London Mayoral Debate on BBC (Sorry non-Londoners!)

Wilberforce Tue Apr 15, 2008 at 11:01:53 PM GMT Print-friendly version Facebook

How do you think the candidates are faring so far?




Ken is holding his own, obviously knows his stuff.
 
Boris is very quiet, dodges questions, and then plays to the gallery with his motherhood statements on combatting crime etc.

Paddick - arrogant and ineffectual.

Boris keeps refering to 'the Labour mayor', trying to downplay Ken's personal vote and link him to the current government and its unpopularity.



tags: , , , , (all tags)

Display: Sort:
London Mayoral Debate on BBC (Sorry non-Londoners!) | 20 comments (20 topical)

Re: London Mayoral Debate on BBC (#2)

by Prbo on Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 09:54:01 AM GMT

If I were Ken, I'd be worried.  The contest is by no means a foregone conclusion for either Boris or Ken, but the problem Ken has is that he's got a track record to be judged on.  Guys on this site may understandably claim it's a good one, but the impression I get from unaffiliated people is that they've simply had enough. 

Wasting millions of our ratepayers money on advertising and PR campaigns telling Londoners to use common sense when travelling on the tube doesn't go down very well with the ordinary people.  Opinion polls are never definitive, but they're looking worrying for Ken.  It's time we gave someone else a chance now - Ken's the man of the past.


Re: London Mayoral Debate on BBC (#3)

by e10rifles on Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 10:05:44 AM GMT

I'd be worried if I were Boris and the best reason his supporters can come up with for supporting him is the vague, nebulous "it's time for a change".

Of course, that is Boris' best chance of victory: repeating "it's time for a change" rather than letting anyone actually question him about policy.

Unfortunately it may well work.


[ Parent ]

Re: London Mayoral Debate on BBC (#16)

by Prbo on Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 10:37:08 AM GMT

If it worked for Blair in 97, why shouldn't it work for Boris...?  Seriously, I do think Boris has a good handle on what people in London.  He's rightly identified that Ken's attitude of ambivalence to the suburbs is damaging (I speak as someone living in the London suburbs).

The point I was trying to make is that Ken's wasteful spending and other attributes has significantly alienated him from the electorate.  His problem is not that he does too little, but that he has claimed to do too much.  His grandstanding on the world stage, and commenting on world issues is pathetic.  Londoners want someone who is focused on their issues, and not on pursuing semi-ideological vendattas which have nothing to do with his jurisdiction. 


[ Parent ]

Re: London Mayoral Debate on BBC (#18)

by e10rifles on Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 10:50:27 AM GMT

What is Ken's wasteful spending and what does Boris plan to do to reduce it?

If Ken's ability to do the job was compromised by his being on a foreign jaunt 50 weeks a year then you might have a point. But it isn't as he isn't.

We need more ideology in politics, not less.



[ Parent ]

Re: London Mayoral Debate on BBC (#21)

by Prbo on Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 11:38:16 AM GMT

On the spending, please see my comment below to Wilberforce. 

I wouldn't necessarily say his focus on foreign affairs is compromising his work - it's more that it's totally irrelevant, and is wasting my money.  I remember seeing a press statement from Ken commenting on the banning of a gay rights march in Lithuania.  It says it all.

As for ideology, would you care to elaborate what you mean?  I'd be interested to hear your thoughts.


[ Parent ]

Re: London Mayoral Debate on BBC (#4)

by Wilberforce on Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 10:13:37 AM GMT

Changing the man, means changing the policies...

And those are policies that are working. Crime is down, transport is getting better, he won the Olympics which will regenerate east London.

He understands the bigger picture globally, regionally and in London. He is not pandering to some 4x4 driver in outer London just to get power, but putting the long term interests of the whole of London first.

Do we agree with everything he has done or does? Perhaps not. But this is a man who has devoted his adult life to improving London, and the results of that determination are now showing. 


[ Parent ]

Re: London Mayoral Debate on BBC (#17)

by Prbo on Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 10:48:10 AM GMT

I admire your faith Wilberforce, and I would of course acknowledge that Ken has been a force for good in some areas.  However, to quote from a post yesterday from ConHome, which made me almost weep.

Ken has managed to spend:

  • £8m of taxpayers' money on opposing nuclear power
  • £2.8m pa on Pravda The Londoner newspaper
  • £2.2m on promoting home insulation scheme worth £300k in grants
  • £793k on promoting a Oyster card giveaway
  • £517k hosting a leftie event attended by Che Guevara's daughter, Gerry Adams and George Galloway
  • £4750 of taxpayers' money to Chinese torch-bearer former Blue Peter presenter Konnie Huq in exchange for appearing alongside him at a press conference
  • £4,088 for a rebuttal file answering claims that he should not have met the extremist cleric Yusuf al-Qaradawi
This is my money.  What mandate does this man have to talk about nuclear power, and actively spend money campaigning against it?  And all the other things.  Other people may not be bothered, but I see no reason why my money should be wasted on these absurd and laughable causes.

This is one of the prime reasons why I want to see Ken lose office, as well as his consorting with reprobates such as Chavez, Castro et al.


[ Parent ]

Re: London Mayoral Debate on BBC (#19)

by e10rifles on Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 10:51:45 AM GMT

And what the hell is wrong with Chavez?

Except that he's a lefty who (damn him) is massively popular and keeps winning elections.


[ Parent ]

Re: London Mayoral Debate on BBC (#20)

by Prbo on Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 11:33:33 AM GMT

From what I can see, Chavez's recent referendum on granting himself unlimited terms in office and centralising banking and other powers gives an indication of his attitude.  This is precisely the behaviour which the left delight in denouncing amongst right-wing dictators the world over, but when a socialist comrade exhibits it they leap to his defence. 

I know wikipedia shouldn't necessarily be taken as gospel, but I was interested to read the following about him:

In May 2007 the Chavez government refused to renew the license of the nation's most popular television station, alleging the company participated in the 2002 coup d'etat. This led to many, prolonged protests in Caracas. Also, tens of thousands have marched through Caracas to support President Chávez's decision

In November 2007 at the Ibero-American Summit in Santiago de Chile, Chávez and Spanish prime minister José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero were engaged in a heated exchange. Chávez, irritated by Zapatero's suggestion that Latin America needed to attract more foreign capital, referred to Spain's former prime minister, José María Aznar, as a fascist

He also appears to spend a lot of time cosying up to President Ahmadinajad, that well-known friend of freedom, liberty and 'progressive' left-wing politics.

By this token, it's no surprise he gets on well with Ken.


[ Parent ]

Re: London Mayoral Debate on BBC (#22)

by e10rifles on Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 11:40:06 AM GMT

You should do more research.

The referendum to abolish term limits would merely bring Venezuela into line with the UK and other countries. It fell (just) and is only one small piece of legislation compared to all the many positive changes in Venezuela over the last ten years.

The TV channel in question is still available on cable TV but no longer has a licence for free-to-air broadcasting due to its role in supporting the unsuccessful coup a few years ago.

His buddying up with Ahmedinajad is daft but a commonplace second campism endorsed by many who are unfussy about their friends as long as they oppose the greatest world thread today: the USA.

Not sure what the problem of nationalising industries is. It's something plenty of democratic socialists still advocate.

And Aznar is pretty much a fascist. Plenty of people in Spain say that every day.


[ Parent ]

Re: London Mayoral Debate on BBC (#23)

by Prbo on Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 12:03:19 PM GMT

Thanks for this rifles.  I don't agree on the abolishing term limits, and I find some of the other points you make very worrying, but they're by the by.  I don't think I'm going to convince you and vice versa.  However, I would appreciate it if you could let me know what about Aznar is 'fascist.'  That's an incredibly strong term - would you care to justify it?  (and just because lots of people say something, it doesn't mean it's true.  Lots of people in this country say we should send all immigrants back where they came from - would you agree?)

Anyway, Chavez isn't my point.  My point is that Ken spends much of his time doing oil deals with people such as Chavez, and champions causes which have nothing to do with jurisdiction as Mayor and the wellbeing of the people of London. 


[ Parent ]

Re: London Mayoral Debate on BBC (#24)

by e10rifles on Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 12:09:11 PM GMT

Note I said "pretty much a fascist". He may not be a fascist but is obviously soft on such people as evidenced by some of these points: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3715193

The oil deal with Chavez is EXACTLY the sort of thing a mayor should be doing - it directly benefits Londoners on low earnings. Not pointless ideology. What is wrong with that?

And what is wrong with a mayor having opinions on matters outside London?


[ Parent ]

Re: London Mayoral Debate on BBC (#25)

by Prbo on Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 04:05:34 PM GMT

Thanks rifles, but you're claim that he's 'almost fascist' is clearly way off the mark.  By this token, I could label most of the current cabinet as Marxist-Trotskyist based on what they did in their youth.  Calling someone 'practically fascist' doesn't do you any favours, and simply debases the term, and by association your arguments.  Could you define for me also what you mean by the term 'fascist' so I can understand your argument better please?

You'll be unsurprised to hear I disagree on Chavez given my views on him.  I didn't say that was pointless ideology either.

I have no problem with the mayor having opinions on matters outside of London.  I have a problem with him wasting my taxpayers money on championing cause which are nothing to do with the Mayor's office.  Nuclear power, the war in Iraq, gays rights in Lithuania - these are not subjects which my money should be spent on (see my comment above).  Like many leftists, he seems to take the view that if it's 'public' money, he can do what he likes with it.  That, in my view, is wrong, and in this case an abuse of power and position.


[ Parent ]

Re: London Mayoral Debate on BBC (#27)

by e10rifles on Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 04:25:43 PM GMT

Sympathetic to fascists, as evidenced by:

-Aznar denounced the town of Guernica for renaming General Franco Square as Liberty Square after the dictator's death.

-Spain's Supreme Court, appointed by Aznar's government, refuses to expunge the criminal convictions of executed opponents of the Franco dictatorship.

-Aznar defied the instructions of a UN Human Rights agency to find the bodies of the more than 30,000 people who disappeared under Franco.

You started this by referring to "unsavoury characters" such as Chavez but have failed to produce anything other meeting Ahmedinajad as evidence of that slur.

Your point, as you put it, was that Ken does oil deals with the likes of Chavez, but haven't said what is wrong with that.


[ Parent ]

Re: London Mayoral Debate on BBC (#29)

by Prbo on Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 04:47:09 PM GMT

Sorry, you can't get away with that as justification for calling someone almost fascist.  Sounds rather likely Ken himself.  Still, I'm not going to convince you so let's leave it.

As for Chavez being unsavoury, it's in exactly the same way that I regard Ken as said before.  What I regard as unsavoury, you don't, so it's no surprise that you disagree.  Trying to give himself sweeping powers, being friendly with dictators (Castro, Saddam, Ahmadinajad) and calling people fascist with no evidence - I find that pretty unsavoury.  Will understand if you disagree - that's freedom of speech for you.

And for the election contest - we leave it to the people to decide, and not the bloggers - thank goodness.


[ Parent ]

Re: London Mayoral Debate on BBC (#30)

by e10rifles on Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 05:27:53 PM GMT

"Trying to give himself sweeping powers"

i.e. lifting term limits that plenty of countries don't have

"being friendly with dictators"

Wow, that's a first for a head of state isn't it? Can you think of any dictators (Pakistan, for example) which other heads of state have met?

"calling people fascist with no evidence"

Apart from the evidence provided, which is enough for me, and millions of Spaniards, but not you it would seem.


[ Parent ]

Re: London Mayoral Debate on BBC (#6)

by Wilberforce on Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 10:17:21 AM GMT

Changing the man, means changing the policies...

And those are policies that are working. Crime is down, transport is getting better, he won the Olympics which will regenerate east London.

He understands the bigger picture globally, regionally and in London. He is not pandering to some 4x4 driver in outer London just to get power, but putting the long term interests of the whole of London first.

Do we agree with everything he has done or does? Perhaps not. But this is a man who has devoted his adult life to improving London, and the results of that determination are now showing.  A change of policy now, to a person who is only doing the job because he was asked too, would be a disaster for London.


[ Parent ]

Re: London Mayoral Debate on BBC (#26)

by rupahuq on Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 04:22:25 PM GMT

Hi. I thought I posted this earlier but it seems to have gone walkies. My report of the debate and a link to it are here:
http://rupahuq.wordpress.com/2008/04/16/another-day-another-mayoral-debate/


Re: London Mayoral Debate on BBC (#28)

by Wilberforce on Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 04:36:13 PM GMT

Thanks Rupa. as you could see I also had posting problems today, and my post appeared umpteen times, even though the system seemed to be telling me it had failed!


[ Parent ]

Re: London Mayoral Debate on BBC (#31)

by musicman on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 06:40:11 AM GMT

Paddick - arrogant and ineffectual.

http://lavabeat.net 


London Mayoral Debate on BBC (Sorry non-Londoners!) | 20 comments (20 topical)