Comments on: A question of standards

By: Paul Leake: absit invidia verbo » Blog Archive » Standards Board “press self-destruct button”

Sun, 26 Feb 2006 21:22:33 +0000

[...] After all the fuss caused by ‘Red’ Ken’s suspension as Mayor of London following his refusal to apologise for making offensive remarks to a journalist it’s been interesting to see how the different political parties have reacted. The Lib Dems stated policy is to abolish the Standards Board because it has frequently been used as a political football, used to ‘gag’ councillors from doing their best, and generally fails in its stated aim of increasing public confidence in local government. If you’d heard Simon Hughes on the radio the evening Livingstone got his marching orders, you really wouldn’t have guessed that (proving to the Lib Dem’s more left-wing members that it isn’t only soggy centre MPs who helpfully forget party policy when they have a chance to make a populist point). James Graham also points to more Hughes comment, and that of Lib Dem assembly leader Lord Tope (effectively, it’s Ken’s fault, the Board were right that he had brought his office into disrepute). The official Tory line (also, to abolish the Standards Board) seems to have sunk without trace when presented with an easy chance to put the boot into a political opponent. Labour, who introduced the system amid public concern at sleaze has now become a chorus of people denouncing their colleagues foolishness and refusal to apologize and attacking the system! Of course, had it been some crusty old backwater Tory councillor who had been plonked for un-PC comments many of them, Ken probably included, would have thought a similar treatment fair and just (although the size of Ken’s mandate probably affects this as much as a shared party membership). Ken’s former Green deputy, Jenny Jones, actually says what Simon Hughes should have been saying: “What happens to Ken should be up to the Assembly and the electorate - if we want him to apologise that’s up to us, it’s not up to ten unelected, unknown appointees to turn the whole show into a West End farce.” - and given what people knew of Ken in 2004 when they re-elected him is it really a complete surprise. [...]

By: Yellow Peril

Yellow Peril — Sun, 26 Feb 2006 11:49:16 +0000

Lib Dem disgust at Simon Hughes

It seems that the hypocracy and opportunism� of Simon Hughes is just too much even for many Lib Dems:So why - the

By: Will

Will — Fri, 24 Feb 2006 21:26:08 +0000

According to Alex Wilcock at http://loveandliberty.blogspot.com/2006/02/dont-debar-ken-defeat-him.html, Simon was interviewed on PM and did go on to endorse the sentence.

By: Gareth

Gareth — Fri, 24 Feb 2006 20:50:14 +0000

I think Simon’s still trying to prove to me why he shouldn’t have been my 2nd preference - all a little bit too late really. As James says, a bizarre line to take.

By: Ryan Cullen

Ryan Cullen — Fri, 24 Feb 2006 20:48:50 +0000

My reading of the post on Simon’s campaign blog the first time around was “I agree with the Standards Board decision”, reading it again it still comes across the same.

By: Angus J Huck

Angus J Huck — Fri, 24 Feb 2006 20:29:14 +0000

What a pity Mr Livinsgtone didn’t bite his tongue and keep his big mouth shut. He fell straight into the trap which the Rothermere press had set for him.

I know how irritating some of these reporters can be, and there have been one or two in my own time whom I would have loved to have kicked to pulp. But in public life, you have accept that there is a certain amount of ordure which you simply have to put up with. And the same applies to reporters, who love to dish it, but evidently don’t like taking it.

Of course Finegold wasn’t “offended”! He had been trying for weeks to get Livingstone riled, and must have been jumping for joy when he succeeded.

What I find offensive is that Finegold seems to think that he is entitled to special treatment on account of his religion.

Calling someone a “concentration camp guard” is so hyperbolic as to be silly, and a mature person would have treated it as such.

I entirely agree that it is for the electorate, not an unelected disciplinary panel, to remove Livinsgstone from office.

By: David Morton

David Morton — Fri, 24 Feb 2006 20:10:00 +0000

Hmm. I agree entirely with James on this its a travesty of Democracy. It has parallels with the recent BNP prosecution - its turns people who are basically tits into free speech martyrs. A status they don’t deserve.

I’m not commenting on the Simon thing. The comments seem a little odd but then I’m minful of james views on Simon. But as he says its his blog!

By: James

James — Fri, 24 Feb 2006 19:17:39 +0000

James, I don’t give a shit. I’m not on anyone’s campaign team. If the fact that such a mean, nasty person like me happens to support Chris Huhne puts any spanners off from voting for him, so be it. I can point them in the direction of any number of other foul-mouthed gits supporting the other candidates.

By: Will

Will — Fri, 24 Feb 2006 19:16:16 +0000

I must admit that I did think when I read Simon’s comment that it was a bit of a glaring omission that he didn’t take the opportunity to mention, even in passing, that the Standards Board is a travesty of democracy.

And that’s not meant as any criticism of Simon himself, just that, since the existence of the Standards Board is a far more important issue than whether Red Ken was a bit naughty one night, that was the element of the news story that was uppermost in my mind.

By: James

James — Fri, 24 Feb 2006 19:13:50 +0000

Get over yourself Rob - this is a weblog, not a tea party. If you can’t stand my robust style then, with all due respect, piss off.

Seriously, this is my space not yours and I have absolutely no interest in wasting time by mincing my words.

As for Simon’s statement, timing is everything, as is omission. He has chosen to make this an issue in the leadership election campaign by adding his views on his campaign website. He has made the decision to make political capital out of Livingstone’s predicament. He has chosen not to qualify his statement by including anything about his opposition to the Standards Board. He has consciously elected to feed the media beast in this way.

This isn’t a minor detail here. This is the most significant decision made on behalf of the Standards Board ever. To try to hide behind the fact that what Livingstone said was offensive and stupid is beneath contempt.

A leader would give us clarity, not innuendo.