Mayor of London cleared of breach of code of conduct over Taylor Swift concert tickets

The decision of Rory McKenna comes after a complaint by Susan Hall AM and an external investigation by Matt Lewin of Cornerstone Barristers.

The focus of the investigation was an allegation that “it was unclear what level of caution, if any, the Mayor applied when accepting the gifted tickets, given that the company which provided the tickets has live contracts’ with the GLA to organise public events, contrary to paragraph 11.1 of the Gifts and Hospitality Policy (“the GH Policy”).”

Paragraph 11.1 of the GH Policy states: “Particular caution should be taken where any gift and/or hospitality is offered from any company that holds a contract with the GLA or who is likely to bid for a future contract with the GLA.”

In his report Lewin concluded that the Mayor “did exercise an appropriate degree of caution in accepting the offer of tickets from LS Events and therefore he did not breach the Code”.

He attached particular weight to a number of considerations in reaching that conclusion.

Firstly, Lewin noted that the Eras tour was a major cultural and economic event for London. “In that context, I accept that it was appropriate in principle for the Mayor to attend the concert. It is significant that the complaint does not allege that the Mayor should not have gone in the first place; rather the complaint is focussed on the process which led to the Mayor accepting the tickets and whether it was appropriate to accept the offer given that it had been made by a company with an underlying commercial relationship with the GLA.”

He also accepted what he had been told about the importance of Mayor’s ambassadorial function. “In my view, his attendance at the concert was consistent with the GLA’s policy of promoting the tour as a significant event in the life of the city.

“I acknowledge that the Mayor had no official role to play in the concert itself and was there primarily as a spectator. But that would also be true of many cultural events that he attends (such as a football match) without much controversy and so I do not consider that this detracts from the essentially ambassadorial purpose of his attendance.”

Secondly, Lewin noted that the GH Policy does not impose a blanket ban on accepting gifts and hospitality from a donor who is in, or is seeking to enter, a business relationship with the GLA.

He also pointed out that paragraph 11.3 of the GH Policy envisages that accepting gifts and hospitality from an established provider from time to time can be appropriate to “develop and maintain good working relations”.

“This appears to have been what the GLA officer, in preparing the briefing note for the Mayor ahead of the concert, had in mind,” Lewin said.

Thirdly, Lewin found that by the time the Mayor’s office was passed the allocation of tickets for the concert on 7 August 2024, the most sensitive elements of a procurement exercise for a Diwali on the Square contract, which LS Events secured, had concluded.

“The assessment of LS Events’ bid for the contract had taken place almost a month earlier and formal notification of the award of the contract was done on the day the Mayor’s office was notified of the tickets. The Mayor himself was not informed of the offer until 14 August 2024 – after the contract had been executed.”

Lewin acknowledged that the ticket allocation which was passed to the Mayor’s office on 7 August 2024 had actually been proposed by LS Events in mid-June, around the time that the invitations to tender for the Diwali on the Square contract had been issued, and was confirmed in mid-July, around the time that LS Events’ bid was being assessed and a decision made about the award of the contract.

“However, all this took place prior to the Mayor’s office being informed about the offer, by which time the procurement process had effectively been concluded. Given the very clear firewall put in place – for good reason – between the Mayor and individual procurement decisions, this was not something he or his team could reasonably be expected to be aware of when considering the offer of tickets,” he said.

Fourthly, Lewin said he had not seen any evidence to suggest that there were any performance issues with LS Events – something paragraph 11.3 of the GH Policy highlighted as also requiring particular caution. “Indeed the briefing note is very positive about the work they had done for the GLA.”

He noted that it was not highlighted “as an issue of concern in the briefing note (written by an officer who could reasonably be expected to have knowledge of the procurement position) and therefore I do not consider that there were any red flags around this offer to suggest that further enquiries were necessary”.

Lewin said that he was satisfied that the enquiries made by the Mayoral Director of Operations on the Mayor’s behalf – with her Mayoral Director counterparts and with the officer who prepared the briefing note – were sufficient to satisfy the requirement on the Mayor to take “particular caution” when accepting the offer of tickets made by LS Events.

McKenna said he agreed with Lewin’s recommendation that no further action should be taken.

A spokesperson for the Mayor of London said: “An independent investigation into a complaint against the Mayor has concluded that the Mayor did not breach the code of conduct and no further action will be taken.

“Any gift accepted by the Mayor is declared openly and transparently. In this case there was an administrative error which was quickly corrected. The Mayor has no involvement in the procurement process for GLA events, nor in the tendering of these contracts.”