Lord Taylor's 91Èȱ¬ job mix up
, the peer who was this week convicted of expenses fraud, is a resilient chap, and will no doubt survive his expected jail sentence.
John Taylor has taken knocks before, and pulled through. Such as the racism of certain voters in Cheltenham in the 1992 election (and of some members of the local Conservative party which chose him as their candidate).
And subsequently he also survived a rather disappointing experience with the 91Èȱ¬.
In 1995 the 91Èȱ¬ was looking for a new crime correspondent. John Taylor applied, and so did another John Taylor, a well-known reporter with London Weekend Television.
After the interviews, the Tory John Taylor rang the 91Èȱ¬, announced his name, and asked about the outcome. "Congratulations," he was told. He'd got the job, they told him, adding that a formal letter of appointment was in the post.
A letter was indeed in the post, but on its way to the LWT John Taylor, the man the 91Èȱ¬ really wanted.
You can imagine the 91Èȱ¬'s embarrassment when they learnt about the cock-up. And all the thoughts racing through managers' minds - will he accuse us of racism? etc.
A year later the other John Taylor gained some small consolation with a peerage awarded by John Major.
In the light of recent events, perhaps the other John Taylor would have been rather well qualified as a crime correspondent.
I'm Michael Crick, and I'm Newsnight's political editor. My guiding rule is that in any story there's usually something the politicians would prefer the world not to know. My job is to find that out. Follow me on
Comment number 1.
At 27th Jan 2011, stevie wrote:sounds like someone is making a case for 'leniency'tell that to Jonathon Aitken...
Complain about this comment (Comment number 1)
Comment number 2.
At 27th Jan 2011, stevie wrote:Caroline Spelman in her 'defence' of privatising our forests sounded all sweetness and honey, her voice dripped with re-assurance, her tone one of 'do you think we would really do anything like that...you silly boy' and that is when everything she said sounded like the death knell for hikers and walkers everywhere...beware of ministers bearing walking boots...and fences saying KEEP OUT....
Complain about this comment (Comment number 2)
Comment number 3.
At 27th Jan 2011, stanilic wrote:That's a low blow, Michael.
Nice to see that old English principle of always kicking a man when he's down still carries currency.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 3)
Comment number 4.
At 27th Jan 2011, DebtJuggler wrote:'A year later the other John Taylor gained some small consolation with a peerage awarded by John Major.'
Very funny!
Complain about this comment (Comment number 4)
Comment number 5.
At 27th Jan 2011, jauntycyclist wrote:he'll be an expert in crime when he comes out with some useful contacts ?
Complain about this comment (Comment number 5)
Comment number 6.
At 27th Jan 2011, jauntycyclist wrote:this case says more about the endemic 'spirit of expenses fiddling' in parliament?
Complain about this comment (Comment number 6)
Comment number 7.
At 28th Jan 2011, worcesterjim wrote:7...Yes it does Jaunty....it`s code for..."Right ..we`ve sacrificed one black scalp and few white ones to keep the 91Èȱ¬ happy ....now shut up and let us return to the trough ...like generations of parliamentarians before us"
Complain about this comment (Comment number 7)
Comment number 8.
At 8th Feb 2011, Ernst wrote:Warwick did not lose the 1992 election because of racialism. he lost for other reasons.
First an anti Tory swing in the West country - Chris Patten, for example lost Bath.
Secondly, in Nigel Jones there was an outstanding Lib Dem candidate, apart from his personal qualities he was local and a councillor. There was also a formidable LIb Dem party machine.
Thirdly, Warwick was a poor candidate — he tended to rub people up the wrong way — he used racialism as an excuse afterwards.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 8)