Pajamas Media

Will Londoners Send Their Mayor Packing?

Even many supporters of his own Labour Party will be glad if London mayor Ken Livingstone loses Thursday's election — and gladder if he departs public life altogether.

April 30, 2008 - by Oliver Kamm

Support Pajamas Media; Visit Our Advertisers

Londoners go to the polls to elect a Mayor on Thursday. The Labour candidate incumbent, Ken Livingstone, is seeking election for the third time. Against expectations, he is in difficulty against a revived Conservative Party. If he loses, it will mark a coda in one of the more high-profile if low-achieving political careers of modern British politics. A Labour supporter myself, I shall be glad if Livingstone departs public life.

For a generation, Livingstone has been the most successful figure on the far-left of British politics. He came to prominence as a municipal politician in London in the early 1980s. Labour was then a party of extreme policies such as unilateral nuclear disarmament and a siege economy. Unsurprisingly, it proved unelectable at national level. In municipal government, its representatives were typically fiscally profligate and politically doctrinaire. Nowhere were these characteristics more in evidence than in the city-wide authority for London, the Greater London Council (GLC), of which Livingstone was leader.

What few now recall is that Livingstone became leader of the GLC without any reference to the people of London. But in London, Labour’s municipal campaign of 1981 was headed by an articulate moderate, Andrew McIntosh. Immediately after that election, McIntosh was deposed as leader of the Labour group in a palace coup by members of his own party caucus. Livingstone became leader in McIntosh’s place, and thereby leader of the GLC as well. It was a move that evinced contempt for London’s voters.

The GLC was later abolished by Margaret Thatcher’s government in an imprudent fit of irritation at Livingstone’s antics. This ill-considered move allowed Livingstone to develop a populist persona as the defender of local democracy against central government. His political reputation as a maverick and a bit of a card derives from that confrontation.

Tony Blair’s government reintroduced a city-wide authority for London, the Greater London Assembly, and also established the post of a directly elected Mayor. It was a good idea on constitutional grounds, but it did Labour no good at all. Livingstone, by this time a Labour Member of Parliament, sought the party’s candidature for the first Mayoral election in 2000. Blair, recalling, the electoral damage that Livingstone and his associates had inflicted on the party in the 1980s, rightly demurred but went the wrong way about it. Instead of expelling Livingstone from the party, Blair organized a procedural maneuver to select an alternative Labour candidate, a dull and ineffective machine politician, Frank Dobson. Livingstone ran as an independent, and won handsomely.

In 2004, in one of the more cynical acts of Tony Blair’s otherwise principled premierships, Labour made up with Livingstone in a desperate wish to secure a victory in London amid electoral setbacks in other parts of the country. Livingstone ran as the party’s candidate and won again. This time, he is electoral trouble. It is of his own devising.

Livingstone has accomplished one important reform as Mayor, a charging scheme for traffic in central London (the “congestion charge”). Beyond that, he has been a substantial liability for London’s governance, reputation and — owing to his curious predilection for property development — skyline.

It is his judgment on foreign affairs — absolutely nothing to with his municipal remit — that is the greatest wound on London’s civic life under Livingstone, however. The Mayor has welcomed to London Yusuf al-Qaradawi, the Muslim cleric who praises suicide attacks in Israel. Livingstone defended these comments with the preposterous and inflammatory claim that Palestinians have only their bodies with which to “fight back”.

This sort of intervention matters because a London mayor represents a huge, cosmopolitan capital city. Many of the contentious international and communal issues on which Livingstone comments are replicated in tensions within London. A civic leader, especially in London of all places, ought to exemplify the principle that there is a single category of citizenship that transcends national and religious divisions. Livingstone does not do that. His is a face of left-wing politics that stands for communalism, populism and administrative incompetence. By rights, his time should be past.

Oliver Kamm is an author and Times columnist. His blog is available here.

23 Comments

Mary Jackson:

Not only does Ken’s chum Sheik Qaradawi
praise suicide attacks on Israel, he also advocates wife beating and murder of homosexuals.

You would expect Ken to be anti-Israel - he is reflexively anti-Western - but for someone who has made such big deal of equality and gay rights to cosy up to a stone-age mad mullah shows a complete lack of principles. And then there’s his hypocrisy, corruption and cronyism, and his whining voice.

Well, I’m voting for Boris. I recommend that any other Londoners reading this vote for Boris. If you don’t like him, make him your second choice. The most important thing is to get Ken out.

Apr 30, 2008 - 3:48 am angela:

I totally agree with every word of this article and commend yur courage in writing it. Well said, Mr. Oliver Kamm.
I just hope that every Londoner who possibly can, goes to the polls tomorrow, because at least then we will have a truly democratic result. Let’s hope the dirty tricks don’t come into play as regards the postal vote!

Apr 30, 2008 - 3:57 am Britmex:

Gimlet Kamm has managed to leave out one crucial bit of information with regards to Livingstone’s election as leader of the old GLC. All political groupings on all councils hold a meeting after every election to select a leader.

Living in Manchester at the time I can well remember how the press howled that if Labour won that election then Macintosh would be removed as Labour leader and replaced by Ken Livingstone. So the notion that Livingstone became leader “without any reference to the people of London” is yet another of Gimlet’s idiotic lines.

I wouldn’t mind if the line was unique to Gimlet, but it was being put about by the Tories during the election. In fact, so keen were they on this line that the news of what was happening in London’s local election reached me up in Manchester - 200 miles to the north. If I could hear the news, then the notion that Londoners didn’t know that a vote for Labour was a vote for Ken Livingstone as leader is risible. Well, gimletish…

By the way, I call this character Gimlet because a gimlet is a small device used to bore holes in wood. A small, boring tool.

Apr 30, 2008 - 5:35 am J.J. Sefton:

As penance, he can play “Night Porter” with Oswald Moseley’s son.

Apr 30, 2008 - 7:05 am David H Dennis:

I’m curious, why wouldn’t the congestion charge alone ensure his defeat?

Surely that was an enormously unpopular move?

Or do I just read too many UK car magazines?

Apr 30, 2008 - 7:54 am Mary Jackson:

David Dennis:

The congestion charge as originally introduced was better than people feared. Then, having promised not to, he raised the charge from £5 to £8. Then, with no consultation and with a great deal of opposition, he extended the zone to the west.

So while the initial introduction of the congestion charge didn’t make him unpopular, his subsequent actions - the lying and the abuse of power, may well do. I sincerely hope so.

Apr 30, 2008 - 8:06 am Pru:

Kamm, a Labour supporter, are you. Remember Celia Barlow, She was the Labour candidate in your constituency whose objection to Blair’s Neo Conservative interventionist foreign policy led you to very publicly vote conservative and encourage others to do the same. You have supported every illegal war from the Balkans to the Middle East. You support rendition flights yet prattle on about international law and human rights. You was a member of the now defunct Euston Manifesto re branded (like the good little neo cons that you are) Democrataya. The only group you/they care about are, hedgefunders (which you are) and shock doctrinal capitalists. You are as illiberal and anti democratic as the granddaddy of the Neo Cons, Leo Strauss whose crap now infiltrates both mainstream political parties. You are a supporter of any party in power that will carry the genes of corrupt murderous neo conservatism, you will claim to be left and/or right to claim a vessel to power.

Any individual family with British servicemen reading this twaddle by Kamm, know this. Our boys are not dying to in the name of “Democrataya” (look it up - have a laugh or rather, cry) Pity the poor bloody Arabs whilst you’re at it. The Neo Cons have no pity, no shame. They are global thieves and muderers.

Apr 30, 2008 - 10:28 am triviaqueen:

I can’t help noticing that the only putative Livingstone supporters on this thread (BritMex and Pru, I’m looking at you!) have neither defended nor expressed actual support for “Red Ken”, but merely lobbed ad hominem attacks on Mr Kamm. That’s rather telling, don’t you think?

Apr 30, 2008 - 11:09 am Dave F:

Pru, go and write Neo-con on the blackboard 200 times. Maybe you will tire of using it as a one-size-fits-all term for your hated foes of every stripe.

If you want to be taken seriously, try rational argument rather than hysterical ranting.

Apr 30, 2008 - 11:22 am Pru:

Dave F, is that you Gimlet, darling.

Apr 30, 2008 - 11:44 am Pru:

triviaqueen
“ad hominem” - do Oxfords best still use this rather tired old slipper. (it’s you again isn’t is Gimlet. Still got no friends I see) And when did I mention supporting Ken Livingston? I might vote Green as it happens. So long as those Greens really are Greens and not masquerading as Greens rather like Kamm and his insistence of being a centre left! I’m off, Gimlet I’d love to stay a while longer, I know you need the company but I’ve got something on. Chow

Apr 30, 2008 - 11:55 am Andrew Ian Dodge:

Pru means Jew when he says “Neo-con”. Makes it all make far more sense.

Apr 30, 2008 - 11:55 am Pru:

Andrew Dodge (D being for desperate, Gimlet?) seriosuly, after this I have to go.
Is Donald Rumsfeld or Tricky-Dicky Cheney or naughty Condi Rice Jewish? Think not! They all bought in Oliver and the list exposes lots of non Jewish neo Cons, like Tony Blair for instance - Nu Labour, Nu catholic for which I don’t blame the Pope. So lets leave religion out of this shall we Gimlet. We know that Neo Cons/ Neo Liberals (whatever tag sells it to Joe public)use sectarianism. There are laws against inciting racial hatred, I’d becareful if I was you.

Apr 30, 2008 - 1:00 pm triviaqueen:

triviaqueen
“ad hominem” - do Oxfords best still use this rather tired old slipper.

If the tired old slipper fits, wear it!

And no, I am not our author, or “Gimlet” as you so wittily call him. I observe Red Ken and his Merry Men from the quieter though admittedly slightly shallower waters of southern California, USA.

Apr 30, 2008 - 1:52 pm commenter:

Kamm really manages to get under the skin of the Saddam/Milosevic (and apparently Livingstone) fans doesn’t he?

Apr 30, 2008 - 2:25 pm Robert L. Mayo:

Hey, don’t feel bad, it could be worse. We in Washington, DC had Marion Barry as mayor. Livingstone may be a one fry short of a happy meal, but at least he’s never been videotaped smoking crack.

(Reference for our non-American speaking friends:)
A couple of fries short of a happy meal
The lights are on but nobody’s home
Not the sharpest knife in the drawer
As sharp as a bowling ball
Couldn’t pour water out of a boot with instructions on the heel
Donated his brain to science before he was done using it
Elevator doesn’t go to the top floor
Has delusions of adequacy
Fell out of the Stupid tree and hit every branch on the way down
The lights are flashing, the gate’s down, but the train ain’t coming
Was left on the tilt-a-whirl too long as a baby
If you stand close enough to him you can hear the ocean

Apr 30, 2008 - 4:06 pm Britmex:

Well, I don’t feel any need to support Ken Livingstone because the aim of my first comment was to point out young Gimlet’s error.

If I lived in London - which I don’t - then I would probably vote for Lindsay German on the first preference and then switch to Ken for my second. I say probably because there are a lot of things that Ken has done that I don’t like, such as cuddling up to the City.

That aside, my original point still stands - all council groups elect or re-elect their leader after every election, so what happened 30+ years ago in London was quite normal.

Gimlet, not for the first, was simply repeating an old Tory line that didn’t work then and won’t now.

Apr 30, 2008 - 6:08 pm Javelin:

Teh reason I initially dislike this man went back to 2003 just before the Wonderful Liberation(for sharia’h) Iraq. There was that Miss Universe Contest in Nigeria that the Islamo killers used as an excuse to lot riot and kill. Mr. Livingstone then refused the contest’s bid to relocate to safer London, blaming these utterly innocent people for the brutality of the Nigerian Muslims. I realize that contests like that are dumb and PC, but they are harmless too. Meanhwile, he sucks up to every Islamo-dirtbag he can find.

Apr 30, 2008 - 6:33 pm Dave Barnes:

Final score is Boris 53% and Red Ken 47%. Good bye Ken.

May 3, 2008 - 8:37 am USpace:

.
YEY BORIS! Boris may be a buffoon, but at least he’s not a communist one.

Bloody good news! Praise the Lord! Thank God! There is hope for Londonistan. What will Red Ken do next?