Afternoon:
12°c
Ken Livingstone refuses to appear before LDA audit panel
Katharine Barney, Evening Standard15.07.08
Ken Livingstone has refused to appear in front of an audit panel investigating allegations of misspending during his time as Mayor.
The Forensic Audit Panel was created in May by newly elected Conservative Mayor Boris Johnson to investigate financial management at the London Development Agency and Greater London Authority.
The investigation was launched after revelations in the Evening Standard over how cash was given to friends and allies of Mr Livingstone's adviser Lee Jasper with little or no results to show for it. A series of projects are also being investigated by police.
Mr Livingstone yesterday turned down a formal request to appear before the Forensic Audit Panel from its chairwoman, former Sunday Telegraph editor-Patience Wheatcroft. The former mayor replied that while he was happy to work with any "genuinely independent body", he considered Mrs Wheatcroft's audit panel neither objective nor independent.
"To cooperate in any way with your purely Conservative Party dominated body would be to lend it a facade of independence and objectivity which it clearly does not possess," he wrote. Mrs Wheatcroft, a former editor of the Sunday Telegraph, declared she is a member of the Conservative Party on City Hall's register of interests.
Two other members of the fivestrong panel are Stephen Greenhalgh, Conservative leader of Hammersmith and Fulham Council, and Edward Lister, Conservative leader of Wandsworth Council. A fourth member, Patrick Frederick, declares on his register of interests that he is chairman of Conservative Business Relations for South East England and southern London.
Mr Livingstone also said in his reply that there was a conflict of interest with the panel's fifth member Andrew Grove, a partner at accountancy firm PricewaterhouseCoopers, which has been awarded work by the panel.
In the panel's interim report, released last month, Mrs Wheatcroft said there had been a culture where spending was encouraged and political interference common but with few checks on whether taxpayers got value for money.
Her full report is expected to be released tomorrow.
A spokesman for Mr Johnson said: "We are disappointed that the former Mayor chose not to appear before the Forensic Audit Panel."
Reader views (24)
Somehow I don't think that Red Ken will adopt the same uncooperative Bolshi attitude, even with his 'Capital friends and allies' at the Met., during the current police enquiries.
But as long as his close political associates within McLabour continue to 'control' the CPS decisions, then I suspect that, like Blair and Levy et al, he'll eventually wriggle out off any potential prosecutions.
- Dave, cumbria
A transparent attempt to detract from Johnson's inevitably shaky reign as mayor.
A waste of taxpayer's money on a Tory-led 'neutral' investigation to take the heat off.
- Charles Marino, Walthamstow
What a surprise!
- Brandon Thomas, London UK
Accusations of fraud need to be addressed at all times by the relevant authorities.
Hopefully a politically balanced audit panel that included perhaps some retired judges and other more impartial individuals would neither induce Mr Livingston to ignore them or the public to view the proceedings as anything other than a lynching.
It is amusing that the hot headed firebrands of yester year all tend to attempt to feather their beds as they grow into their twilight years. Hopefully Ken wasn't so daft, I'm sure Boris won't try... now.
- Ivan Zelenka, Gosport
A sign of a guilty conscience? Or does Saint Ken believe himself to above us mere mortals, or might he believe that this is a Tory Witch Hunt?
Actions often speak louder than words. Its often not what is said, but what is not said.
- B Clark, Chelmsford England
I am fortunate enough to be able to stay on London each year and last summer I found a newspaper in the foyer of our rented flat extolling the virtues of Ken Livingstons' mayoral reign. It turned out that it was published by the mayors office, I think. Who paid for that?
- Hans Von Loeffler, Balboa, California
Millions went missing either stolen or thrown away and Livingstone will not answer one question. Where did all our money go?! It really is a simple question but one Livingstone will never answer it.
- K Harrop, hertford uk
If you or I refused to appear before any court or panel we would probably find our front door broken down in the early hours of the morning, and be 'invited' to accompany some nice men in blue.
- Patrick Griffin, Dalston, London
As Labour is always fond of saying if you have nothing to hide then you have nothing to worry about - the truth is that tax payers money has gone missing whilst Livingstone was at the helm and the public deserves to know what happened to it. Nothing else is relevant.
- Simon, London
'Although I'm sure the blinkered Ken haters here will think otherwise'.
Hilarious stuff. There are none more blinkered than Ken lovers. Amusing to see the newt hanging around like a disinterred corpse, following his electoral defeat, bleating and whining to anyone that will listen. Ken can dish it out but boy you see the true man when it comes to his utter inability to take it. The way he mixes his own bitterness with the execution of the shadowy policies of his masters (a clapped out and discredited Labour Party)is little more than can be expected of him.
- Mark, London
Does it matter what they find? Nothing would happen. Look at the MPs guilty in the public mind of dubious financial practice..Conway Harman Hain Balls the speaker of the house...the list is endless and not one is in court let alone prison.
- Roger Tanneau, rennes france
Surely the only rationale for convening such a committee is to establish the truth of where various very large sums of public moneys went and if the proper procedures were followed.
If the entire panel's Conservative affiliation render them 'unfit for purpose' as Ken implies, ethical standards of those in public life in the UK have slipped to an unacceptable low and the implications of this for the citizenry are very frightening indeed.
Is Ken genuinely concerned about political bias, or does he wish the findings of the panel to be hidden from public view?
He has, in my view, two options: front up to the panel and answer the questions or prove that the panel is not able to produce an unbiased and honest report.
Merely impugning the integrity of the panels' members is not good enough and us Londoners deserve better.
- Kiwi Expat, London, UK
There was going to be a genuine independent inquiry, led by a QC, but then Boris scrapped it and appointed an 'audit panel' of Tory stooges. No-one will think its report is unbiased. It seems that Boris is determined to prove that no-one does cronyism better than the Tories.
- David Boothroyd, London, UK
I can't blame him, whether or not there is anything to hide, why should he appear before what essentially appears to be a court to try him set up by his successor.
Boris appears set on making Ken's name mud (diverting attention from his own inadequacies in the process) and ensuring that enough of a cloud hangs over his head that he never makes it back to public office again.
If Boris feels there were irregularities in spending, why not use existing channels to highlight this? Why set up this Spanish inquisition style, "independent" body/court? It's all down to publicity...
- Headhunter, London
To Kieran, London, UK.
It's a bit rich claiming the panel will have vested interest in dirtying the name of Comrade Livingstonski. Did he not hold an 'independent enquiry' into the activities of his mate Jasper, which completely cleared him of any wrongdoing. That is, until the Evening Standard pointed out that that enquiry was just a sham. Livingstonski and Jasper then fell back on the tried and tested Labour ploy of branding every critic of Jasper a racist for having the temerity to question his truthfulness and integrity. Of course in the end Livingstonski and Jasper were forced to admit their culpability which resulted in the 'resignation' on personal grounds of Jasper. How many other Livingstonski appointees resigned because of fiduciary failings in the last year of his dictatorship?. That's why Londoners finally saw through his bluff and bluster and voted him out.
- Pw, Sutton UK
Ken Livingstone - What a surprise - your a coward too !
- Raymond, Elstree
It's odd how Livingstone wont appear before a panel investigating his incompetence. He was quick enough to introduce draconian measures for passengers (aka Livingstone's paymasters and the people he is accountable to) on the tube/bus with oystercards when payment was questioned (many of the problems are due to tfl not the customer). message to Livingstone: we want our money back - so explain yourself or pay up!
- Josh, london
Red Ken quite clearly running scared.
- Jimbob, Kensington
This just illustrates what utter contempt this vile man has for anyone who doesn't share his views. Thank God we had the sense to boot him out!
- Paul Wilson, London, UK
Please, please publish the full response-
His comments about patience Wheatcroft's son being given a post at the GLA, "irregularities in the Procurement of PWC", the replacement of a QC lead independent inquiry into Jasper in favour of a Tory-heavy "audit" are fantastic...
This one will run and run!
- Fresh, london
For Mr Livingstone's sake, I trust that when this audit is eventually completed that it will clearly show that "NO that there was a conflict of interest" existed in relation to the cash that was given to friends and allies of his adviser, Lee Jasper, with little or no results to show for it. Furthermore, I trust that this audit will revisit any "inquiries" that Mr Livingstone had carried out during his time as Mayor to confirm beyond all reasonable doubt that any such "inquiry" was fully independent.
In the meantime however, perhaps the best solution overall would be to simply ban Ken Livingstone from holding any position in public office "for life".
- Fraser, Telford Park
If there's nothing to hide, why not appear?
- Alex, London, England
Mr Livingstone is absolutely right. The panel is a complete joke.
I don't care what people think of Ken. By even those who despise him should acknowledge that appearing before a panel composed of an absurdly biased panel - of his own opponents - is pointless.
Let's see - the panel is composed of Conservatives. Our mayor is a Conservative whose core campaign relied on accusations of wastage.
Are people seriously suggesting that this panel will not have a vested interest in coming back with dirt? That there might be an issue if they come back and say "actually Boris (our fellow party member and close ally) was wrong."
I'm all for an investigative panel - I wholeheartedly believe in accountability. But this is ridiculous. What is wrong with putting together a fair, impartial panel. Isn't that what everyone would want?
Although I'm sure the blinkered Ken haters here will think otherwise. They probably wouldn't care if the panel just invented the results.
- Kieran, London, UK
I think that day by day we can all see this former mayor for what he was.
- Mikko Takala, Drumnadrochit, Scotland
