Integrity

The Gilligan - Johnson campaign has sought to taint Ken Livingstone and his team as lacking in probity and integrity. The constant drip of allegations has been unhelpful of course. Ken has been in power for eight years so it is much easier for the mud to leave a smear even if it doesn't stick than if he was enjoying his honeymoon period in office.

The Gilligan - Johnson team has constantly attacked Ken's aides like Lee Jasper and civil servants, Peter Hendy of TfL. Surely this should open Johnson up for questions about his own team. Hypocritcally, he has refused to say who they are. That isn't fair game, though politics has never been fair. Johnson will not say because he is protecting them and becuase his master, Lynton Crosby has been working hard to keep attention away from Johnson and on Livingstone. The less exposure Johnson has the less damage he can do.

Ken seeks a third term just has he is becoming more radical and has really grown into what was an unknown job in 2000. London needs his vision and ambition and it looks like he is finally coming into his own.

Johnson is "flakey" according to Michael White. I agree. He has made much of his "plan" to replace bendy buses with a new Routemaster. On LBC this morning he admitted that "The bus we are going to bring in is not yet on the drawing board,'' so why make a play of something you can't deliver?

Jasper quits, what next for the Evening Standard?

Hopefully now that Lee Jasper has quit after the reporting of his embarrassing flirty emails yeaterday we can focus on policy in the run up to the election.

In the last couple of days there have been some good articles focusing on the issues vexing London at the moment. The Independent on Sunday's Gilligan interview, today's Guardian Livingstone interview, we have to remember that it is Ken versus Boris, not Ken versus Gilligan/Evening Standard.

Gilligan claims he isn't returning a favour to Boris Johnson for employing him at the Spectator after he lost his position at the BBC after the Hutton Enquiry. Dave Hill's "What if Boris wins?" reminded me that Johnson previously offered his support to the thankfully now jailed convicted fraudster Conrad Black.

More importantly for London, Boris has unveiled his transport manifesto. This includes "consulting" (read abolish) on the western part of the Congestion Charge zone and to get a no-strike deal with the tube unions. I can't see that happening and anyway, strikes have hardly been the scourge of the travelling public in London recently. There was no vision, no schemes to get excited about or to reduce carbon emissions.

Perhaps the only thing exicting about what Boris says is how he says it, not what he says. London needs more.

What else has Lee Jasper supposedly done?

Now the Daily Mail is accusing Lee Jasper of sending "sexually charged" messages to a woman in charge of an organisation in receipt of LDA money. This doesn't look great and takes the campaign onto a new level.

However, I'm more interested in the concept that many of the accusations against Jasper stem from alleged relationships, personal or political, that he may have with those in the ethnic minority community network. I don't think I'm missing the point, but isn't that exactly what you want in that sort of position? Surely the reason Jasper was appointed was precisely because he had such connections?

The campaign against Ken

It has been commented that I was wrong to state that the campaign against Ken Livingstone and Lee Jasper has singly been at the hands of the Evening Standard. It was cited that Channel 4's Dispatches aired an attack of Ken's powers. The programme argued that the Mayor has too much power. The summary states that Martin Bright:

"(investigates) the lack of checks and balances on the mayor which allows him to create and instigate costly and controversial policies, at public expense without wider scrutiny or approval."

Ken himself stated that if extra checks and balances were put in place, he would be happy. He also responded in more detail in Bright's New Statesman, setting out why he thinks he deserves to win in May. You may recall that part of Bright's programme sought to investigate whether a glass Ken had used contained any trace of alcohol. I really cannot take this seriously. Radio 4 reported on Dispatches and what others were "reporting."

Dave Hill reports on last night's Influentials Debate, where Ken gave a strong defence of his record and against Gilligan's attacks. Ken stated "what hasn't been produced is any evidence to sustain...the Evening Standard implying that Lee Jasper has been a beneficiary of this. That's what's outrageous." Without laying specific evidence and proof, Richard Barnes' "tide of corruption" claim does not stand up.

The Evening Standard and those campaigning for Boris want us to be caught up in these arguments rather than positively campaigning on Labour's undoubtedly progressive record in London. I'll finish with a short list:

• Congestion charge
• More social housing
• Free travel for the young and those on income support
• Plans for a sustainable city by 2020
• Improvements to buses

Lee Jasper, the media...

Yesterday's post that the police have stated that they cannot charge Lee Jasper with any offences seems to have caused a stir. There are two points here:

1. My main point from yesterday being that the Evening Standard had been all over the Lee Jasper story, but once something that didn't suit their line came out, almost nothing
2. Second being that commented on here yesterday by the "GLA Spokesperson" that nobody has actually presented the police with criminal allegations - they'd much rather mouth off to the press than have to offer substantive proof

I have no vested interest in Lee Jasper and I've no idea whether any of these allegations have any vestige of truth about them. My point is that the Tory media are hounding him and are using people like Richard Barnes to do their dirty work. As yet Barnes hasn't come forward and given whatever evidence he may have for making these allegations to the police.

Therefore, I find Libdemvoice's thoughts amusing, when they say my post was "Labour spin" about the police "clearing" Jasper of charges he hasn't been charged with. The challenge is actually to see whether Barnes will put up or shut up - and the Evening Standard will follow suit.

I'm not going to respond in detail to Sharon's charge sheet, these charges are not for me to answer. If the police cannot investigate because nobody has made any allegations to them, the same applies to the District Auditor, someone has to complain for there to be an investigation. My experience from Islington and the Standards Board's investigation into the appointment of Helen Bailey by the Lib Dems as Chief Executive of the council isn't a good one. Aside from the findings, it took three and a half years, lots of expense, while Bailey remained in post.

Lee Jasper to face no charges

The police have decided that Ken Livingstone's suspended race advisor Lee Jasper hasn't committed a criminal offence. The politically motivated campaign against Jasper and Livingstone by Associated Newspapers and the London Evening Standard has been brutal. Trawling thisislondon and dailymail.co.uk I see no mention of this. So far this "scandal" has only been written about by BBC, The Guardian and a couple of local papers.

I'm sure there will be a response from Gilligan and the Standard but as yet, they haven't published one. Not that surprising really when one considers this is hardly the news they will have wanted and likely to be exactly the news Livingstone expected when he asked the police to investigate.

There is a bit more buzz on the blogosphere. Laughably the "Battle for Britain" now claims the police are corrupt for convicting Nick Griffin on "lesser charges" than Jasper. Author Philip Bryant does describbe himself as a "nationalist nutter" though. Some more balanced and journalistic reoprting is found on Mayor Watch, while Lib Dem Voice thinks that Livingstone was possibly wrong to ask th epolice to investigate in the first place if there was nothing to answer for. I think that is a little naive considering the mealstrom that built up.

Next up for Jasper, complaints that despite his job being politically restricted, that he told The voice newspaper that he was backing Ken for Mayor. Does that count as campaigning? It shouldn't really surprise anyone that he would say this when he owes his position to his boss, Ken.