London Mayor

By sheer chance I stumbled across the Newsnight candidates debate just now. God streuth!!!!

Johnson clearly lacks focus, has no grasp of detail and is palpably out of his depth. He's deluded if he thinks that editing the Spectator somehow qualifies him to run one of the globes major city's. A few people sniggered when Hartlepool elected H'Angus the monkey, London might be on the verge of doing similar. He gives the distinct impression of a man who just isn't in control, and could do untold damage. He obviously, and doesn't respond well to pressure, although there's something else I can't quite put my finger on which frightens me about him. I think he reminds me of George Bush in that he comes across as being impulsive, lacking clarity, superficial and generally not being in control. It's as if it's an attention problem. I always knew he was an idiot and incompetant, but didn't realise just how bad he'd become. If ever a ballot paper was screaming out for 'none of the above' it has to be this one.

imo The liberal looked best
 
Originally posted by Warbler@Apr 8 2008, 11:35 PM


imo The liberal looked best
Click to expand...
Yep, not so hot at public speaking but that shouldn`t matter imo.

I don`t see why Party loyalty should come into mayoral voting. Surely even the most deluded Tory is only voting for Boris as an anti-Ken measure. They can`t actually want him for real.
 
It shouldn't really be a partisan thing I agree. But i got the impression the liberal was something of a pragmatist and all round sound manager of measured judgement who understood the brief, the issues, and the responsibilities that went with it. Johnson by contrast was appalling; like a little boy in a sweet shop desperately trying to flannel his way out of answering detailed questions.

Politicians of course don't like answering questions, but I detected in Johnson that his reason for being so evasive is because he didn't know the answer (which is very different). All the others knew how much a bus cost. The tendering process that needed to be observed. The time lags by way of design specifications. The purchase cost, and the running costs. They also knew the same for the alternatives, with the liberals obviously bringing trams into the solution. Johnson stood there and said he could do it cheaper, yet couldn't tell anyone how much it would cost. It's not as if Paxman let him off either. He gave me the impression that he just went on the programme (could he really not have anticipated a question on transport?) announced that he wanted to buy more Routemasters and scrap the bendy buses, and had either been too lazt, too stupid, or too naive not to have costed things out. It could be of course that he's too arrogant, but this populist, and simplistic sound bite approach to everythign he does just worries. Suffice to say, his veneer came crumbling down when exposed to even the most gentle scrutiny. "How much will it cost?" - He patently didn't know
 
I only watched a little of it as I wanted to watch The Wings of the Dove again on BBC1, but I agree with Warbler that Boris came across as worryingly badly briefed - floundering is the only word one could use. You would of course as Mayor delegate all that stuff, pref to the best people around; but that's no excuse for not being of top of Transport costs, one of the most important responsibilities of the Mayor.

Here's a fun little quiz on the candidates which was put up on FF - interesting as when you see the results it displays all the candidates' policies on the questions, which saves a lot of manifesto reading!

http://www.votematch.co.uk/

I was and remain totally against the concept of Mayor anyway - it was a political tactic brought in by Labour to ensure they could get or keep control of most cities, rather than the old system of decision-making by Council committees which were filled on a % of the democratic vote. I don't agree with handing so much power to any one man, no matter which party he represents
 
I think he reminds me of George Bush in that he comes across as being impulsive, lacking clarity, superficial and generally not being in control
Click to expand...

Not true. Whatever you think of Bush, he certainly did not lack clarity. If anything he was too black and white. Not as impulsive as many would assume either.

I didnt see this last night but i simply find Boris ridiculous. He offers nothing at all...

The priority for any voter who truely understands what racist Ken and his cabal is all about is to get rid of him, but why this idiot?

Looks like it will be Paddick for me
 
Oh dear oh dear

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard-may...cafe/article.do

No doubt because the "donation" was from a asian any criticism of this will now be deemed "racist" by Ken

It is hilarious though

What could be more red tooth and claw capitalist than property development?

I suppose his one saving grace was that no Jews were involved which would keep his inner cabal and certain supporters happy

But this is not the end of it. Gilligan almost certainly has more up his sleeve.....

My guess is that a further revelaed "connection" to Ken will be even more explosive than this
 
Originally posted by Headstrong@Apr 9 2008, 12:18 AM
I was and remain totally against the concept of Mayor anyway ....... I don't agree with handing so much power to any one man, no matter which party he represents
Click to expand...
And this kind of thing {below} is one of the reasons why.
What happened to local democracy? - well we all know what John Prescott did to that :what:

<< Mr Livingstone has planning powers unique for a British politician. On his initiative he can accept or reject "strategic" planning applications across London, and has recently acquired powers to override borough councils. >> [from the ES piece by Gilligan]
 
Originally posted by Headstrong+Apr 9 2008, 09:46 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Headstrong @ Apr 9 2008, 09:46 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Headstrong@Apr 9 2008, 12:18 AM
I was and remain totally against the concept of Mayor anyway .......  I don't agree with handing so much power to any one man, no matter which party he represents
Click to expand...
And this kind of thing {below} is one of the reasons why.
What happened to local democracy? - well we all know what John Prescott did to that :what:

<< Mr Livingstone has planning powers unique for a British politician. On his initiative he can accept or reject "strategic" planning applications across London, and has recently acquired powers to override borough councils. >> [from the ES piece by Gilligan] [/b][/quote]
I'm sure Gilligan will find that the unelected RDA's have reserve planning powers too, although in reality they're never invoked. The Secretary of State can also 'call in' any planning decision, though in reality only does so when a sufficient protest has been mounted and normally involves a public enquiry.

On the wider issue of local governance I'm afraid I've been embroilled it too long now to delude myself regarding the existance of some kind of democratic camelot. I used to beleive in it, but after spending time in New York and watching closely the activities of one Rudolph Guiliani I came to change my mind (despite disagreeing with most things he was doing). It's got nothing to do with the dangers of handing power to one person, provided that person is good. In reality, not many local authorities observe democratic protocols anyway, as it's not unusual for one or two all powerful individuals to bow beat their colleagues into voting one way or the other anyway.

To be honest Headstrong, if I were to give you a blank piece of paper, and ask you to devise the most inappropriate and dysfunctional method for local government, with the additional brief to ensure that you attract barely competent or people pursuing even more dubious motivations, you wouldn't go far short of what we have today.

In reality what tends to happen is you get a branch Labour party covering a council ward (typical membership between 12 - 20) of whom half are either unable to get the time off work to discharge their responsibilities effectively, and another 25% of the active membership are likely to be ineligible to stand due to being employed by the local authority. Therefore you get a gene pool of about half dozen people (often retired) who about 20 people decide to run as a candidate. To do the job properly requires you to put in about 60 hours a week, for which you get paid a pittance of an allowance plus expenses, as well as getting a whole load of grief from all and sundry 24/7. In other words, you aren't necessarily attracting high calibre and capable people. They then go forward as a candidate and will get voted in on about 10-15% of the total possible, as only about 30% turn out. Then a bit of horse trading goes on as they elect their leader who appoints their cabinet. All of a sudden you can have someone who has absolutely minimal experience in a portfolio making decisions and trying to manage a budget, the size of which they have little comprehension of nor experience in handling. What normally happens (especially if the councillor is unable to put the time aside to get to the bottom of issues) is the unelected full time officers end up running things by effectively pulling the wool over the councillors eyes.

In many respects it is this which worries me about Johnson, as he hasn't come from a background of political or large organisation management. If this was a conventional job application, he wouldn't even be shortlisted for interview he's so palpably unqualified. All he's ever done is represent Henley on Thames (hardly a transferable experience) and vote which way he's told. He's never managed anything remotely on this scale. The nearest he came was in being his party's spokesperson for 'Culture' and ended up offending most of Liverpool before falling on his sword. Strangely enough he invokes editing the Spectator as his experience of large organisational management, though curiously couldn't tell Paxman how many people he managed (a lot of whom must have been freelance anyway, and were capable of managing themselves).

To this end democracy of this nature really isn't a very good model in local government, and the atraction and appointment of a leading American style 'City Mayor' (they have a similar system in France, where the title is much less ceremonial) is much more effective, provided you can get someone of sufficient ability. An international city the size of London should have little difficulty, though I fear Johnson could turn the capital into a laughing stock. Essentially you might view the post as that of a quasi 'city manager'.That the Olympics will occur on his watch even threatens to turn it into a national humiliation.

Autocracy can be a much under estimated form of government if the prevailing imperative is action and getting things done. Since a democratic check exists, the model falls short of being dictatorship, and as it isn't run through heraditary anoinment it shouldn't fall down like Rome ultimately did, although there's a possible paralell there regarding the dangers of one ineffective person having too much power and an ineffective senate being unable to check poor decision making.

As I'm fond of saying, there's nothing wrong with Stalinism, provided I can be Stalin


nb

Incidentally John Prescott was foremost in trying to introduce a regional level of local governance, but ultimately failed through poor timing. Had the North voted at the same time as Scotland and Wales (or shortly afterwards when memories of the Tories were still in peoples sub consciousness) he might have succeeded. Instead he waited about 7 years
 
Autocracy can be a much under estimated form of government if the prevailing imperative is action and getting things done
Click to expand...

Hitler and Pol pot would agree

Democracy isnt perfect until you look at the alternatives.... (Churchill)

Regardless of practical failings, it has to be the only system that can be applied.

Can you imagien what London would be like if Livingstone was given a completely unaccountable free reign? Even with the laughable limited checks in place we have seen the shambles of million s of pounds tax payers money being simply handed over to friends of Lee Jasper

God knows....we might even see the imposition of Sharia law with the burning of synagogues would soon on the agenda. :brows:

As an aside anyone see the BNP leaflet for london (in theTimes this week), It was hilarious. Stupid beyond belief!

If we are talking about "managers" and experiience then Paddick has to be the man
 
Livingstone, who is himself running for a third term next Thursday, said Galloway would compare well to some of the ‘nonentities’ currently sitting on the London Assembly. ‘I would like to think we could work together and he'd form part of a broad coalition with the Greens and us against the Tories and Islamophobes,’ he said…He has taken a very correct line around the consequences for London if Boris Johnson is elected.’
Click to expand...

His judgement has gone to pot. The average voter is not impressed by Galloway, even if they are anti iraq war. Why didnt he just keep his distance?

Not only that, he was strongly defending that extreme right wing muslim cleric just last week. The one who believes in the genocide of those with the wrong sexuality and of those that dare to change their religion, amongst other repellent views

and it was great to see the always excellent and single minded Kate Hoey stick the knife into this vile creature
 
Well, the way I see it there's a clear choice, between a socailist, a liberal, and a conservative. Thats the good part for Londoners. Character assassination started months ago it seems but the key point is the South has always been traditionally a good area for the conservatives, and if the national polls are to be believed then Boris has a good chance.

It will always be hard to persuade the people who think they could do a better job than Boris but strangely didn't run for mayor that he's the man for them, and it seems the armchair politicians are slating him the most.

ultimately for me it will be a verdict on the way London's gone over the last few years. If Boris gets in it will be because the city is crime ridden and people are scared to go out, and if Ken gets in it will be because the city is now the centre of the world and a great place to be, which is it?
 
On a slightly related theme;

The hottest political council contest voting tomorrow is my local council ward (Bicester South). Where as Cherwell District Council has an inpregnable Tory majority, the bell weather state of South Bicester is true blood and guts stuff. The alst time we voted it was Liberals 600 - Tories 599 (or was it the other way round?). What ever, this is seat of your pants stuff folks!!! Imagine my shock however at realising what low and conkniving dirty tricks the ruling Tories played today in the ward. Despite it lashing down with rain all day, I came home to discover that all the grass verges in the ward have been mysteriosuly cut and trimmed just the day before we vote :rolleyes: Even my garden waste wheelie bin which has been over filled and systematically rotting away for the last month, has been emptied :eek: What depths they will plumb?

Gordon Brown obviously thinks he can buy my vote by giving me an extra £20 a month (I expect that to be withdrawn next November with immediate effect) now that he's not calling a general election where he would have needed middle income votes, and he's got to repair the damage done with the 10% band. Cherwell Tories think they can buy my vote by cutting the grass, and emptying my bin.

All very cyncial stuff in the power broking and dirty tricks campaign that is the hotbed of Bicester South norty
 
Both the local District Councillors round here are friends of mine - I'm on a cusp. One used to sit as a Tory but has sat as an Independent for about 8 years now due to some local financial skulduggery in the Tory party ranks :rolleyes: He's in his forties but grew up here and knows his patch inside out.

The other is a very forceful and hard-working fellow who used to be Headmaster of a tough East End comprehensive. He represents a town which is believed to have the highest ratio of listed buildings in the country... Imagine his fury when he graduated from Local to District Councillor to be sidelined off the Planning Committee, which was of paramount interest to his constituents! - he got on 2nd time round and became Chairman LOL. Although a Tory he was voted in by a huge majority inc a lot of Labour voters - some lifelong party members btw, as he was by far the best candidate; and he represents ALL his ward without prejudice.

It was under Prescott's watch that Councillors were forbidden to sit in on meetings where they were deemed to have an 'interest' ie they had spoken out in the past, eg during their election campaign, on a matter of local importance. It was a national scandal and showed the man's utter contempt for democracy.

I agree with you tho Warbler that the present system is wide open to abuse and manipulation. The kind of people - like my chum above - who you'd want to be councillors very rarely have the time or inclination to serve. It is as you say very hard work, and you can't even go out for a drink without someone accosting you with their problems!
 
Well i face a few interresting scenarios tomorrow (and have an opinion firmly nailed to a mast) - though not the one you might think - I'm Pragmatic - I can divorce my own opinion from the need to do the job.

Anyway fingers crossed for me (from some of you doubtless) and fingers up to me (from some of you others doubtless) :D I suspect however that zee Warbler might very well be warbling about for a new job shortly :P
 
Council elections looking interesting. :) The Conservatives seem to be doing fairly well although not all results in yet.
 
I'm watching the BBC coverage - it looks as if people are well fed up with Labour
Think it will be a long time before we get the Mayorial results, but BF has now gone 1.18 for Boris :what:
 
Local council results show that Labour has had it's worst result for 40 years! Anyone surprised? shrug::
 
Originally posted by Headstrong@May 1 2008, 11:16 PM
Tell us more!! And let us know the outcome/s
Click to expand...
A disaster. Not for the first time, there's one city in this country that's completely out of kilter with the national picture and yours truly could well get caught in the middle now. Me thinkz an escape plan needs hatching
 
:laughing:

Oh well I fear for what could turn out to be the worst Olympic games in history now. To be honest Kathy, I wouldn't be too surprised if Labour aren't secretly clapping too. Livingstone had the capacity to do them more damage in the 'run in' to the next general election. It wasn't so much his decision taking, but increasingly his associations that were becoming devisive and embarrasing. Johnson has never been slow to offend before and could easily become an embarrassing figure.

I was struck by a few comments tonight. The first was a former Tory press aide who said that Johnson has no grasp of detail, can't even micro manage, and had all the capacity to make a complete cock up of the whole thing. She ended up saying that she just hopes he's able to surround himself with capable people, as he's out of his depth. If he doesn't, than she fears for London.

The more interesting stuff though came from Steven Norris, who noted how Ken had gone from being chippy, cheeky and charismatic under dog who he readily admited was difficult to campaign against on those terms. To something of an acidic and slightly nasty character that the city was tiring off.

He's the latest addition however (Blair started it) in the growth of a certain type of shallow politics short on detail. Cameron is another, and of course we're seeing Obama doing something similar in the States (and seemingly making it stick)

Oh well.... it should be funny anyway
 
Originally posted by Warbler@May 2 2008, 11:18 PM
To be honest Kathy, I wouldn't be too surprised if Labour aren't secretly clapping too.

He's the latest addition however (Blair started it) in the growth of a certain type of shallow politics short on detail. Cameron is another, and of course we're seeing Obama doing something similar in the States
Click to expand...
Maybe, but I know who is clapping the loudest.

As for David cameron, I take it your one of a few people who can't see into the man in terms of there being someting there? What a shame that people only believe in "conviction politicans" when they're socialists like Gordon Brown.

I'm a conservative thinker and I make it 1/50 it's all over for Iron Gordon. It'll be " opposition limitation" in Millbank me thinks. Lets see what positive spin that labour crony Kevin Maguire gets to put in The Mirror tomorrow, not that I bother reading that paper.
 
Back
Top