Sunday, 4 May 2008

Dreadful Result in London

I'm seriously disappointed at the result of the London mayoral election. To me, it seemed obvious that Ken Livingstone was the best man for the job in terms of skills, experience and commitment to what was right for London. He's followed sensible economic policies, fought for social justice and improved public transport; and the congestion charge must be the way of the future for cities like London.

My opinion of Ken has nothing to do with him representing the Labour Party once again. I admit I found myself unable to vote Labour for the first time in my life during Blair's latter years, on account of his unforgivable behaviour over the Iraq War. Although he seems to be an inferior politician, I see Gordon Brown as more sincere and certainly preferable to Blair in that respect and voted Labour again in the recent local elections. I concede that Labour probably did deserve to do badly in these elections. Regardless of that - to me, the battle to be Mayor of London was (or should have been) much more about the individuals, and Boris Johnson seemed so obviously clueless that even Brian Paddick would have been preferable as the winner.

There seem to be some parallels with the USA. Sadly, it seems the electorate of London (as in the USA) were stupid – or self-interested – enough to vote in a right wing buffoon as their leader. It’s also said that, just as Dubya is the figurehead for some cleverer (but extreme) men to get their far right policies enforced, Boris might be steered behind the scenes by Tory right wing extremists. I hope that idea isn’t true.

1 comment:

JackP said...

I tend to see Boris as an amiable buffoon. I mean, I'm sure he's not got any sort of sinister agenda, and I think he does mean well, but I'd be reluctant to place him in charge of a sack of potatoes, never mind London...

...having said that, it does also appear that there was somewhat of a backlash against Ken/ labour so I think that's been a factor in the vote too.

But Boris??