The 2012 London Mayoral Election

Leela: This may be their only chance to skate in their whole lives. Who are we to say they can't use this ice rink? 
Chaz: The mayor's aide, and his badge! Beat it kids! Come back when you got connections. 
Vogel: Alright kids. Back to the Orphanarium. You can slide around the gym in your socks.
- Futurama

Ken Livingstone was a good and bold Mayor during his time in office. After effectively delivering the Congestion Charge to help London cope with the demands of a growing city, he demonstrated vision and focus which saw London landmarks like Trafalgar Square and Exhibition Road transformed and East London make steady progress from backwater to the focal point of the Olympics.

His ideas were so good that the current Mayor is still enjoying the fruits of his labours, from the success of the London Overground network to the development of major clusters at key transport hubs like London Bridge, Kings Cross and Victoria (as envisaged in Livingstone’s London Plan) and, of course, the Boris Bikes.

This legacy aside, Boris has delivered virtually nothing during his time in office, doing exactly as he promised during his effective, but vacuous campaign of 2008.

Boris ballsed up the Olympic Stadium legacy, dawdled over the Emissions Charge, scrapped a range of river crossings and killed off projects like the pedestrianisation of Parliament Square, which has instead remained a dogs-breakfast at the heart of a World Heritage Site, fenced off from the public for much of the last four years.

He wasted enormous amounts of effort fighting an imagined conspiracy against ‘the motorist’ (as if they were a separate constituency from the people who walk, cycle and navigate the city via public transport), promising to re-phase lights and remove crossings, whose sole purpose, he suggested, were to inconvenience drivers. Four years on, it turns out virtually every crossing has a very good reason to be there and there is enormous community resistance to their removal. We’ve yet to meet a taxi driver who tells us that driving around the capital has become easier.

The cycle superhighways – a rare example of an eye-catching pledge from his 2008 campaign – were value engineered to the point of irrelevance and the abolition of the bendy bus happened a lot quicker than the arrival of its replacement.

The new Routemaster is an idea we’d love to be successful, so we’re prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt that the public will take it to their hearts when it finally arrives, but the capacity problems that were foreseen as a result of scrapping bendies are now being felt and have not been properly mitigated.

The 1,000 ‘extra bobbies on the beat’ turn out to be the 1,000 extra bobbies on the beat that were agreed before he came to power. With the exception of a cable car across the Thames at Greenwich, the pipeline of big civic projects has dried up: Thameslink had nothing to do with Boris and his role in securing Crossrail was probably minimal.

Meanwhile the savings he promised London taxpayers have only been delivered if you accept his counterfactual, which argues that had Ken remained in power, his tax take would have continued to rise (this is probably a reasonable assertion). We’d rather have paid a little more and had a better place to live.

So if this was a re-run of the 2008 election, we’d back Ken like a shot. But despite the fact that the same names are in the hat again, it’s a very different election. Ken appears to have learned all the wrong lessons from the last four years, returning with an election strategy that is part Boris 2008, part George Galloway.

In 2008, Boris ran a campaign that was in tone and content, a national campaign by-proxy. He focused on sleaze and promised to cut Labour’s profligacy – two themes that would dominate at the General Election. It was depressing to see Londoners reward such a policy vacuum.

Instead of using his time in the wilderness to reflect on whether his poisonous identity politics was turning voters off, Ken has doubled down on the rhetoric, exposed himself to charges of rank hypocrisy over tax avoidance and delivered a set of pledges that are beyond the scope of the Mayor’s power to deliver and have very little to say about London’s particular challenges and opportunities. The Ken of 2000 used to court big business (he believed that if he could persuade enough BRIC companies to list in London, the future of the capital as an international centre for commerce would be secure). Now, his campaign site has nothing to say about business (and the jobs that come with it) at all.

The promise to reinstate EMA for London pupils is reliant on a huge array of different bodies all agreeing to fund Ken’s plan. His ‘fully funded’ plan to cut fares by drawing on a wad of cash that TfL is supposedly just sitting on because Boris is ‘out of touch’ (hard to believe that any Mayor could be so out of touch as to ignore an enormous pot of free money just before an election) is dismantled thoroughly by Channel 4’s Fact Check. Fares could be cut, but that would mean less money available for investment in transport infrastructure (or for contingencies like the Hammersmith flyover threatening to fall down). There is no free money.

Like Boris in 2008, Ken has delivered a plan designed to exploit public dissatisfaction with national government. It was a lamentable strategy four years ago, it is risible now, made worse by the contrast with the Ken of 2000. Livingstone is like Howard Kendall returning to Everton for a third time, or worse, Keegan giving it another go at Newcastle.

Read through his transport manifesto and there is a smattering of nice ideas, including a smart parking system and proper investment in the cycle super highways to improve safety. But the big stuff doesn’t come until the final page. There is a vague commitment to invest in a range of well-known projects (including the South London Line link to Victoria, but nothing about a Bakerloo Line extension), but nothing new or convincing.

SE London blogger Adam Bienkov is right, this race has become dominated by personality, but when there is so little policy to discuss, what else is there to talk about?

Boris is promising more of the same, which is to say not much. He has begun to show signs that he realises there’s more to the gig than he first thought, but it’s still small beer. He’s woken up to the need for new river crossings in East London (albeit he’s come up with a worse plan than the one he scrapped), his support for local high street communities (like Deptford) is welcome and he’s shown a bit of imagination with ideas like submerging Park Lane traffic to create a new approach to Hyde Park.

London deserves better than either candidate (there are others of course, but no-one with a hope of winning). The Mayoral election should not be about national politics, it should speak directly to our daily lives. But Boris is the incumbent. What’s Labour’s excuse?

If you've heard any exciting policies from a candidate, we'd love to hear about them.

72 comments:

Anonymous said...

Nick, this opinion is more like one you'd see on a mung blog.

Boris has provided good leadership rather than token policies (apart from the drinking on the tube thing) and has been like a well-needed dose of Tory bleach for London.

Anonymous said...

I tend to think that the only rational vote for someone that seeks progressive policy over inane personality politics is 1. Jones, 2. Paddick.

But under the circumstances, with the media framing this as a two-horse race and doing their best to discredit the alternatives, I can't see any other way than a Jenny/Ken one/two, though in which order I'm not yet sure.

Jenny aside, who I think really has some creative ideas to tackling London's biggest problems, the campaign has shown the sheer paucity of ideas on offer. Whoever wins in May, the biggest loser will be London itself.

Anonymous said...

Plus, the mere fact that Ken is willing to do away with Boris' smoothing traffic flow policy, means we may actually get some kind of progress in making London a more liveable city. Countless transport organisations have damned Boris' transport manifesto as the kind of document fit for 60s road planning - woefully out of touch.

Don't forget too, that we are all essentially voting for a new head of TFL here. The only area in which the Mayor has *absolute* power is with regards transport. Whatever he says goes.

With that in mind, anyone but Boris is surely the way to go.

Anonymous said...

Jones? We're meant to be getting away from mung policy, not closer towards it!

Anonymous said...

None of the above. Except Boris; or Ken.

Pete said...

So f'ing tired of reading the word Mung. What does it even mean? Is Boris McDonalds to Ken's Mung Bean salad then? Good honest, heart clogging fare vs supposedly healthy but maybe not that satisfying food? What a shit analogy.

The majority of working Londoners' lives would be improved far more by improvements to public transport and cycling infrastructure than they ever would be by improving the flow of cars. Any politician that tells me they're going to focus on those two things will get my vote.

I even have a car.

mb said...

Leadership? Boris has shown zero leadership that I can see. The Boris Bus is the only authentic policy that belongs to him, using milions for a gimic. We don't live in a theme park where those belong. At best they look nice and could suplement the bendies, an expensive bit of decoration. Ken turned the busses into a practical option for scooting around, the Countdown thing is a deverlopment from ideas his administration started. He spotted from day one that the PPP was flawed and called for more revenue rasing powers for the upgrades including borowing money using TfLs AAA rating rather than paying a premium to pay the private sectors debts with little or no tranfer of risk. He rumbled Gordon long before everyone else.

But yes, these are all 1st term positives. Not seen anything that is inovative this time, he's now an official Labour candiate so will expect bland safe mumblings for the next few years if he gets in which is questionable.

Ken over Boris for me though, Ken is a shrewd opperator if nothing else. Paddick is a joke

Danja said...

I believe the literal translation from anonymese is "I have the wit(s) of a sheep".

Anonymous said...

"The mayor is too busy on his holidays to come back for the London riots."

Anonymous said...

My God Pete - Thank you! At last someone else has said what has been on my mind. Give over with the mung thing, it is tired and boring.

Oh and I also agree with you views on public transport and cycling (i don't have a car - but am part of a car club)

Bravo

Anonymous said...

With Boris, you get projects finished - which in case case, and especially in the bloated (and generally rather staffed with thickies) public sector, can be just as hard if not harder than getting a project of the ground in the first place. Crossrail, Borisbikes, Olympics - all finished under Boris. Congestion extension scrapped like the vague annoyance it was. Proper buses back on the route, running super-efficiently (for all the mungsters out there) and with two staircases. A right balance between all kinds of traffic rather than favouring bikes, buses or cars.

With Ken you get a leader in the pocket of the unions, silly token policies, congestion charges (adding a kick in the teeth to what was already a not very fun experience of driving in central London) and strikes.

But yes Ken is amazing and the wet dream of Hugos and Mungos everywhere.

Anonymous said...

Can't remember who said it, but I echo the sentiment that it really is a poor selection of candidates for what ought to be the greatest city on the planet.

I probably ought to put a pragmatic vote in for Ken but he generally leaves me feeling really cold.

Mb said...

Crossrail finished? Crossrail is not finished. It started before ken actually, it got the go a head under him. He pushed through the funding agreement. It's actually slowed down slightly under boris but would have done under either candidate. Crossrail is a company whole owned by TfL, the design, construction and much of the management is out with the private sector as it should be and always was going to be.

Mb said...

And strikes? Have you been living in an alternative universe to the rest of us?

Cllr Mike Harris said...

Interesting almost all the comments are anonymous!

Anonymous said...

You get strikes now because of the system Ken allowed to happen. We now can't get serious with the unions without them throwing their toys out of the pram. So you see the toy throwing during the Conservative administration, because Labour would just roll over for the sake of "engaging all key stakeholders" or some other management bullshit bingo.

Had Boris been in charge of TFL from the start, we wouldn't have this case of the tail very much wagging the dog. And there's only one side of the political spectrum who's going to roll their sleeves up and put that right, and I bet you'll complain about that too.

Mb said...

Boris has been in charge of TfL from the start. It's about the only signifficant power he has over a major London service. That's busses, rail, taxis, streets. He appoints the leadership and chais the board. Your central point is incorrect which makes your other dubious points irrelevant.

Mb said...

Just to confirm my position. You can vote to sack the chairman if you like.

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/about-tfl/2881.aspx

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/about-tfl/boardandchiefofficers/1432.aspx

Anonymous said...

Some might say some of our local councillors have been annoymous since they were elected.

A number of them seem more interested in international matters rather than local issues.

Guess they see Lewisham as a stepping stone to Parliament.

kolp said...

kolp is voting for Siobhan Benita. She is G'OD's choice!

Anonymous said...

Boris should remain Mayor to represent London at the Olympics, he'll be a hoot.

Ken is yesteryear's man.

How bad must politics be in London that after 5-10 years it's the same old faces?

Maybe Boris & Ken could form a coalition, Boris could show Ken how to maximise his income and Ken could show Boris how minimise his tax.

It's not as daft as it sounds...didn't Jeffery Archer use to sort out Ken's expenses at the GLC?

Slow left arm over said...

This is a total shower. You can't blame the Tories for backing Bojo, despite the fact he is pretty useless and deeply objectionable. But Labour tooled up by offering Oona or Ken ages before the election as the only choices. I've no idea what Paddick stands for, the only thing I've heard from the Greens is that they (unlike anyone else) "trust Ken". And then there's that decent independent who doesn't get allowed on hustings.

London's been stitched up. Good article Nick.

LadyGaGA said...

I enjoyed Nick's lead article as I think it sums up the situation perfectly. I think most people will be voting for the candidate that annoys them the least, not the one(/party) that has the best policies or the ability and intention to deliver them.

Anonymous said...

As a labour candidate Ken will pander to the unions so we will see little progress on the transport networks as funding is directed to the pockets of the already overpaid tube workers. On the debates i have seen he has reduced himself to mocking Boris - Boris mocks himself well enough for anyopne so it leaves ken looking desperate. which i think he might be. Plus he clearly minimised his taxes.

Boris is clearly not universally adored. he has other agendas i'm sure and he may not have pleased everyone with his policies or actions in office but be honest - neither did Ken. or he'd still be mayor.

Paddick is strong on ideas with reagrd to the police force but this is the only string to his bow.

Jones is not strong enough, on newsnight last week she couldn't make herself heard - we need stronger candidates. The lack of strong independents is a real dissapointment.

it is a real shame that one os these people will be in charge for the next term.

max said...

It'll be a great day when people would stop saying that isn't a two horse race. It would immediately stop being one.
It's a shame that the BBC feels they have to exclude independents from debates. It's really looks like a regime run for the benefit of extablished parties.
But Nick please, you don't need to do the same.
Please balance this with another post about all the others.

Anonymous said...

But no one is going to vote Mung or Libdem or BNP so why would you?

Anons dad said...

Can't wait until school starts again.

max said...

Because there should be a level playing filed, otherwise it's not democracy.

max said...

(for filed read field)

Anonymous said...

Meh. What voting system do they use again? FPTP?

Anonymous said...

Boris has also pledged to investigate extended the DLR from Lewisham to Bromley - that would drive a coach and horses right through any proposed development of the Lewisham 'Gateway'

max said...

Pledge to investigate?
I'm impressed.

Cllr Mike Harris said...

It's a good point Max

If any of the independents keep their deposit, by law, they will have to be included in the election coverage during the next Mayoral election - but of course, it'll be too late by then.

Anonymous said...

Is that true? That's a bit of a chicken and egg innit?

urbansurgery said...

Ken's London plan adopted schemes and proposals that were already in existence.

The work done in its re-drafting that took the full two terms to was impressive, but too slow, vague and ultimately the market moved on ahead of it. The skinning down of the St Pauls views to allow for the tower clusters was the only piece of radicalism.

Boris' team's emphasis on housing standards and delivery is more modest, focussed but wholly easier to interpret, deliver and leads to tangible 'real world' benefits.

The LOndon Plan should be outside of party politics. Thankfully both Ken & Boris managed this sidestep well, so one should be able make a non-partisan judgement between rhetoric and product – at least in terms of The LP. I think the executive and strategic role of the mayor is far more important than invented for election policies.

urbansurgery said...

Until the UK Green Party come to terms with the fact that their zero growth economic policy is daft they should remain on the fringes.

Take a look at continental Greens - proper policies, in government ... it can happen!

Anonymous said...

well, this is what he says:

"I will support the extension of the Docklands Light Railway to Bromley"

so not exactly a pledge, indeed, only 'support'

in other places he says:

"Work to extend the DLR from Lewisham to Bromley."

cringe... said...

I'd like to vote Lib Dem but every time Paddick starts talking my toes start curling. I should never have watched him on I'm a Celebrity....

Anonymous said...

Why would an extension of the DLR from Lewisham to Bromley drive a coach & horses through the Lewisham Gateway development?

How strange in 2004 the council were saying the Gateway would kick start Lewisham's regeneration.

8 Years later the Loampit Vale developers are saying they are the one's kickstarting the regen of Lewisham.

Anonymous said...

Isn't time to point out to thes politians they are failures?

The repeated same old arguements about transport, housing, policing etc.

If they were successful they wouldn't be debating what's wrong and how to correct it, they'd be talking about a great system and how it can be maintained or improved further.

kolp said...

Siobhan Benita is an Independent candidate. The more you see and hear from her, the more you realise what a serious candidate she is and that this is choice beyond the BoKen.

Siobhan Benita's policies

Anonymous said...

Kolp: did you seriously call her "god's choice"?

Sue said...

Good article Nick. Out of interest - do you have a way of telling from IP addresses or smthg how many different Anons keep making these incessant mung comments? Can't help thinking it's just one sad hack sitting in his bedroom.

@Anon 15:53 - the voting system - it's AV for the Mayor (so you can vote for your favourite for 1st vote and whoever you think is least worst option out of Ken/Boris for 2nd - unless of course either of them are your first choice, in which case your 2nd vote probably won't be counted). The constituency assembly member is FPTP, but the list assembly vote is PR, and the one where smaller parties stand a chance (just need to clear 5% threshold to get an assembly member).

@urbansurgery - just look at the voting systems they have in continental Europe for your answer to why there are more elected Greens there - PR. And since you seem to have been reading the manifesto from the Ecology Party circa 1976, you may want to take a look at the London Green's website for an update on policies ;)

Max - I agree re democracy deficit. The fact that mayoral candidates have to raise £10k deposit which they forfeit if they get less than 5% also helps maintain the status quo with relatively few independents - perhaps a requirement for more signatures rather than £10k might be an alternative way of ensuring candidates have some kind of support from the electorate to stand.

Sue said...

*London Greens'!

Anonymous said...

The green mayoral candidate even looks vegetarian. They know their market I suppose.

Crofton Park Robert said...

10 April 2012. The date that I stopped visiting this truly awful website.

Brockley Nick said...

Sorry to hear that Robert. Although you did actually post that on the 11th of April, so perhaps there's hope for BC after all.

Of all the articles to tip someone over the edge, this is a curious choice.

Tamsin said...

Kolp - agreed all sounding excellent and worthwhile, but rather baulk at the notion of a Young Mayor. In these stringent times it seems a very extravagent playing at democracy both in Lewisham and now suggested for London. A lot of admin. and bureaucractic support to put something good on the CVs of just a few candidates. Money that could be better spent on more focused outreach and youth-centred research.

Lou Baker said...

@ nick

I think your analysis has one significant flaw - the economic context.

Ken was Mayor in times of plenty. There was money to pedestrianise Trafalgar Square and to build the Overground.

Boris comes in and there's no money left - Labour spent it all. There's not much you can do with no money.

I have voted for Ken all three times. But I think Boris has actually done quite well - except for the bendy bus fiasco. He successfully argued for Crossrail to go ahead - despite a spending review where it could have been axed. Trying to speed traffic flow up is sensible and he's been a good ambassador for London. He's also come up with - and championed - the boldest idea to improve London in generations, Boris Island.

I think we're lucky to have two such high profile candidates. It's a shame the Lib Dems have such a dweeb. As for Jenny Jones - the woman is a basket case. Thank god the Greens are a group to laugh at.

mb said...

I'm not sure Crossrail was in serious jeopardy, it had strong cross party support before the election and would have cost many millions to cancel the existing contracts. As for no money, Boris wants to increase his borrowing powers independent of Whitehall, as does Ken.

Ken does seem to have lost his touch for solid policies though but still think he’s a better bet than Boris. Boris is amusing, he’s a personality but really don’t see the leadership to the same extent. Remember Ken sacked the top team at LU with some thinly veiled criticism and shipped in a highly paid yank (Tim O’Toole) to much derision. O’Toole did brilliantly.

Both candidates share one thing, they don’t seem to have a lot of respect for the GLA or the idea that they are accountable to them. That was one of Ken’s big flaws. Goes with the ego of both I suspect.

Brockley Nick said...

@Lou - you're dead right about relative economic climates - it was a point I meant to make and should have.

Nonetheless, Boris' inactivity was to a large extent of his own design. He wanted to show he could be a low-spending Mayor, and he has. But he has also shown that you get what you pay for.

@Max - I don't agree that the poor showing of the other candidates is all down to media bias, although of course with two such big characters representing the two main parties, the odds will be stacked against them. Not sure either that I have destroyed democracy by omitting them from an article complaining about the poor quality of the candidates, but if you want Paddick et al to get their fair share of criticism, then I will try to oblige. ;)

bob the voter said...

London does deserve better candidates, but we are where we are and I’d rather have the status quo than a mayor who flirts with extremists and dictators.

London needs someone who does not hold prejudice and Ken's 'gaffs' betray unsavoury views on the Gay and Jewish communities, and it's not just the once. His own goal on tax was laughable and he has a leaky policy about reducing fares, although I recall significant increases under his tenure as well.

I'll be voting for Boris because I think a mayor is best judged over 2 terms, the second in particular, and feel that the largest recession of our time is not a great starting point for anyone.

max said...

Yes Nick, please complain also about the poor quality of the rest of the candidates.
BTW, a big personality is an advantage until it becomes a parody, and people may rather have someone less self-absorbed as Mayor.

Anonymous said...

"London needs someone who does not hold prejudice and Ken's 'gaffs' betray unsavoury views on the Gay and Jewish communities"

Bullshit - Ken has consistently proved himself to be supportive of the LGBT community. Even in the 80s when it was politically unpopular to support the gay community, he's been a very vocal ally, campaigning for equal rights and to destroy institutional homophobia.

But of course, feel free to vote for 'unprejudiced' Boris, Bob. But do bear in mind that he was a staunch supporter of Section 28. Oh, and that he ONCE COMPARED GAY MARRIAGE TO BESTIALITY -

"“If gay marriage was OK - then I saw no reason in principle why a union should not be consecrated between three men, as well as two men; or indeed three men and a dog.”

Boris Johnson, 2001.

Anonymous said...

"Bullshit - Ken has consistently proved himself to be supportive of the LGBT community."

Err - so? Hitler consistently proved himself to be supportive of the vegetarian and artist communities, not sure it said much about his bedside manner at the end of the day...

With Boris you get a good honest vote and some leadership - not namby pamby rollovers and bonuses for Bob Crow and co.

Danja said...

not namby pamby rollovers and bonuses for Bob Crow and co

Remind me what that very tough deal Boris struck over the Olympics was?

Anonymous said...

"Err - so? Hitler consistently proved himself to be supportive of the vegetarian and artist communities"

First off, you've godwinised this argument so I win by default...

Second, I never said that Hitler didn't like vegetarians. Bob said that Ken was a homophobe and suggested that Boris was less prejudiced. Neither of which are true.

So you can take your straw man and you can both get stuffed.

Mb said...

Hitler and support of artists.

Please Google "Hitler" and "degenerate art" and get back to me.

NAT said...

Sorry, bob the voter, there's just something about that last sentence that wont stack up for me.

'I'll be voting for Boris because I think a Mayor is best judged over two terms, the second in particular...'

If this is so then the only one who's record can be asessed is Ken and a vote for anyone else is, at best, a hopeful punt.

What if Boris's second term were to turn out a disaster, or merely as unproductive as his first?

Anonymous said...

Just a few observations about how life has been better under Boris - in Brockley. For a start, finally Oyster cards worked on National Rail which meant not having to queue at Brockley Station's frequently closed ticket office or frequently broken ticket machines.

Second. Being able to cycle when I got to London Bridge, thanks to the Boris Bike scheme... and it *is* a 'Boris' bike - Ken fooled around with the idea for eight years but never took any practical steps to make it a reality. I suspect it was another of his hollow promises to keep Darren Johnson vaguely on-side after the 'Qaradawi' fiasco.

Thirdly, since the end of the bendy-bus, traffic jams out of Brockley have eased up considerably on those occasions when I use the car.

BUt finally, I will not forgive Ken for lumping us with the bloody Olympics.

kolp said...

Siobhan Benita is a great choice all round for Mayor.

The more I read about her the better the better her candidacy becomes.

Agree however not loving young mayor idea for the reasons you've states Tamsin, but youngsters have need something extra, to get them energised about politics, this could be it.


"Kolp: did you seriously call her "god's choice"?

Yes as in Gus O'Donell ex cabinet secretary nicknamed G'o'D cos of his initials & the high regard he was held in.

Anonymous said...

People Before Profit have not made a call to support Ken, it is likely many of our members and supporters will be voting for Ken if not first choice, then second choice. It could be in the closing weeks of the campaign the polls narrow and the outcome of the result will be deterimed by second preference votes.

Anonymous said...

Oyster cards on NR. Another ken initiative, he forced that issue against the TOCs wishes. Boris happened to be here when we saw it happen. He'd make a great assistant mayor. And borris has always been a big Olympic supporter, try again.

urbansurgery said...

@Sue

My mistake, I assumed London Greens were the same party as the Green Party, whose core constitution advocates zero economic growth.

kolp said...

This time next week...remember Siobhan Benita.

kolp said...

Here is Siobhan's election broadcast BBC Broadcast rules wouldn't allow it to be shown apparently. The BNP's was however... Siobhan's Election Broadcast

jonathon said...

Then again i didnt see BNP given 10 minutes on BBC breakfast. Siobhan was.

kolp said...

She has overcome the requisite hurdles (20k finances & signatures from the boroughs) to make her a legitimate candidate.

This is not like some 'Monster raving loony' situation, she is sensible, coherent, independent candidate, who is trapped in a catch 22 regarding coverage, which in turn keeps us locked into the increasingly useless an party political stalemate.

Please remember that the London Mayoral race is for a PERSON not a party.

Anonymous said...

Kolp, who will you be voting for? You're being too ambiguous.

With the polls opening next week, perhaps now would be a good time for an election thread?

(p.s. - is there anyone out there, including the candidates themselves, who cares about the local/assembly stuff?)

jonathon said...

Kolp, it was your comparison equating her candidacy with the BNP

Westsider said...

Kolp fancies Siobahn.

kolp said...

Lol anon...
Siobhan very much cares about these things and more importantly will act on them. As part of her manifesto entitled Build better, safer neighbourhoods she states “I will require Councils to identify and address residents' top five local issues” very similar to how the local assemblies run.

Johnathon: Yes I did, the confusion stems from seeing the BNP broadcast where the candidate Carlos, doesn't appear once.

Westsider: she is a fine looking woman, but that would not be the sole reason for me wanting to see more of her on telly!

Latest Tweets

Brockley Central Label Cloud

Click one of the labels below to see all posts on that subject. The bigger the label, the more posts there are!