Smears against Boris Johnson were financed by Livingstone's taxpayer-funded organisations

Yesterday the BBC's John Pienaar 'joked' that it had been hours since Brown's Labour Party had been rocked by scandal.  Well, we didn't have to wait long for something new.

Following up on our earlier post about the huge amounts of cash that went to organisations associated with Lee Jasper, Livingstone's ideological ally, today's London Evening Standard is now reporting that these organisations were the same organisations that attempted to smear Boris Johnson as a racist earlier in the summer.  The infamous Blink website is at the heart of the taxpayer funded dirty tricks.

This press release has just landed in my in box from the Johnson campaign:

"Speaking at Prospex in North London, a charity helping disadvantaged young people, Conservative Candidate for Mayor of London Boris Johnson commented on the allegations surrounding City Hall orchestrating recent attacks on him.
 
Mr Johnson said:

“Attending a group today desperately in need of LDA money, it is galling to know that millions of pounds of LDA money has allegedly not got through to the many community groups that need it most.
 
“The Mayor should now apologise for this outrageous abuse of hard-earned taxpayer’s money. We always knew the attacks on me were a put-up job, and in no sense represented the black community. The attacks are a smokescreen to hide the fact that his administration has ripped off community groups across London and failed to improve the lives of the very people he claims to champion. 
 
“I am delighted that the curtain has gone up to reveal Ken pulling the levers. The incompetent puppetmaster has been exposed by his own puppets.”

There really is something rotting throughout Labour.

4.45pm update: Boris Johnson has written an open letter to Ken Livingstone (click continue to read it) and asks him ten questions...

1. You claim in numerous press releases and statements that the LDA is “the Mayor’s LDA”. If this is indeed the case, are you personally satisfied that the organisations referred to in the Evening Standard article have been transparent and honest in their dealings with the LDA?
2. Was Lee Jasper involved, either directly or indirectly in any of the funding decisions relating to the organisations mentioned in the Evening Standard?
3. Have you instigated any internal enquiries relating to the allegations of an abuse of expenses in the Metropolitan Police?
4. Can you provide a breakdown of the number and individual amounts of grants the GLA have directly (not including money given by the LDA, but including waived fees for facilities at City Hall, and sponsorship for events and conferences) given to the following companies/project; Diversity International, 1990 Trust, Brixton Base, Black Londoner’s Forum, European Federation of Black Women Business Owners, African Caribbean Business Network, Deshbangla Foundation?
5. On BBC London News on 5^th December 2007, it was reported that you stated there was a “full audit trail” relating to these projects. Can you confirm when this will be published?
6. Will you undertake to commission a full independent enquiry into the allegations reported in the Evening Standard?
7. How many official complaints have you received about the ethical standards of any of your senior staff during your administration?
8. If the allegations about the unethical behaviour of Mr Jasper are proved by an independent enquiry to be accurate, what disciplinary action will you take?
9. Can you confirm that no taxpayer funded GLA staff have been asked by you or any of your senior staff to work on political attacks against your opponents during your administration?
10. How many complaints have been made against Mr Jasper by GLA staff relating to breaches of the GLA Dignity at Work guidelines?

Dear Mr Livingstone,

Like many Londoners I was appalled to read in yesterday's Evening Standard that one of your senior advisors has been accused of channelling huge sums of taxpayers' money to a network of companies which have done little or no work in return.

I was then amazed and furious to read that Lee Jasper is accused of personally directing taxpayer-funded bodies to mount political attacks on your rivals.

Is this true? Do you confirm or deny these reports?

Do you think it right that bodies funded by the Mayor's office should be bullied into issuing misleading and intellectually dishonest attacks on your political opponents?

You must realise that millions of hard-working Londoners are entrusting you with their hard-earned cash. What we need now at the very least is an inquiry into Mr Jasper's role in steering LDA expenditure, and we need the audit trail showing exactly how the money was spent.

I believe you must now persuade Londoners that you know (a) how the money was spent and (b) that it was spent in their interests.

Otherwise I am afraid you will have forfeited any right to represent the financial interests of the people of London. You cannot just stick your head in the sand, and you cannot claim that this is just politically motivated.

We are all Londoners together - of whatever community - and it seems that we are all being ripped off by some of your closest associates. You owe it to Londoners to call an inquiry now into a growing scandal that threatens to undermine not just your own credibility, but the credibility of the institutions you purport to run.

I note that I have still to receive a reply to my letter about the scandal in the expenses of the Metropolitan Police. You are meant to have oversight of the police budget. Have you taken any steps whatever to inform yourself of what is going on?

Any further delay will serve only to heighten the impression that there is a growing culture of dishonesty in the administration of London

Please find below ten questions that I believe need answering.

Yours sincerely

Boris Johnson MP

Comments

[Tony Makara]

It isn't power that corrupts people, it is people that corrupt power. Ken Livingstone is an absolute disgrace. The man is clearly afraid of a fair toe-to-toe fight with Boris. This underhand behaviour is the sort of thing that gives politics a bad name, but really it isn't politics that is the problem, it is people like Ken Livingstone who ruin politics for everyone else. Boris for London!

[Boris strikes back]

This is an absolute shocker.

Let's hope that the national press and broadcast news (nota bene BBC) give this a proper airing tonight and tomorrow.

(Why do I think the story is more likely to appear on Newsroom South East - and even then not as the top story - rather than the main news?)

Once again, this is the kind of corruption that would have required the mayor to resign in any era other than that of Nu Labour.

Truly, the extent of the Augean stable that is festering at the heart of this administration is being revealed for all to see.

[Comstock]

"Ken Livingstone is an absolute disgrace."

For once, we agree, Tony :D

Not that I'm convinced BJ is much better though.

[Malcolm Dunn]

Good for Andrew Gilligan. After Livingstone's absurd attempt to smear him he probably thinks that it's personal. I wonder how many other skeletons Livingstone and his cronies have in their cupboard.

[WG Graceless]

Remarkably prescient Boris strikes back - anyone who saw the BBC lunchtime news will know that this story got absolutely no airing today.

Instead they used their soapbox to smear Boris (again) with a story that had absolutely no relevance to Londoners. Meanwhile, the news that taxpayers’ money is being pocketed by corrupt City Hall officials is deemed to be surplus to the interests of the public.

Why must my TV license go towards propping up this clearly biased and decrepit organisation. Surely, with all prejudices put aside, the story about Livingstone and Jasper is solid gold news, which more than just the readers of the ES and Conservative Home need to hear about?

But then i’d hate for BBC London to lose influence with the Mayor because they reported his mates are bent as bananas...

[Tony Makara]

WG Graceless, hopefully ITN, which tends to be fairer, will give more coverage. If you've got Virgin Media you can watch 'London Tonight' at 1800 on their ITV1 audio description channel as it carries the London region all over the country.

[Tony Makara]

Virgin Media channel 853 carried 'London Tonight' all over the country at 1800. If anyone wants to look out for the Livingstone corruption story.

[James Cleverly]

I think that I may have had something to do with this:

http://jamescleverly.blogspot.com/2007/12/was-it-me.html

[Andrew Young]

Who writes Boris' press releases?

Poorly written...

[Yogi]

Lee Jasper is paid well over £110k in salary - I wonder what was his income before he was taken on by Livingstone.

Now the whole of London is one single rotten borough.

Anyone got any idea as to what happened to the millions of £ which Livingstone's mate Hugo Chavez gave to subsidise the buses?

The only way to expose this tyrant's actions is for every ethnic minrity group to ask for handouts from the LDA and that includes B'nai Brith and se what their response is.

[Rupert]

Andrew Young - I agree.

It appears to be written in slang. Boris clearly didn't write this himself.

Has he still got a junior press team?

Shouldn't the money be rolling in now so he can bring in professional help?

(any way good story and at least he is now active)

[Mr Angry]

Surely Livingstone must be in breach of the law somewhere for spending taxpayer's money on party political purposes? Come on CCHQ find out where and then report him as appropriate.

[Roger Evans]

Blink also provides sympathetic coverage for other labour politicians :

www.blink.org.uk/subcat.asp?key=433&grp=66

[Tony Makara]

On 'London Tonight' ITV's Alister Stewart challenges Lee Jasper to sue the Evening Standard and Andrew Gilligan if the alligations are not true. Jasper backing down replies that litigation is an expensive process etc. The same old quote about 'Watermelon Smiles' is used yet again.

[Tony Makara]

Lee Jasper appears on London News looking rattled and saying that Ken Livingstone has 100% confidence in him. Jasper looked stressed clearly isn't used to being held to account.

[John Moss]

If true, these allegations amount to criminal misappropriation of taxpayer's money.

Wednesday's ES article is more detailed and more devastating for it. £2.5m has gone to the various organisations listed, most are companies where Jasper's mates are shareholders, directors or employees and most appear to have done nothing of genuine public benefit with our cash.

eg Brixton Base claimed money for "premises" while occupying - rent free - a building owned by the LDA and they claimed cash for AV equipment to run a "training course", but that was provided by the person who ran the course at their expense. That's a straight fraud.

My company gets grant funding, but before we get a penny, we have to build things and provide invoices and bank statements proving the money has been spent. The LDA don't seem to be quite so bothered with such technicalities.

[Paleo Man]

"The same old quote about 'Watermelon Smiles' is used yet again."

The problem is that the Boris quote is accurate like the one about "picanninies". A true libertarian would not have used such language. Boris provided the ammunition for Jasper and his cronies to fire.

[Tony Makara]

Paleo Man, I thought the 'Watermelon Smiles' line was brilliant descriptive writing. Boris is highly articulate and is able to conjure an image in a mere sentence, with a degree of aplomb, something well beyond the capabilities of most people. If Boris had written about jut-jawed Germans nothing would have been said. Once again it is the left stirring up racial tension where no tension previously existed. Boris is a great writer and when one reads Boris one is carried along, entertained and full engaged until the end of the piece. Such writing is brilliant and rare. If the left had their way they would suffocate all great writers.

[Paul Kennedy]

Is Mr Jasper's detailed job description available, together with the recruitment and selection process for that job?

[Pav]

The 1990 Trust is proud of our role as one of the UK’s leading Black organisations. Founded in 1990 we have been engaged in hundreds of initiatives for social, economic and political rights of Black communities.

We are proud of our work; and all of our operations - political, media, organisational and financial - are transparent. We are accountable for finances to all our funders, to Company House and the Charity Commission. We also are accountable to those with whom we work, and find confidence in the fact that our reputation in the community is beyond reproach.

True to his pattern of playing loose with the facts, drawing conclusions and then shaping reality to fit his pre-conceived biases, Gilligan hurls numerous falsehoods about the 1990 Trust. Some of his accusations are potentially libellous and, necessitating that we seek legal advice as we consider our options. We are also asking the Standard’s leadership to take appropriate action, and we will be making a complaint to the Press Complaints Commission about the implications of what we consider to be Gilligan’s unethical journalism.

To Correct the propagandist false statements:

1.Gilligan reports that Koku Adomza, the newly appointed Director of the 1990 Trust, had said criticism of Mr Phillips and Mr Johnson on the site represented the "sincerely held views of the black community". This is completely false and Gilligan is challenged to provide the evidence where this statement is made immediately.

2.Blink is not, nor ever has been, funded by the GLA, as Gilligan claims. And thus his central “thesis” that taxpayer money was used to criticise public figures is patently untrue.

3.Further, Gilligan alleges a range of things concerning an internal grievance from Lester Holloway. This is surely a breach of privacy for our employees past or present. In any case the grievance was withdrawn by Mr Holloway and did not raise any issues of political concerns. Beyond this we consider this entirely internal and a closed matter.

4.Gilligan wrote that “Mr Holloway's grievance was resolved, but soon afterwards funding for his post was withdrawn and he left the 1990 Trust”. This very statement contradicts the main thrust of Gilligan’s smear. If the GLA has pumped so much money into The 1990 Trust, and funded Blink which it has never done, the former colleague would still have been with the Trust.

5. Gilligan reports that the 1990 Trust received at least £65,200 directly from Mr Livingstone's office in the last financial year (05/06), and at least £86,000 previously - a total of at least £151,200. “Some of this is committed to particular projects but tens of thousands can be spent on anything”. This supposed expose of financial irregularities is false. The money has been spent on exactly what it was procured for.

6.The 1990 Trust only receives project funding, won through an open bid process, for specific work to be performed. We have received £151,200 over a five year period. It is totally untrue that “tens of thousands of pounds can be spent on anything,” as alleged by Gilligan. Our financial records are transparent, and can stand up to public scrutiny and audit. It is important to stress that the GLA has never funded the Blink web site. Further Gilligan presents absolutely no evidence to back his false claim that “The 1990 Trusts' funding appears to have stepped up as the Mayoral election has approached.”
Probably because this too is untrue.

7. Gilligan’s accusation that the 1990 Trust through a “front company” (ABI Associates) is false.
The 1990 Trust received £138,000, not from the “Mayor’s London Development Agency” as Gilligan claims, but from the European Social Fund over 3 years. So not only is Gilligan hurling falsehoods, he is guilty (again) of sloppy research and reporting that would gives a bad name to “investigative journalism”.

8. Gilligan further alleges that “The Trust shares many of the same directors as the other Mayor-funded companies. This is untrue. But even if there were many shared directors we are not aware of any legislation that prohibits this.

[David]

"To Correct the propagandist false statements:"

Oh, excellent. I look forward to you publically apologising for false smearing somebody by calling them a racist when they most patently aren't, purely for the political advantage of the current mayoral incumbant. Off you go then, chop chop.