Ken
This post shall be brief. Ken Livingstone did a vast amount for this city, which is now in a position of esteem around the globe that was a vague fantasy eight years ago. Thankfully it was in his head and thus a mixture of effort from Londoners and measures from City Hall has brought us to a shining position.
To hear Ali suggest, then, that Livingstone was somehow not “credible” smacks me as simply absurd and lacking consideration of a comparison of London prior and after his policy implementations. I find it a real pity that somebody who knew and cared for the city as much as he did is out of power and I remain unconvinced of Boris’ views on this place.
He starts work tomorrow so it remains to be seen but he certainly has a lot to live up to.
I’ve published views on Ken Livingstone elsewhere, as well as commentary on Boris Johnson’s bid to become Mayor of London (no longer online). I wrote something with the title of “How to beat Ken Livingstone”, and will immodestly suggest that I wasn’t far off the mark. Almost a year ago, I wrote words to the effect of, “I am slowly moving towards the “Anyone But Ken” camp, and that is a very dangerous, unstable place to be”. With Boris Johnson as the alternative, my prediction there also proved to be correct.
I do not for one minute suggest that Livingstone was a bad mayor - I would have voted for him in 2000 and 2004. But democracy is a two-fold process of electing those you wish to govern, and then holding them to account. Livingstone did much good - I cannot think of someone who would have done more - but he was lagging towards the end. With no direction, no promises to do anything but “the same, but more”, and with a shockingly long list of evidence of abuse of office, I do not think he was a credible choice for mayor for the next four years.
I do not believe in big government, and Livingstone’s swelling of City Hall was cause for concern in my eyes. As is often typical after 8 years, the screws started coming loose and the whole set-up became a little unstable. Livingstone became arrogant, refusing to accept the plain and simple facts laid before him, then later denying that he had done so, thus completing the cycle. London needed a breath of fresh air.
But, as I said, the “Anyone But Ken” camp is a very dangerous, unstable place to be. Boris Johnson may well scale back City Hall, but I am doubtful about the potential success of many of his policies. He may find providing for London a rather difficult task. He is very possibly the most preferable Tory out there, but a Tory nonetheless.
I regret, then, that Ken Livingstone decided to break his promise and seek re-election… again. A candidate in his mould but without his baggage could have been successful. Even if Livingstone felt he had to run again, in an election where people were dubious about both frontrunners, the LibDems could have fielded a candidate that promised a smaller city state whilst being committed to helping people in the way Johnson is not.
Electoral accountability was exercised well on Thursday, but the major pitfall of democracy was exposed even more obviously: the voter often has to decide between two unpalatable options.
LOL, “Big Government”.
Stop using Republican/American libertarian talking points. In Britain nearly everyone is whole heartedly in favour of big government. How can we tell? Because they don’t want to dismantle the NHS.