Bobbies on the beat

Has anyone else noticed the phenomenal police presence in London in the last week? I must have seen up to twenty police officers of various types in London Fields on Friday evening. I can barely remember seeing more than the odd one previously. Is Ian Blair trying to show that he's responding proactively to a new Mayor?

Two teenagers on the 133 bus

I was on a bus going up Brixton Hill yesterday and found myself sat in front of an animated conversation about the Mayoral race between two teenagers. Two teenagers on their way out for the evening were discussing the new Mayor, Boris Johnson.

The young man, who supported for Boris, was gaining the upper hand, "Well he's gonna get rid of them bendy buses. They catch fire y'know. Whaddya call it? Spontaneous combustion innit? And Ken was a joke, man. The idea of of having a beach on the South Bank was nutty man. If yer from London why d'ya care about that? It's fine for tourists and that but what about Londoners? Y'know, the ones who are from 'ere."

His companion, a young lady of about the same age, was dumbfounded but spluttered, after a slight pause, "You need your 'ed testin'. You do know that Boris is a Tory don't you? I'm not saying I voted or naffin'. What's the point? But a Tory? What's wrong with you, man?"

The reply came, "Yeah but he's different to most of 'em. He's like a liberal more than a Tory. I'm not saying I voted either but if I did I'd vote for Boris."

"You need your 'ed sorted."

Make of the conversation what you will but there's no doubt the Mayoral race had an impact....

Boris Johnson wins

While I don't think this is very good news for London at all, I'm not going to leave the country as some are threatening. I hope Mr Johnson realises the huge responsibility that he has and conducts himself in a manner befitting this very important Mayoralty.

Ken was a very good Mayor in the main and that is worthy of recognition. His people dragged him down and he shouldn't have let that happen.

Poll Wars

Well, Yougov are reporting a 10% Boris Johnson lead while MRUK and MORI are reporting a narrow Ken Livingstone lead. At least one of the pollsters is completely wrong. It does seem worryingly suspicious that MRUK and MORI seem to have the proportion of certain voters at around the 60% mark when the last two Mayoral elections have seen them hovering in the mid-30s. But as Anthony Wells hints in an excellent analysis, sometimes pollsters can get the right result but for the wrong reasons. Science can be the enemy of accuracy in the polling business.

Let's wait to see what Thursday's result is, but, to be honest, who wins the vote is far more interesting than which pollster gets it right though it does provide an amusing sideshow. No-one has any idea who is going to win. Friday will be an interesting day indeed.

London Mayoral Debate

A fascinating last (?) TV Mayoral debate prior to the vote next Thursday's election on BBC's Question Time glaringly exposed each of the candidate's weaknesses. I was surprised once again as I had been at a debate at Thomson Reuters in Canary Wharf last week at the strong start made by Boris Johnson. But as in the Thomson Reuters debate it is quite clear that Boris is absolutely clueless once he gets beyond his pre-prepared script. The script seems to last about 15 minutes. After that, he just filibusters embarrassingly. His pathetic defence of his claim that he could do a no-strike deal with the RMT was typical.

Both Ken Livingstone and Boris Johnson were almost literally floored at various points during the debate. Ken's difficulties with his occasionally venomous tongue and some of the very serious misjudgements he has made with some of the people he has allowed himself to be associated with are well documented. And it continues to trip him up every time. Brian Paddick told Boris to 'shut up' at one point to rapturous applause. It was like a local bobby clipping a young rapscallion around the ear.

The rest of the UK would have been horrified at Ken's boast that he had 'ensnared' the Government into signing an open cheque for the Olympics because it would regenerate East London. He even admitted that it was a bit of a con trick! The reality is that it is what any good Mayor would have done. And on transport, housing, and policing, he has been very successful at getting investment into London. That is the key reason to support Ken.

It is clear that Ken is head and shoulders above the other candidates when it comes to the governance and understanding of London, flaws notwithstanding. He has under-estimated severely how he can no longer claim to be the outsider candidate after eight years in City Hall. But there is no doubt that he has been a good and persistent Mayor over the two terms.

Without a credible candidate against him he deserves a third term.

Ken Livingstone- what's the right strategy?

According to a PoliticsHome panel of experts Livingstone should project himself as a 'competent CEO', portray Boris Johnson as a clown, give jobs to the Lib Dem and Green candidates and avoid Gordon Brown and Labour.

Maybe the PoliticsHome strategy by a committee of 100 experts methodology is flawed. But I don't think that's a winning strategy at all.

Ken's personality (and, let's be honest, his flaws) means that any attempt to project himself as boring, straight down the line corporate boss will unravel fairly quickly. If he is drawing attention to Boris Johnson's colourful personality at the same time it will only make his new persona seem even stranger and could well benefit his opponent. By giving jobs to the Green and Lib Dem candidates he would look weak, desperate, and like he was running out of ideas. Brian Paddick has already said that he wouldn't take up a job offer from Ken anyway. And who exactly do the experts think is knocking the doors day after day for Ken if it's not Labour activists?

Ken can win. He was head and shoulders above the other two candidates in the Newsnight debate last night.

But the way he can guarantee victory is lifting the weight of the world off his shoulders, showing a bit of his natural charm once more, look comfortable in the role and take on his opponents on the policy.

More than that, he needs to articulate just how important the role of London Mayor is from the perspective of security, the environment, transport, the economy, affordable housing, London's international prestige, and to give a focus to major occasions such as the 2012 Olympic games. It is a major role that requires a talented and competent political heavyweight. He doesn't need to attack Boris other than on the policy. If he articulates just how important the role is then people will quickly shy away from the blundering, stuttering, incoherent Boris Johnson no matter how much they may find him amusing.

In the last four years, Ken has contended with suicide attacks on London, the collapse of one the major tube operators, and has won the Olympic games while contributing to the creation of a mesmerisingly brilliant international city. That is a very strong record. That's his pitch. Warts and all, he is the man for the job.

There, a post about London and I didn't use the word 'vibrant' once. A first in modern journalism.

Postscript: Ken manages to avoid calling London 'vibrant' as well. This broadcast is just the sort of stuff that's needed. Needs to develop the 'what could go wrong' line a bit more but the right tone: positive, personal, and clear.



Postscript 2: Steve Richards' thoughts in The Indy this morning are worth a read.

David Cameron- 'cycling menace'

The Daily Mirror tailed David Cameron on Wednesday and caught him violating four road laws on his cycle ride to the House of Commons. Red lights ignored, one-way streets transgressed, bollard flows flouted, the Leader of the Opposition, a 'cycling menace', according to the Mirror, is hanging his head in shame.

Actually, only four traffic violations on route shows him to be a relatively responsible cyclist. Compared to the standards set by most cyclists anyway. On the same route I reckon your average London cyclist breaks a dozen or so. London is slowly being adapted for cyclists without any real thought about the consequences for pedestrians, public transport users, or cyclists themselves. Cyclists don't have to know the Highway Code, they don't have to pass any sort of safety or proficiency test, they don't have to take out insurance, there is no real enforcement of road safety laws when it comes to cyclists. So it's a bit of a ridiculous (and dangerous) situation really.

It is impossible to walk from my place in Hackney to London Fields station without walking on a cycle lane or taking a detour. From time to time, I'm barked at by a cyclist on the way (yes, despite the fact that they have no training, London cyclists tend to be very vocal), only to be nearly mowed down by a cyclist bombing down the pedestrian lanes in the Fields. How many times have you been on a bus crammed with 100 people or so crawling behind a single cyclist going at about 3mph?

All the Mayoral candidates want to expand provision for cyclists in London. Can I suggest that they properly think through the consequences for all Londoners before they do so? In the dash to look green and appease a vocal pressure group, nobody has given this issue proper strategic consideration.

A friend once described cyclists as smug, self-satisfied, narcissists. I thought that was very harsh even if their number does include the Leader of the Opposition and Boris Johnson, the Tory Mayoral candidate. But a bit more consideration of the consequences of turning London into a cyclist's post-industrial nirvana wouldn't go amiss.

Post script: Why don't I cycle? Have you seen the way I drive? If there are others on the road who are that bad then it is just not safe at all. And have you seen how silly those helmets look? No, thank you.

Post script 2: You can WATCH David Cameron's traffic violations here! God bless the Daily Mirror.