Two members of the London Assembly, who also sit on the Metropolitan Police Authority (MPA), have reacted angrily to reports that Sir Ian Blair will be paid for the remainder of his contract despite having resigned.
Sir Ian resigned as Met Commissioner last month after Mayor of London Boris Johnson told him he wanted to see a change of leadership. His contract was originally due to run until 2010.
According to reports, Sir Ian will receive the remaining value of his contract in a £295,000 lump sum, on top of a £168,000 annual pension.
Green Party AM Jenny Jones has accused Mayor Johnson of leaving Londoners ”paying for two police commissioners but only getting the services of one.”
Jones added: “If the Mayor had consulted other parts of London Government about both the original decision to dismiss Sir Ian and the subsequent decision to compensate him, we probably wouldn’t be in this situation.”
LibDem spokesperson Dee Doocey sad there was “no reason whatsoever to pay off somebody who has resigned.”
“If any other employee told their boss they were resigning, there would be absolutely no question of them being given a payoff, let alone a bonus. Why should there be one rule for the chief of police and another for every other worker?”
“In this economic climate it is frankly a disgrace that this is even being considered.”
Jim Thomas says
On the horizon, the new Met chief could be a Ms!
Sara Thornton an expert in “terrorism and intelligence gathering with fifteen years in the met has “entered the race” to succeed Sir Ian Blair. Julie Spence, the Cambridgeshire Chief Constable fancies the job as does Jane Stichbury, CBE QPM Chief Constable, Her Majesty’s Inspector of Constabulary with oversight of sixteen forces. The clue behind this line of thought was the fact that Kit Malthouse on news night spoke of the person to replace sir Ian.
Damian Hockney says
As a former MPA Member, can I just add my support to Jenny and Dee’s position. This is another outcome of the muddy way in which we are now governed. Many people believe that the Commissioner was “sacked” by the Mayor (which he wasn’t) and that he therefore deserves a payout. The Commissioner resigned. It is clear he would not have resigned if the MPA No Confidence motion staged last year had been carried, even though the MPA has a greater role than the Mayor in the process. The Mayor chairs but does not control the MPA. And only the Home Secretary can sack the Commissioner. And yet again, as with the resignation, there is no transparency and no clear outline of why this has happened and how it could be prevented in future. So it will.