Thursday, 19 June 2008

The Evening Standard smell Ken blood at City Hall

The Evening Standard yesterday reported that five women had 'lost their jobs' before the decision had even been confirmed at City Hall.

A copy of the article Ken's partner axed as Boris Johnson purges City Hall 'wimmin' was brought into the chamber by a reporter at yesterday's Mayor's Question Time, several hours before the relevant committee was due to discuss the matter.

The Business Management Administration Committee (or Business Management and Appointments Committee as the Standard chose to call it) did in fact confirm the job losses, but spoke of their disappointment that the redundancies had been reported in this way.

Regular Troll readers will have realised that this 'news' was reported on these pages a whole week ago. Information about the possible redundancies were contained within a report to the BMAC committee rifled through by one of my regular readers.

However, although I chose to run with the story, I did not make the mistake of saying that the members of staff had already lost their job, nor did I publish any of the individual names prior to the official confirmation.

But like their infamous 'Suicide Bomb Backers Runs Ken's Campaign' story, published during the campaign, these considerations of mere fact are as nothing, when there is the opportunity of drawing some Livingstone blood.


Anonymous said...

The Standard seem stuck fighting the last war. Do they not realise that Ken isn't Mayor anymore?

Chris said...

They're probably hoping he runs again. Their circulation went up during the peak Ken hunting season remember. Day after day of Gilligan writing a 'go Boris!' type editorial isn't going to keep people hooked for long now is it?

angelneptunestar said...

Is it ethical though to employ your partner where you work at such a huge salary? If Boris took his wife on to work with him at City Hall, would't you all be squeaking nepotism?

Anonymous said...

If Boris and his team want to get rid some of posts in the GLA fine. He won the election and its up to him how he wants to his office to be run.

HOWEVER it can't be right that the Standard chooses to tackle this war on bureaucracy, or whatever other tabloid phrase you wish to use, by A/personalising the issue, and B/getting its facts wrong.

One of the pictures of the people losing their jobs that the Standard used in Wednesday's paper came off the GLA's internal contacts list. Who gave them that?

They also published the wrong salary for Ken's office manager. She got paid £55k a year (too much IMHO), not the £90k the Standard reported. I tried to leave a comment correcting their error on their on-line edition, but for some reason it hasn’t been published.

Let me repeat what I said at the beginning. I don't argue that Boris should not have taken this action; but if people are to lose their jobs, shouldn’t they be afforded some privacy?

The Tory Troll said...

That's really interesting Anonymous. Can you email me about this please?

angelneptunestar said...

Surely you are contradicting yourself though? When I said Boris Johnson had a right to a private life and it was wrong to print details of his private life, you said NO. You said anyone in public life was fair game and it was right to print embarrassing details about people. Surely then you cannot object if details of people who are made redundant are printed, when the issue is wastage of public money? Obviously if errors are made about their salaries, a correction should be made.

The Tory Troll said...

Angela, who are you talking to? This article is about the misreporting of the Evening Standard. They misreported. I reported their misreporting.

angelneptunestar said...

sorry Adam, I got the wrong end of the stick.