Low Standard in journalism

Harbinder Singh Rana on the Queen's Jubilee Barge

To judge from the activities of the British Press the Leveson Enquiry on Press standards and influence may as well not be happening – paparazzi photos are still being used and personal stories are still being run in the Yellow Press without a shred of “Public Interest” pretense.

http://daithaic.blogspot.co.uk/2008/11/paparazzi-insight.html

London’s Evening Standard which is the sole evening newspaper in the capital has never been famous for its journalistic standards. It was formerly part of Northcliffe Newspapers owned by the Rothermere family and the Daily Mail was its sister paper. The first Lord Rothermere was an enthusiastic appeaser of the Nazis prior to World War 2 and got the newspaper the nickname “The Daily Heil” for his editorial line that Herr Hitler was a reasonable sort of chappie we could do business with. His son used to lecture Britain on patriotism and family values while living in tax exile with his Japanese mistress.

Three years ago the paper was sold to Alexander Lebedev, a Russian Oligarch who emerged with unexplained millions in the murky world of Boris Yesltin’s Russia. He gave assurances on editorial independence and his “fitness” to be a newspaper proprietor which were thrown out the window during the recent London Mayoral Election when, for two weeks beforehand, it devoted over four pages a day to pro- Boris Johnson editorial – indeed so naked was its bias it even had Boris ads on the top and side of its website. Interestingly the Evening Standard is now a free paper and is distributed under a commercial agreement at Transport for London stations controlled by one Boris Johnson, Mayor of London. Dwell not on these matters now; they are the subjects of complaints to the Returning Officer and the Electoral Commission.

However a recent Standard article under Ross Lydall’s byline plummets to a new low. Under the teasing headline;

“Met police: Sex attacker on royal Jubilee barge posed no threat”

They ran a story over the Jubilee Weekend that a convicted sex offender was allowed on the royal barge for the Diamond Jubilee pageant because he was not considered a threat to the royal family, it emerged today. The Standard reported;

“Harbinder Singh Rana, 52, was a guest of the Prince of Wales on Spirit of Chartwell despite having been sentenced to four years in jail in 1986 for five counts of indecent assault, 11 counts of assault causing actual bodily harm and one count of attempted assault.

He met Charles through his work as a director of the Anglo Sikh Heritage Trail, which aims to promote awareness of the links between Sikhs and Britons, and was accompanied by his 22-year-old daughter Kamalpreet.”

I commented under the story in the Standard on the 7^thJune 2012;

“I hope the Attorney General prosecutes the ES for what appears to be a clear breach of the 1974 Rehabilitation of Offenders Act. Once a Court has tried a case and decided on punishment society's only interest is in seeing the offender is rehabilitated and does not re-offend. Harbinder Singh Rana is clearly in this category and has done much to atone for his crime.

Perhaps in the interests of honest journalism Sarah Sands can tell us how the ES got hold of this information and how publishing it complies with the PCC Code of Conduct and the Data Protection Act?”

In the best traditions the Evening Standard didn't publish this comment critical of its Editor. Good to see that the Press has cleaned up its act during the Leveson enquiry. Particularly this Russian owned, opaquely financed "Free Paper."

Mr and Mrs Queen and family on the Jubilee Barge

Shareholder Spring: Employee reps to stop crony capitalism

I was astonished to read in today's Evening Standard (of all papers) that its City Editor, James Ashton, supported as the only "surefire way for any board to keep in touch with reality" over executive pay, is to appoint employee representatives to the

board "to keep them honest".

The background to this is the revolts by shareholders (or rather asset managers not by and large the actual share owners) at Company Annual General Meetings (AGM) over excessive and unearned top executive pay. Yesterday the boss of insurance giant Aviva was forced to resign after his pay package was rejected at its AGM. So were the bosses of drugs giant AstraZeneca and Trinty Mirror. Tomorrow apparently the British Gas Centrica CEO is also in big trouble.

At a pension conference recently on executive pay I asked Government Cabinet minster Vince Cable why it was thought a good thing that employee representatives were legally required to make up to 50% of the trustee board of a company pension fund, making decisions that could make or break the organisation, yet there was no requirement to have even one such rep on the same company remuneration committee? He claimed to support the principle of employee reps but that the role of a pension trustee was very different to being on a company remuneration committee (which is completely rubbish not least since many employer reps on pension schemes also sit on you know what committees!)

I must admit to agreeing with James Ashton's conclusion that the employee representation "model has been proved to work elsewhere in Europe. What better way for the chairman to keep in touch with the shopfloor than to have the shopfloor turn up in his boardroom once a month? It could make for some uncomfortable meetings".

Update: I'll post on the campaign by Fair Pensions on how ordinary people can take action against executive High Pay soon.