Tuesday, March 11, 2008

The real difference between Ken and Boris...

In the Mayoral elections in 2000, Ken Livingstone turned down a donation of free campaign offices from a wealthy businessman to avoid a potential conflict of interest in any future planning application, in which the Mayor might have to make a ruling.

But The Guardian revealed last month that Boris Johnson, the Tory candidate in the current election, accepted a similar offer from the same Japanese businessman.

It's a story which starkly illustrates the real difference between Labour's Ken Livingstone and Tory Boris Johnson.

Following the headlines, Boris has apparently now agreed to pay rent on the offices which he is using as his campaign HQ.

I look forward to seeing a follow-up by the London Standard hack Andrew Gilligan who is running a nasty campaign to get his mate Boris elected Mayor of London...but I won't hold my breath...

3 comments:

Byrony Williams said...

Please see this post at MayorWatch:
http://www.mayorwatch.co.uk/article.php?slug=Johnson-Backtracks-Over-Free-Campaign-Office&article_id=1419

Boris's campaign did not accept free office space from the owner of the building, but a current tenant. Therefore, the comparison between Ken in 2000 and Boris in 2008 is inaccurate and there is no potential future conflict of interest.

Also, the campaign is NOT paying rent (contrary to the Guardian article) and declares the office space each month to the Electoral Commission as a 'gift in kind'.

Please check your facts before you post.

fairdealphil said...

Byrony:

thanks...

any word on Boris's £100 million a year bus blunder...?

Anonymous said...

On the contary Phil, Byrony confirms that Boris is acepting a gift from people he may later have to deal with, if elected Mayor.

I am no fan of Livingstone having worked in London when he was leader of the GLC, but given the leading candidates he is the only logical choice.

GW