Tom Barry wrote:

Boris's campaign could have done without the headache of the row over
routemaster costs. And which newspaper made an issue of it?

The Guardian. Dave Hill's piece appeared around about the first week in
March and proved to be entirely correct.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...london08.boris

When did the Standard lay into it?

Before then - late February and earlier in March. Their website keeps
crashing my browser but amongst the search results:

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standa... is/article.do

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standa...ers/article.do

Anyway if you want an anti-Boris Livingstone-nostalgic paper, buy
the Grauniad. Or try getting "The Evening Communist" started and
successful.

If you like your transport finances to pass more than a superficial
examination you're a Communist? Interesting. *makes note*

I meant that more for the sore losers currently whining about the Standard
and claiming it swung the result of the election against their beloved Ken.
(Although I find all the "I'm devastated for London" or "Not in my name"
comments from Labour activists far worse - they're not fooling anyone.)
Never mind the fact that other papers were vehemently anti-Boris or that the
newspaper market is the way it is.

There's a pretty good rebuttal of this line by Gilligan in the Independent:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/me...is-821013.html