Sir Ian's rewards for failure

There certainly were improvements in London's crime figures on Sir Ian's watch but he faced repeated criticism for allowing his role to become politicised. More importantly, questions remain over when he became aware that Jean Charles de Menezes had been killed in error, and over his handling of Assistant Commissioner Tarique Ghaffur's claims of racism. Yet incredibly, despite the embarrassments of the Ghaffur case, which may cost the Metropolitan Police Authority around £300,000, Sir Ian is receiving that part of his bonus for the period up to February 2010 for achieving ethnic diversity targets.

Rewards for failure at the expense of shareholders are unjust enough in the corporate world; in the public sector, where Sir Ian's pension is paid by taxpayers, they provoke even greater resentment. The Met will doubtless say that it is bound by law to pay out these sums, which represent the remainder of Sir Ian's package up to the expiry of his original contract. In that case it is time the public sector stopped entering into service contracts which continue to pay out even when the holder is no longer doing the job. At a time of recession, these arrangements rankle all the more with those whose taxes are now paying for Sir Ian to do nothing. Whatever the basis of Sir Ian's deal, this outcome does nothing for popular confidence in the Met.

A free press

WITH his warning about attacks on the freedom of the press, the editor-in-chief of this newspaper group, Paul Dacre, has highlighted an issue of growing concern - and one which should extend far beyond journalists. Speaking to the Society of Editors, Mr Dacre warned that our libel laws have "made London the libel capital of the world". More importantly, he focused on the use of the Human Rights Act in recent privacy cases, especially by Mr Justice Eady.

The judge has presided over a string of high-profile privacy cases, most notably that of motor racing boss Max Mosley, who won his case over accusations that he had taken part in a sado-masochistic orgy. What arose from this case goes far beyond the personal life of Mr Mosley. As Mr Dacre warns, taken together with a string of other decisions by Mr Justice Eady, and a section of political opinion which would like to curb press freedom, there is a real danger that this will have a chilling effect on the media's readiness to undertake investigative journalism, especially against powerful or wealthy figures.

A judge, rather than Parliament, is making the law by laying down the limits of what the press may investigate and publish. But there has been no parliamentary discussion of a privacy law, nor have the consequences of such a move been laid before the public. It should not be introduced at the whim of judges, by the back door. The battle for a free press is a perpetual one and this is the time to fight it once again.

And celebrating...

YOUTH SPORT. The London Assembly suggests that young people should be provided with Youth Opportunity cards to encourage them to take up sports in the run-up to the London Olympics. These cards would allow young people to use sports facilities in areas outside their own boroughs, which means that teenagers in a borough with poor facilities could take advantage of those anywhere in London. Furthermore, those using gyms and sports facilities would obtain points which could be put towards bonuses such as cinema visits. This paper is campaigning for a real sporting legacy from the 2012 Olympics: the card would be a good way to encourage greater participation in sport.