Mayor's suspension 'a menace to democracy'

Allies of Ken Livingstone have slammed the "outrageous" decision to suspend him from office, but critics have said he brought the punishment on himself.

The London mayor was suspended by the Adjudication Panel for England, an appointed body responsible for judging cases of improper conduct in local government.

Friday's sentence of four weeks suspension came after Livingstone compared a Jewish Evening Standard reporter to a Nazi concentration camp guard.

The Conservatives said the mayor should now "consider his position".

But allies said it was unacceptable for the mayor, directly elected by the capital's citizens who were already well aware of his outspoken reputation, to be second-guessed by an unelected organisation.

Tony Woodley, general secretary of the Transport and General Workers' Union, said: "It is outrageous that an unelected body of three men has deprived seven million Londoners of their elected mayor for four weeks.

"Whilst many had wanted Ken Livingstone to apologise, suspension for such a long period seems to me to be totally disproportionate and serves no other purpose than to disrupt the work of the authority at a time when London needs it most.

"This harsh sanction hasn't been made in the interests of Londoners and is a menace to democracy.

"We will support London's mayor in whatever measures he may take to challenge this scandal."

And Jenny Jones, Green Party member of the London assembly, said she was also "outraged that this system allows three undemocratically appointed individuals to suspend a man who was elected by the vote of millions of Londoners".

"There is no criminal charge or corruption here and this is an example of hysterical over-reaction," she added.

There was also criticism of the suspension decision from the right-wing One London party.

"We are no friends of Ken Livingstone politically, but this suspension is outrageous," said leader Damian Hockney.

"Ken's remarks were absolutely appalling, but unless there is a clear case of him having broken the law, then suspension is a totally inappropriate response.

"Politicians rarely speak their minds. This decision will make them even less inclined to be honest in public.

"If free speech is worth having, we must accept that politicians should be entitled to voice their opinions too."

Defending the decision, Sir Anthony Holland, chairman of the Standards Board for England, said: "The public expects all elected members to conduct themselves in a manner that is beyond reproach.

"It is right that the facts of this case have been aired and considered in public in this way."

And Conservative AM Brian Coleman said the comments raised serious issues about Livingstone's "suitability for office".

"He seriously needs to consider his future," he added.

But Evening Standard editor Veronica Wadley stopped short of calling for the mayor's resignation after the judgement.

She welcomed the ruling and said there was "no question that he caused offence to many Londoners by his comments, and his stubborn refusal to say sorry aggravated the position".

"This paper has not always seen eye to eye with Mr Livingstone but we have applauded his work in helping to unite London after July 7," she added.

"We believe, though, that it is only right that the adjudication panel has now decided that Mr Livingstone acted in a manner that was ill-fitting for the mayor of this great city. Mr Livingstone should now apologise to those he offended."

Graham Tope, leader of the Liberal Democrat group on the assembly, said: "Mr Livingstone brought this on himself by making these insensitive remarks which caused a good deal of offence to a large number of Londoners.

"It would have been much simpler for all concerned if the mayor had apologised immediately as we said he should do so at the time.

"The nature of these remarks brought the office of the mayor of London into disrepute and caused damage to community cohesion in London."