agree with anti-Semitic statements than the Conservatives, Labour or Lib Dems. But from the close-fitting black skullcap perched atop his head to the full, free-flowing beard flecked with grey, Shneur Odze, Ukip's candidate for Manchester Mayor, wears his Orthodox Judaism with pride.

And he is no rank and file party member, but a close confidante of both former Ukip leader Nigel Farage and new leader Paul Nuttall.

Odze is running against the firm Labour favourite, Andy Burnham, for the Manchester metro mayor. And Ukip’s popularity is growing. 

Of 11 local election seats contested in May 2016, the party won the second highest vote-share in nine of them - and they were snapping at the heels of the top party in wards across the wider 10 boroughs of Greater Manchester.

Odze himself stood in Salford, coming second to Labour’s 1,580 ballots in Broughton with 368 votes. He admits he was unsure about joining Ukip, which he once perceived as "BNP in blazers". He said: “I thought it wasn’t going to be the party for me because they would be anti-Semitic [at the start]. I was convinced of it.”

Having previously served as a councillor in Hackney, north London back in the noughties – for the Conservatives – Odze lost his passion for the party and spent some years in the political wilderness.

On his return to politics, he found himself to the right of his original position. He ran to be the Ukip candidate in 2014’s London mayoral selection, but lost out to Peter Whittle.

Now he is settled in Salford with his wife and children, and the 33-year-old Lubavitcher – a strain of Orthodox Jews descended from a village in Belarus – is enjoying his return to the fray. Odze describes his interest in people and making a difference to real lives as the crux of his mayoral candidacy in a contest which heralds the devolution of England's regions from Westminster’s grip.


“I wasn’t surprised that Ukip were willing to take me as a member per se,” he says of his Damascene conversion from true blue to Kipper purple. “[But] I was very concerned that they were racists, or anti-Semitic, and that I was a bit of a fig leaf. It took a long time to get over that.”

Rather than immigration, his main political stamping ground is the NHS – Odze was a public governor of the University Hospital of South Manchester in Wythenshawe for six years until 13 months ago – transport, housing and employment across the region, as well as putting police back on the streets. He insists that Ukip have never pushed him forward, instead allowing him to take his own steps into the limelight.

But he has willingly basked in that fame, and seems to enjoy being a member of a party many wouldn't have associated with Orthodox Judaism. He says that occasionally "the average Joe Public would have at the start had a double take” at the the uniform of his faith, but he has never had an issue in Ukip. 

"In all parties, particularly in Ukip, anyone who stands out seems to do well," he says. “In the MEP selection we had Amjad Bashir, Steven Woolfe – we’re a colourful party. We attract people of character and charisma.”

Oh, yes – Steven Woolfe. The mixed-race Ukip MEP, once tipped as a leader, instead quit the party, describing it as “ungovernable” after a colleague punched him. As for Amjad Bashir, he defected to the Tories.

Indeed, June's Brexit vote was something of a high for Ukip in 2016. Since then, the party has been consumed with factional infighting, with Ukip leader Diane James quitting after just 18 days in the job, and later leaving the party altogether. Farage was forced to take the helm again, before Nuttall was elected to the post. Meanwhile, Theresa May's Tory government has hoovered up some of Ukip's most popular policies. Support for Ukip in the polls has hovered around 13 per cent. 

Odze – Chair of Ukip’s Friends of Israel grouping – dismisses Woolfe's criticisms. He quips that Ukip don’t mind how “far out you are” – meaning unusual – “just that you’re not far right”.

“It’s showbiz, it’s people who don’t fit into the straitjacket of the other mainstream parties," he says. “We’ve attracted a lot of other people at the time who had been deselected by other parties.”

As far as Ukip's future goes: “The number of times that people have said ’this is a disaster for Ukip, this is the end’, and it isn’t. I was concerned when we were at 1 or 2 per cent in the polls. Paul Nuttall said that we were going to overtake the Lib Dems and everybody laughed at him. Well, as they say, the rest is history. “

Odze insists that Ukip is the only party that can challenge Labour. "We’re attracting Labour voters. The question is how many more and to what extent," he says. “All Andy Burnham’s been going on and on about for months and months is migration and Brexit, because he knows we’re the only people who can beat him."

“Of course Andy’s the favourite. But look at Donald Trump. Look at Brexit.”

This article previously appeared on our sister site, the New Statesman.

Want more of this stuff? Follow CityMetric on Twitter or Facebook.

 
 
 
 

Does it matter that TfL are renaming White Hart Lane station Tottenham Hotspur?

New White Hart Lane. Image: Getty.

Pretend for a moment that you’re travelling in the London of 1932. You’re taking the Piccadilly Line northbound and alight at Gillespie Road station. The name should be obvious: it’s inscribed in bespoke brown tiling on the platform.

But that 31 October, following an intense campaign by the eponymous football club, the London County Council changed the station’s name to Arsenal (Highbury Hill). The area’s growing association with the name “Arsenal” ended in a lengthy negotiation that changed maps, signs and train tickets alike. Football had acquired so much power that it changed the name of not just a Tube station but an entire suburb, even before the era of Wenger or the Emirates.

Now the spectre of name changes is on the horizon once again. As Tottenham Hotspur FC inches closer to completing its new stadium, the club is clamouring for a renamed Overground station. Despite the fact the new stadium is located on almost exactly the same site as the old just off White Hart Lane, and fans have long been calling the scaffolding-laden mess “New White Hart Lane”, the club’s executive director is adamant that the station’s existing name cannot stand. White Hart Lane station, on the Overground line leaving Liverpool Street, is set to be renamed “Tottenham Hotspur”, at a cost to the club of £14.7m.

Little has been made of the fact that this peculiar PR kerfuffle is tied to Spurs’ failure to convince Nike to sponsor the venue. Some sources have even claimed that the sponsorship is yet to be finalised because it is somehow contingent on the renaming of the Overground station; beyond the ridiculous Johnson-era vanity project that was the Emirates Air Line, it seems improbable that TfL will allow any more corporate-flavoured information pollution. There will be no “Nike Stadium” station on the way to Enfield, much as there is no “Emirates” on the way to Cockfosters, especially if public consultation gets a look in.

The scene of the crime. Image: TfL.

But there’s a problem with the new name, all the same. “White Hart Lane” already means “football stadium”, in the same way Loftus Road or Stamford Bridge do. Changing it to “Tottenham Hotspur” risks opening the floodgates to an “O2 North Greenwich” or a “Virgin Euston” at some point in future, names as banal as there are dystopian. The Greater London Authority has promised to spend the £14.7m fee on community programmes in the local area – but that’s not much money to set the precedent that a private company can mess about with the Tube map.


What’s more, as CityMetric has often observed, there are plenty of station names across London that could do with a tidy up. Picking one that’s perfect already and asking for £14.7m to change it is adding insult to injury. How much would it cost a community group if they asked to change the name of Goodge Street to Fitzrovia? Why does a vast corporate entity backed by international sponsors and thousands of season ticket holders get to set the standard?

Back in Arsenal’s day, changing names on the Tube must have been easy; changes could be accommodated gradually without bothering the every day traveller. But in our world of online information, maps and apps, name changes are rather more complicated.

The question is – if TfL can bring itself to balefully accept this particular proposition, why can’t it accept ours? Why sort out a single non-issue on the Tube Map when you can catch lots of real ones in one go? A day’s pandemonium might just be a price worth paying to fix the Bethnal Greens problem once and for all.