Saturday, 30 August 2008

Brian Coleman: Boris's Champion Olympic Gaffelete

The news that Brian Coleman believes British Olympians have the 'blood of Tibetans' on their hands and that Boris Johnson has no chance of bringing the games in under budget, is no surprise.

Just last week Coleman was claiming homophobia after being passed over for an job at the LGA and just last month he was condemned for spending tens of thousands of pounds of our money on taxis.

Of course you would think that Labour and the other parties would be hungry for blood after McGrath, Lewis and Parker. But aside from condemning his remarks they have held back from calling for a resignation.

Because with Coleman supplying such a regular chain of gaffes, it is clearly in their interests for him to stay.

Gaffe Cow

In recent years Coleman, who Boris Johnson chose to chair the London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority, has become something akin to a cash cow for his opposition politicians.

The man who was recently described to me by an ex-assembly member as being "to the right of Genghis Khan" is a regular supplier of outrage, controversy and scandal.

And is in his actions and manner he is as living an embodiment of everything that is objectionable about the Conservative Party as we are ever likely to find.

Boris of course cannot afford another resignation anyway, and Coleman would be highly unlikely to give him one. So for now at least, Coleman is likely to stay.

But if anyone can explain to me why Boris Johnson was happy to appoint such a walking disaster zone to his team, then I would be really interested to hear it.

14 comments:

Tom said...

I'm not sure I get this 'homophobia at the LGA' thing at all - that'll be a different LGA from the one with the openly gay Sir Simon Milton as Chairman, then?

It's quite possible the LGA didn't want to be associated with rentaquote idiots.

The Troll said...

Well exactly. I think the homophobia claim will probably have lost him more respect amongst his Tory colleagues than anything else. Say what you like about the conservatives, but being a gay man certainly does not seem to be an obstruction to getting to the top levels of power in London.

Being a woman Tory on the other hand, does not seem to be quite such a good hand to be dealt.

chris said...

"if anyone can explain to me why Boris Johnson was happy to appoint such a walking disaster zone to his team, then I would be really interested to hear it."

Because he makes Boris look good by comparison.

Mr. Stop Boris said...

Coleman's going to pop up on the phone on Ken Livingstone's LBC 97.3 programme in the next couple of hours. Might be worth a listen.

The Troll said...

Thanks Mr. SB. I had forgotten about that (as with Any Questions yesterday which I missed).

Coleman vs. Ken should be a winner though.

votedforken said...

In fact there are Labour calls for Johnson to take action, reported here:
http://www.mayorwatch.co.uk/Labour-attack-Colemans-Olympic-comments-article_id-1774.html
and here:
http://www.insidethegames.com/show-news.php?id=3367
The position taken by leader of the Labour group in Barnet - Alison Moore - that the mayor should take action against a member of his administration making comments such as this is surely strengthened by the fact that he - Boris Johnson - has already condemned them as offensive. It makes no sense for a political leader to have as a member of his team someone whose views he has attacked in stark terms. If these comments are so offensive that the mayor has had to say so in crystal clear language then how does he square having Coleman on his team as a very senior appointment?

Some may want to keep Coleman because he's a liability for Boris Johnson, but if Johnson is let off the hook when things like this arise it will in fact lead him to conclude that he does not have to be accountable. He wants to present Coleman's views as Coleman's business, but whilst he is a member of Johnson's team it's not that simple.

Johnson's attempts to say, basically, 'terrible, but not me guv' are calculated to avoid having to lose yet another senior appointment. Yet in the case of Brian Coleman he surely deserves to lose him, since he should never have been indulged with his position as chair of a London-wide functional body in the first place.

Anonymous said...

Rumour has it that Coleman thought he would run the show for Boris. He upset the Lib Dem PPC for Hampstead and Kilburn over policing
http://474towin.blogspot.com/2008/07/empty-chair-politics-from-our-elected.html

angelneptunestar said...

You know I always support Boris to the hilt, but even I don't know what he is doing with this dork. The thing about the taxis is awful.

harold said...

Of course Boris hasn't got a chance of staying within budget - not while Coileman makes expenses claims.

Hannah said...

As you said: 'Being a woman Tory on the other hand, does not seem to be quite such a good hand to be dealt'
Exactly.
Is it true that there are no women in senior posts and the recently departed, but not mourned Tim Parker's main contribution to the administration was to suggest that women do not have the skills for high office?

Tom said...

It occurred to me a few weeks ago that at no time in the Conservative Party's history has the number of women, black or Asian members in senior positions exceeded the number of gay men. This probably holds true now, it certainly holds true under Boris.

angelneptunestar said...

People should be promoted on merit, not sex or sexuality. If no women have made it, they are not good enough. I dont want any concessions made for me.

Tom said...

"If no women have made it, they are not good enough"

You're denying the existence of sexism in the workplace?

angelneptunestar said...

Tom, I'm not but the worst way to fight that is by accepting concessions. By accepting concessions, You are tacitly agree ing you are not equal. The only way to fight sexism is to show you are so good that they have to appoint you, in a way by being more than is required, which is hard, but it is the only way. that is the only way to kill sexism. Offering us concessions and "wimmin's" things, even though well meant, is just so patronising.