Boris bitten in the bum?
15th May 2008
Posted in: Boris Watch | Bullshit
Written by: Douglas Johnson
Has the downfall begun already? Today, it emerged that Boris Johnson might not keep his election promise to replace Bendy Buses with a new form of Routemaster. Quoth BoJo’s transport policy director, Kulveer Ranger (interspered by the ES):
Mr Ranger said: “It’s almost a fact to say Londoners are not happy with bendy buses. We want to develop a bus that is safe, reliable and has that extra bit of style and panache.
“The Routemaster was, and indeed still is, an icon and we need something that has the same iconic status.”
But in a departure from Mr Johnson’s policies, Mr Ranger said the new design would not necessarily be ” hopon, hop-off” with a conductor, as on the old Routemasters.
He said: “Whether or not we have a conductor depends on the design of the bus. We want people to be creative. Our brief is very flexible.
“Anything is possible. We’ll set some sort of ball-park figure but we can’t say how much it will cost at this time. Let’s see what comes back.
“The plan is to have them on the roads by the end of his first term but we’re not doing this just for the hell of it. If we find there are initially no suitable bids we will review [the policy].
“A major problem people have is the need to stick to things even if it is clear it is not working - like the 10p tax.”
So; no costings for the neo-Routemasters, possibly no neo-Routemasters and certainly not soon. Headline Manifesto Pledge 1 (of very few) broken. BoJo’s legions of voters in the outer boroughs didn’t expect that, I’m sure.
They should have done. It was patently obvious from the start this was an ill-thought out move. Boris had no idea how much it would cost (”8 million! 8 million!” followed by “100 million! 100 million! Maybe!” followed by “Um….”). He had no plans drawn up for his neo-Routemasters. His only apparent reason he had for the policy was misplaced nostalgia for a contraption almost designed to screw over the disabled. It was an impractical policy, and it was going to have to be scrapped.
As will his commitment to a no-strike deal with the RMT; as will his commitment to miraculously reduce crime rates by 100% without addressing its social causes; as will…
Wait, did he have any more policies?
Oh yes. He wanted to abolish the Londoner. He’s managed that, because various Mail group owned rags around London will publish his Mayoral Agitprop (Outsourcing, perhaps? Pyongyang style freesheets with a hint of Thatcherism…).
Well done Boris.
Boris’ manifesto was based in populism and scare-mongering. He played nostaligia over buses. He portrayed his opponent in overblown caricature; King Newt reigning over the socialist republic of Brickney. He exploited fear of crime without suggesting any real solutions which would treat the root of the problem.
In short, he bullshitted (bullshat?).
Where that populism can be bought for free - as it was in abolishing the Londoner - he’ll do it. Where that populism was based in fluffy rhetoric and disconnection from reality - here, for example - he’ll do what Michael Bloomberg suggests and quietly sweep it under the carpet.
Empty promises will bite politicians in the arse. Expect more manifesto pledges to be broken as Boris realises how many of them simply won’t work. Aides will suggest he drops as many of these policies in his first hundred days, while the press still slurp over him in a sordid media orgy masquerading as a honeymoon period. That won’t help. The few policies which he shouted so much about during his campaign, and people will notice that - if anything, because there were so few, and because he shouted so loud.
If things carry on the way they look to, Boris will be hoist by his own populism in 2012. Great for then. Not so good for the intervening 4 years…
Somehow, I actually saw this coming. There was no way the entourage would allow him to pursue a policy that would bring about a return to buses that people tended to fall off of the back of and die. This is because they seem to be more of an editorial team than an entourage, just as Bloomberg seemed to be acting more as a wandering visionary and temporary adviser than visitor. Unfortunately the Tories hardly pulled off sensible last time they were in power and Bloomberg is a busy man who lives on the other side of the Atlantic, indeed may be Obama’s running mate for ‘08 and thus is almost certain to become Vice-President in early 2009 should that occur, so will have limited time for Boris.
So this news hardly surprises me but, given the amount of time he spent twirling plumage over it and the rants about the bendies that occasionally fell on the wrong side of five minutes, it still makes me laugh uproariously.
Please do attack his policies. Many are unworkable. But don’t pretend he didn’t have any - his manifesto was more innovative than Livingstone’s.
On the buses, it was clear from the outset that a neo-Routemaster would never have worked. The Routemaster worked because it was inaccessible and dangerous: in a world where that is no longer allowed, there can be no real mileage in a new bus that has no doors and doors at the same time, has seats but also space for wheelchairs and a ramp and doors and… Essentially, that plan was flawed from the start. Getting rid of the bendy buses (on all routes except the 521 and 507) is actually a decent policy, though.
I am all for innovation in bus design, but not if that innovation is unworkable and expensive.
Please do attack his policies.
Ah, right, shall we attack his person then? Say nasty things about his personal habits and maybe dredge up some horrible stuff concerning his life and wife? Wait a second, that would be an ad hominem wouldn’t it? That would display our weakness in that we were incapable of attacking the man for what he was implementing instead of who he was.
Actually, in hindsight and with that fully considered fuck that.
You bring up Livingstone. Superb, fantastic. Old news. At present the electoral contest is over and the man in charge is failing to implement policies, both the good ones to have in place {amnesty for illegal immigrants} and the good ones not to have in place {neo-Routemasters} which he assured his voters he would.
You know what that means, don’t you Ali? He lied to the electorate.
To some extent he falsified his mandate. This is excusable a year or perhaps even a fortnight after the election: stuff changes, circumstances are dissimilar, context is altered, conditions shift. But eight days? You may claim that Routemasters were beyond redemption and everyone knew. But if you asked Boris before the election he didn’t. He had no idea how much it would cost to bring about his vision, that much became rapidly clear, but he jolly well wanted them.
Now? He doesn’t.
Over whether illegal immigrants would be granted amnesty, what was his view before the election, when he was willing to clash with Cameron over the issue? All for it. Bugger the leader, he went with his reason. Even the far-rightist neo-con Giuliani was all for amnesties, a policy position that he was brave enough to argue the value of to a roomful of Republicans. Boris was for.
Now? He isn’t.
This is not about Livingstone, this is not about policies he claimed to have in mind, this is about what he’s doing and what he’s done. Things he is doing include shelving most of his good ideas along with his worse ones and thing’s he’s not include not putting all his expenses onto the website “From day one” as he promised.
We’ll attack his policies because they’re poor and because he lied about what they would be. He’s the power and we’re the truth. He has not explained reasons for these policy shifts as did our former mayor {Clinton accepting them gave the Americans Bush, for instance} and therefore we can only assume that he does not consider lying to the electorate of importance, does not consider his policy shifts to be of any great significance, has poor reasons that he knows will damage his position or has no good reasons for changing his mind and simply made the alterations upon a light-hearted whim.
Finally, there is the distinct possibility that a coterie of Conservatives is in control of the Mayoralty, which makes a London where the top dog has enlisted a handful of Socialist Action members as underlings and acolytes {who obviously had no impact on his positions, even over The City} look like a meritocratic utopia.
So Douglas drew attention to that. As any good journalist should and would do. As Andrew Gilligan, despite assurances, hasn’t. Any further objections?
DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS.
Regardless of Vamp’s mistake - he thought you said don’t attack BoJo’s policies, which was unfortunate - most of the above comment is still entirely valid. Vamp does, in fact, attack his policies - and his lying. Jolly well, too…
I’m amazed at Vamp’s ability to get defensive when I agreed with you! The neo-Routemaster policy was failed from the beginning, and is failing in malpractice. Others of his policies are similar.
I simply suggested that complaining about a lack of policies is unjust. You don’t win an argument by pretending that your opponent doesn’t have anything to say.
Vamp tells me he first thought you had written don’t attack Boris’ policies - which would have been quite unlike you, and worthy of such a vigorous response.
Like I said…