What would you do with £2.5 million?

By Mark Pack | 5th December 2007 - 6:55 pm

Follow @markpack

Good news for Labour! Latest political financial scandal doesn’t involve David Abrahams.
Bad news for Labour! It still involves Labour, in this case London Mayor Ken Livingstone:

A senior adviser to London Mayor, Ken Livingstone, is under investigation after at least £2.5 million in public money was channelled to organisations controlled by himself, his friends and his business associates.

Lee Jasper, the Mayor’s director of equalities and policing, is at the centre of a network of companies which have received large sums of public money from Mr Livingstone while appearing to do little or no work in return.

An investigation by the Evening Standard reveals hundreds of thousands of pounds of public money is unaccounted for or has disappeared as a result of grants made through Mr Jasper.

Read the full story on the Evening Standard website.

Read more by Mark Pack .
This entry was posted in News and Opposition watch.
Bookmark the web address for this page or use the short url http://ldv.org.uk/1774 for Twitter and emails.

5 Comments

JamesS 5th Dec '07 - 10:18pm

This is a can of worms, to be sure. But who is going to run the risk of any accusations from Mr Race Relations himself?

If this is corruption, and that this is what is meant by multi-culturalism, does this mean we can return to simple secularism?

What does seem clear, though, is that there is a whole self-absorbed industry with an interest in perpetuating the race relations issue, which cannot be a healthy state of affairs.

I note Lee Jasper will be with Yvonne Thompson (of the also implicated ACBN) at the London Schools and the Black Child Conference this weekend. Does anybody here plan to attend and ask questions?
JamesS 5th Dec '07 - 10:34pm

The more I read about this the worse it gets.

Apparently a previous LDA investigation into dubious funding was condemned as ‘inadequate’ and ‘insufficiently probing’. While as far back as 30 October it was said this matter should be reinvestigated.
Angus J Huck 5th Dec '07 - 10:54pm

The little I have heard so far suggests that Lee Jasper has disbursed GLA funds to organisations run by people known to him personally. If this is so, his actions would appear to amount to a clear breach of his fiduciary duty; unless, of course, the GLA has expressly authorised him to dispose of funds in this way.

If Lee Jasper had done this in the private sector, he could very well end up in prison and bankrupt.

Anyway, what is an advisor doing handing out money? Isn’t there a process that has to be followed? Submitting an application, along with budgets and cash-flow forecasts, providing proof of minimum prudential standards, having the probity of one’s trustees checked?

The law has always come down very harshly on those who put themselves in a position where they have a conflict of interest and duty, because the Court of Chancery (historically) sought to preserve the positions of those owed a fiduciary duty. Lee Jasper is going to have a great deal of difficulty wriggling out of this one. Calling critics “racist” might scare people off, but it won’t change the facts.

One of the most egregious breaches of fiduciary duty in history (in relation to a public authority) was the decision of Nelson Rockefeller, as Governor of New York State, to rent 40 floors of the newly constructed World Trade Centre on behalf of the State, so as to protect his family’s investment.

Well, let’s be fair. The United States is far more corrupt than Britain, and I don’t think Ken Linvingstone’s integrity has ever been in question.

Again, we have to ask ourselves about the role of unelected “advisors”.
mary reid 5th Dec '07 - 10:57pm

Actually the link is:
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/
Mark Pack 5th Dec '07 - 11:58pm

Thanks Mary for spotting that the previous version of the story isn’t there any more. I’ve updated the link to go direct to the new version.