Registered user login:

Bright'sBlog

Bright's Blog

Politics uncovered by Martin Bright, New Statesman political editor

Bright's Blog Homepage

What a way to run an investigation

  • Posted by Martin Bright
  • 21 April 2008

The Electoral Commission responds to my complaints about Ken Livingstone.

An intriguing reply to my complaint to the Electoral Commission about Ken Livingstone. Lisa Klein, Director of Party and Election Finance writes to advise me of the outcome of her "inquiries". My assertion was that Livingstone's advisers, funded by the taxpayer, worked on Livingstone's election campaign in 2004. This, I would suggest, amounts to an undisclosed donation by the Greater London Authority to the mayor's campaign, which is not permissable.

"My view," says Klein, "is that individual officers alleged to have worked for Mr Livingstone's campaign, even if they did so, could not be said to have donated GLA resources unless their actions were authorised by the authority."

So Livingstone's aides would only have been in breach of the rules if they had asked for and been given permission to break them. How bizarre.

I am also interested in the investigative methods used by Ms Klein. How did she find out whether the GLA had authorised wrongdoing? By asking the GLA. "Having raised this issue with the Head of Paid Service at the GLA, my understanding is that no GLA staff were specifically authorised to work for or with Ken Livingstone's campaign during paid time." We happen to know that advisers to the mayor did work on the campaign during work time because one of them, Atma Singh, has turned whistleblower. But according to the Electoral Commission, this was fine because they did so behind their employer's back.

Read the whole letter below. It strikes me that Klein's chopped logic gives a free pass to anyone who wishes to continue the practice in this and any future mayoral elections.



Post this article to

  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • newsvine
  • Reddit

8 comments from readers

Jonny Mac
22 April 2008 at 12:40

Her response is internally inconsistent. She sets out the test as being whether the actions were "authorised", and then rejects the complaint on the grounds that she finds the actions were not "specifically authorised". But implicit authorisation - knowledge of what was happening and no steps taken to prevent it - was always going to be most likely. It may sound like pedantry, but in my view it's a pretty crucial distinction and I think it would be worth going back to her on it.

redharry
22 April 2008 at 23:30

Can I explain.

You made a complaint against ken Livingstone but had no evidence he did anything wrong. Case dismissed.

If you had any evidence against people employed by Livingstone then it should have been directed to the GLA in the first instance. It wasn't. And now it's too late. Tough.

Now, for about the third time, what is your justification for describing the extreme neo-conservative Policy Exchange as 'centre-right'? You have dodged this question on every occasion. Why?

Martin Bright
23 April 2008 at 07:15

Thanks redharry. It all makes sense now. Under Livingstone, all is for the best in the best of all possible worlds. I'm afraid I don't share your Panglossian optimism about those who have power over us.

As for Policy Exchange. I don't have to justify anything. Were is your evidence that Policy Exchange is anything other than a rather energetic think tank with close links to the progressive wing of the Conservative Party?

redharry
23 April 2008 at 16:52

No evidence - case dismissed. I'm afraid smears and mud-slinging doesn't count Martin. You couldn't come up with the goods.

Then you claim the Conservative Party has a progressive wing - and have the chutzpah to call me Panglossian! I'm sorry but the Tories are further to the right now than when Bevan described them as 'lower than vermin'.

I think these articles

http://www.spinwatch.org/content/view/4309/8/

http://www.spinwatch.org/content/view/4587/8/

reveal plenty about the background of your 'progressive' friend Dean Godson, Research Director for the Policy Exchange. Or is he a neo-progressive? Charles Moore, Michael Gove

Anthony Browne (The same Anthony Browne who wrote an article in the Spectator, entitled, 'There’s no plot, Islam really does want to conquer the world.) progressive? What planet are you on?

By the way, what happened to Godson's threats of legal action against Newsnight after they exposed his 'evidence' as crude forgeries?

Martin Bright
24 April 2008 at 21:44

Plenty of evidence. Electoral Commission discredited

I think the mudslinging came from somewhere else. What happened to the injunction/complaint to Ofcom, for example? How can anyone justify the treatment of Atma Singh. Every claim I have made has been verified by none other than Livingstone and City Hall itself. I do love paper tigers.

On Policy Exchange: I do not share Anthony Browne's views on Islam but then nor does that headline accurately respresent his views. Anyway, my pamphlet was commissioned by his predecessor.

Of course all Tories are evil -- except the ones that aren't.

Who are you by the way?

Oh sorry you hide behind a daft pseudonym, I forgot.

redharry
24 April 2008 at 23:45

Do you share Browne's views on immigration, published on the racist Vdare site? Or has he misrepresented himself?

http://www.vdare.com/misc/browne_britain.htm

http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?pid=2...

Or do you disagree with Browne but agree with the 'progressive' Godson, Moore and Gove?

I think my pseudonym is less daft than your real name. At least it is internally consistent.

knave
26 April 2008 at 17:33

I think red harry gave you a bit of a kicking Martin.

I love that sentence progressive wing of the tory party

A little like the sentence "Military Intelligence"

How are they progressive martin

They have

1. Powellite views on immigration

2. They believe in Charles Murray solutions to Welfare and race. Cut all welfare

3. They want to privatise education and health

4. Restictions on trades unions.

They may be your type of progressives but they certainly aren't mine.

knave
26 April 2008 at 17:39

I do not share Anthony Browne's views on Islam but then nor does that headline accurately respresent his views. Anyway, my pamphlet was commissioned by his predecessor.

HE WROTE THE ARTICLE and HEADLINE

Post your comment

Please note: you will need to login or register before your comment is displayed on the website

We want to encourage people to comment on our content and to exchange views with other readers and hope this will be done on a courteous basis. However, if you encounter posts which are offensive please let us know by emailing comments@newstatesman.co.uk and we will take swift action where necessary.

About the writer

Martin Bright

Martin Bright began his journalistic career writing in very simple English for a magazine aimed at French school children. This experience has informed his style ever since. He worked for the BBC World Service, and The Guardian before joining the Observer as Education Correspondent. He went on to become Home Affairs Editor before becoming the New Statesman's political editor in 2005.

Recent Posts

Five stark truths

  • By Martin Bright
  • 04 September 2008

And the winner is...

  • By Martin Bright
  • 29 August 2008

No glory for the other Team GB

  • By Martin Bright
  • 21 August 2008

Israel and The British Left: The Great Betrayal Revisited

  • By Martin Bright
  • 19 August 2008

The Death of Michael Baxandall

  • By Martin Bright
  • 19 August 2008

Walktalk Reaches London

  • By Martin Bright
  • 18 August 2008