"One of the bizarre things about London politics is, although there is a Mayor and some kind of city wide authority, there are never regular opinion polls like there are nationally, so voters can never track the ratings of parties. This is one reason why the Mayor is never under much pressure, because he doesn't have an opinion poll lead to defend."
- London Salmon introducing an extensive posting on the results of the Annual London survey.
Is there a way of remedying this accountability problem? Many Londoners think there is more democracy on London government than there actually is, making increased accountability all the more important.
There's nothing too notable in the survey - the Mayor's approval rating is barely changing - but it is worth combing through if you are involved in London politics. One interesting finding though is that the Congestion Charge is the top reason for why people say Livingstone has done a good job, as well as the top reason why people said he had done a bad job!
If you haven't seen it already, 18 Doughty Street have today launched their video attacking Ken Livingstone for his associations with al-Qaradawi and Bob Crow, and his profligarate spending of Londoners' money on PR and irrelevant . His office angrily hit back in the Standard saying 18DS represented the nasty side of politics... must have hit a nerve!
Deputy Editor
A lack of opinion polls does not cause an accountbility problem and probably aids long term thinking as opposed to headline grabbing stunts.
An election is all the accountability that is needed.
Posted by: Richard Allen | February 14, 2007 at 20:02
How much longer is this website going to continue with this drivel? Since when is it the job of leaders to "defend an opinion poll lead"? Wasn't this one of the main Conservative critiques of the early Blair years?
Anyway, whether or not there are published polls, you can bet that he conducts his own private polls on a regular basis, so is hardly operating in a poll vacuum.
As for the finding on the Congestion charge being "interesting" - hardly, it's a polarising issue that arouses strong emotions, and is also his flagship policy. What's so interesting in that?
Livingstone is a political giant in London, and unless he makes a serious error, DIRECTLY linked to his job (so stuff about Cuba, Venezuala etc is irrelevant) or is exposed as corrupt, the Tories have no chance of beating him until a serious political player is prepared to put their reputation on the line against him.
The sort of pygmy politics that this website is encouraging is hardly likely to have an impact.
Posted by: greg | February 15, 2007 at 07:17