ConservativeHome's London Mayor blog

Some quick reflections on the mayoral vote

So Boris has won and won convincingly with 79% of the vote.  Victoria Borwick, previously the least known of the three candidates, came second.

Each of the three defeated candidates made their contributions.  Warwick's manifesto was stuffed full of useful ideas.  Victoria's no-nonsense approach to crime would give London some of what Giuliani-Bratton gave to New York.  Andrew Boff's ideas for a more democratic London - with powers to recall the Mayor - will, I hope, find their way into Boris Johnson's manifesto.

The level of participation was very disappointing.  Only 0.37% of eligible voters took part.  It might have been different if CCHQ had advertised the vote more enthusiastically but probably not much better.  The only real way in which turnout would have become respectable would have been a heavyweight contest - the Norris V Borris contest was the one ConservativeHome had hoped for.

Boris certainly has the charisma to win and London badly needs a break from Ken Livingstone's taxes, waste and political grandstanding.  On Radio 4 this morning Mr Johnson said the top issue facing London was the need for a more democratic London - with greater involvement of the London boroughs.  He attacked Ken Livingstone's imposition of rabbit hutch dwellings on London communities.  Over time Mr Johnson will need punchier messages than that.

He may also have a very big decision to make if Gordon Brown calls a General Election.  Will he fight Henley and risk communicating a lack of belief in his mayoral candidacy?  Or will he vacate Henley and risk having no elected position next May?

After the ups and downs of this process we can at least all agree that it's good we don't have Greg Dyke as our candidate this morning!

Boris wins 79% in mayoral vote

Boris Johnson: 15,661 (79.0%)
Victoria Borwick: 1,869 (9.4%)
Andrew Boff: 1,674 (8.4%)
Warwick Lightfoot: 609 (3.1%)

CCHQ have released the following statements...

Caroline Spelman: “I am delighted to announce Boris Johnson as the Conservative Mayoral candidate. Running a London wide open primary is a first in British politics. I would like to thank all our excellent candidates for the hard work they have put in. By opening up the process and running open hustings we have given all Londoners the chance to vote on the Conservative appointment and influence the outcome. The Conservative Party can now unite behind Boris to offer the people of London a real alternative to the misgovernment of London that we have seen for the past 8 years.”

David Cameron: “Boris will be an excellent candidate and I know the Party will unite behind him to remove Ken Livingstone from office. It’s about time that all Londoners had the chance to vote for real change.”

Boris Johnson: “I’d like to thank Londoners for giving me this opportunity.   As I visited all of London’s 32 boroughs in the last few weeks, the message is loud and clear – King Newt’s days are numbered. Across London I’ve met people fed up with paying so much to city hall and getting so little in return.  The job of the Mayor is simple - to get people to work on time, to ensure people feel safe on the streets, to help people find a place to call home, to celebrate our diversity and to champion our success.  My determination to lead this city is stronger than ever. After seeing both the good and bad that London has to offer, I am committed to making London greater and standing up for every Londoner that invests so heavily in our city.  I want to be a Mayor for all Londoners, from Zone 6 to Zone 1. A Mayor that will listen, will learn and will lead.”

Johnson - wooing gay voters - comes close to endorsing polygamy

Boris Johnson has given an interview to PinkNews and sends strong pro-gay messages to its readers.  The frontrunner for the Tory nomination comes close to endorsing polygamy in one response to PinkNews' questions, however:

"You are implying that civil partnerships are not equal to marriage, they are just a sort of contract…
 
"No, no, no, no, no
 
"I am genuinely, I genuinely  - I come from a family, I have Muslim ancestry, my ancestors believed in polygamy and I believe in loving relationships between all sorts of people to be completely valid, I really do.

So you are advocating polygamy?
 
[Pause]

"I don't want to get myself into more trouble than I need to be. No, no, I think that ..
 
You might be better telling us what you think of civil partnerships?
 
"I am in favour of civil partnerships and I voted in favour of them.

"I was cycling up Shaftsbury Avenue the other day and there were two guys in a rickshaw who had just got married and they said, "Hey Boris we just got married" and it was wonderful. I congratulated them and all that..."

Read the full PinkNews report here.

Warwick Lightfoot: 'Naive' Boris has the wrong policy on Livingstone's too costly PFI schemes

Warwick Lightfoot is a candidate in the London Primary to select the Conservative Candidate for Mayor of London. He is an economist and was Special Adviser to the Chancellor of the Exchequer 1989-92.  He believes that Londoners have been "fleeced" by the PFI schemes and calls for London to receive a fairer share of national revenues so that it can afford direct investment in new infrastructure for London.

The Conservative Mayoral Primary and its hustings have shown the Greater London Conservative Party in a good light. We have shown that we are open to debate and argument and we know that as a party we have to address the concerns of everyone living in Greater London. Common themes have emerged about tackling crime, improving transport and getting greater value for money from the £10.7 billion spent through the Mayor of London’s budgets.

Clear blue water has also emerged in the hustings between Boris Johnson and me about how to finance the transport and other investment that Greater London needs. In my judgement the Private Finance Initiative (PFI) and the PPP arrangements that Gordon Brown used for the modernisation of the London Underground do not work. The private sector cannot take on the risks of such investment at a reasonable cost. Whereas the government can borrow and finance awkward risks more cheaply through the gilt market. Gordon Brown would never have allowed Scotland to be treated in the way that London has been treated in relation to the modernisation of the Tube.

In the long-run PFI increases the costs of investment. Taxpayers get fleeced and shareholders coin money. Our debate should be about getting London access to the taxes that it already pays, and not loading Greater London with higher borrowing bills that have to be paid for one way or another. London's investment is justified in economic and social terms. London generates the taxes needed to pay for this investment, but national governments have refused to give London its own money to pay for the investment it needs.

Boris Johnson offered the platitude that we should approach PFI in a non-ideological way and expressed the naïve hope that it could offer incentives for efficiency in investment. He also expressed concern that without the private finance initiative the taxpayer would have to finance London’s investment. There is nothing ideological about the present debate on PFI. It is a practical matter of the relative cost to the taxpayer in the long-run. The only ideologues on the issue are national politicians, like Gordon Brown, who construct convoluted financial rules that ensure that investment can only be carried out through PFI off-balance sheet schemes.

The Standard sends mixed messages to Boris' rivals

The Evening Standard is very critical of Boff, Borwick and Lightfoot in its leader today:

"It sounded like a good idea at the time: the Tory plans for an open, democratic, X-factor-style mayoral contest to determine who would run against Ken Livingstone. In fact, this exciting approach delivered a line-up of candidates who, whatever their personal merits, are woefully unimpressive as heavyweight politicians. It must be painful for the Tories to consider how quickly Ken Livingstone would have seen off any of the original candidates - Warwick Lightfoot, Victoria Borwick or Andrew Boff - had Boris Johnson not rescued the party at the 11th hour by stepping into the ring. It remains to be seen whether Boris can indeed pull off this election but the Tories mst be thankful that in the mayoral primaries at least, it's no contest."

But in introducing a Q&A with the three of them further on in the paper, City Hall Editor Ross Lydall says:

"The performances of Andrew Boff, Victoria Borwick and Warwick Lightfoot at hustings meetings have surprised many and left Tories with a real choice. All have long experience of London politics, in contrast to Mr Johnson, who despite his higher profile has been criticised for getting his facts wrong on subjects such as cyclist fatalities."

They were asked where they lived, if they'd taken cannabis, what the last CD they bought was etc. These were the most political questions:

What will be your first priority if elected Mayor?

AB - Remodelling the government of London to make it much more democratic. Ken Livingstone is an overcentralising Mayor

VB - I would ask the Met Commissioner what we are going to do about crime hot spots.

WL - Start with a zero-based budget to get value for moeny at City Hall and commission a plan for the investment in transport and flood defences for the next 40yrs.

What are your Tory credentials?

AB - I joined the party in Uxbridge  when I was 15. I was a councillor from 1982 to 1994, leader of Hillingdon council from 1990 to 1992 and Parliamentary candidate for Hornsey in 1992. I have been the Euro candidate in Greenwich, Lambeth, Southwark and Lewisham and I took a seat from Labour in Hackney in 2005.

VB - I joined in the Seventies. I have been a Kensignton & Chelsea councillor for six years. I worked at Central Office and was Steve Norris's running mate in 2000.

WL -  I joined when I was 15 or 16. I have been a Kensington & Chelsea councillor since 1986. I stood for Parliament in Liverpool Mossley Hill and South East Cornwall. I was special adviser to three Chancellors: Nigel Lawson, John Major and Norman Lamont.

What is your unique selling point?

AB - I can present Tory plans and policies in language that Londoners can understand.

VB - I'm a Londoner with very clear ideas about what needs to be done.

WL - I have the experience, expertise and skills to deliver an agenda of public service reform based on value for money.

Could Lurline be Boris' deputy?

It was a shame that Lurline Champagnie didn't make it through to the shortlist. After getting over her obvious disappointment she's been "backing Boris" quite actively, attending the Back Boris launch and Monday's hustings in a supportive role and now formally as an adviser to the campaign.

Tottenham Conservatives Chairman Justin Hinchcliffe claims to know for certain that she will be appointed to be Boris' Deputy Mayor if he is selected and elected. I've spoken to a campaign representative and Lurline herself, and both deny such a decision has already been made, however.

Lurline would be a sensible appointment. She's put a lot of thought into London issues and would of course help to assuage any lingering doubts about Boris' views on race in voters' minds. The other remaining candidates might be disappointed about missing out on this role if they did lose out to Boris.

I don't want to get into speculation about these things too much though, Boris may be the frontrunner but he's failing to impress at the moment...

Deputy Editor

The Ilford hustings

Andrew Boff supporter Graeme Archer offers a light-hearted account of last night's hustings in Ilford. Our report of the first hustings is here.  Another hustings has been added to the schedule (Sidcup Sports Centre, September 19th).

Hustings Round Two! Ilford here we come - but how to get there? Wrestle The Candidate to the ground over his plans to cycle there - rush hour traffic on the A12 not conducive to elegant arrival. Instead we drive (the horror!), but put the roof down on the way as a nod to environmentalism (I'm slightly woolly on the science of this). Since Candidate is practising his revamped speech, this gets us some odd looks from the passing van drivers. Suppose it does look bizarre to see a very animated driver gripping the wheel and declaiming to the air, sat next to a passenger so tired his head is lolling around like a pig's bladder on a stick. Arrive in Ilford about six hours early, due to my nerves over the heaviness of said traffic. Candidate reminds me, somewhat acidly, that Ilford is about 5 miles from Hackney so perhaps leaving mid-afternoon for a 7pm appointment was over-egging it a bit.

Multiple ballots

Like Shane Greer I know of a number of people who have received more than one ballot paper for the mayoral section, one of whom has received four! Apparently the forms don't even state that it is against the rules to vote more than once.

Has anyone else had this experience? Although a database error has presumably sent duplicates out at random it would be worrying for the legitimacy of the selection if it was a widespread occurence.

12.30pm (Sept 12th) clarification from a party spokesman:

"Rigorous systems are in place to recognise if someone has voted more than once and each voter will only have a single vote counted. There are instances when members may have received more than one ballot paper if they have been members in more than one place."

Anecdotal evidence suggests that the problem isn't just down to being a member in different places, but it's reassuring to know that the party can somehow filter out multiple votes anyway.

Deputy Editor

Victoria Borwick calls for intolerance of cannabis after Boris Johnson objects to heavy policing of the drug

In an interview for 18DoughtyStreet.com Boris Johnson said this about cannabis:

“I don't want the police wasting their time rifling though the sock draws of every student in London in the hope of finding a little rabbit dropping of cannabis. You know, I just think it’s a waste of their time. On the other hand I don't want a too great a tolerance of a drug taking culture, because I think that it’s profoundly bad. Because as you say it is a gateway drug.”

Such a statement will remind some of Brian Paddick's softly, softly approach to the policing of cannabis when he oversaw the Lambeth experiment.  Paddick may be the LibDems' mayoral candidate.  ConservativeHome readers will have an opportunity to put questions to Boris Johnson tomorrow and this may be an issue you may would like to raise with him.  On a previous occasion Boris Johnson had described himself as "illiberal" on cannabis.

Boris Johnson's remarks about cannabis brought this statement from Victoria Borwick:

"I believe we need clarity over law enforcement and over drugs laws. The Government has done great damage by downgrading the importance of cannabis and by giving the impression to young people that cannabis is legal.  It is not legal. As Mayor, I want the law enforced, without fear or favour.

I support the recommendation from the policy group chaired by Iain Duncan Smith - that cannabis should be reinstated as a Class B drug.  I also agree with the Breakthrough Britain report when it says: "The Government should be giving out a clear message that cannabis use is regarded as a serious matter - one that should be actively discouraged and certainly not seen as something that is rather a fruitless waste of police time."

Samuel Coates: The first Mayoral hustings

Last night was the first and most central hustings for the Conservative nomination. Chaired by former London Assembly leader Bob Neill MP, the candidates each started with a five minute speech:

Victoria Borwick told "the tale of two cities", not Dickens' comparison between London and Paris but a modern comparison between the crime rates of London and New York. Drawing on several statistics she explained that there had been an inverse correlation in recent years between the increasing rates of murder, rape and robbery in London and decreasing rates in New York. She said political correctness can cost lives and called for similar zero tolerance policing as that pioneered in the New York. This was a very polished performance with strong, clear tones and hand gestures.

Warwick Lightfoot started by saying that it was reform of the public services that was his main aim. He promised to cut any budget that the mayor had direct control over. Making much of his previous work as a senior SpAd at the Treasury and Department of Employment and his current work with social services as a councillor, he cited some surprising statistics about the level of unemployment in London compared to other parts of the country. He finished his assured speech by saying a fresh face was needed, without any baggage.

Andrew Boff sounded more like a "typical Londoner" than the others and had a rougher but engaging speaking style.  His main theme was of giving power to the people, "the Tory party is about liberation or it is about nothing", principally through a mechanism that allows large petitions to trigger city-wide referendums. Not many people would criticise the principle of that but he spent some time criticising those who would by pointing to examples of direct democracy abroad. After virtually shouting his pledge to scrap the congestion charge, he calmly finished by urging the audience to visit the buzzing community that is Broadway Market.

Boris Johnson began in his usual self-deprecating manner by saying that he was very pleased to be in Lambeth as it was one of the few parts of the country that he had not offended. He referred to "some sensible policies" from "his revered colleagues" who had spoken before him but barely went into any of his own in what was largely a five minute diagnosis of London's problems. He pledged to get rid of the bendy buses that wipe out cyclists and whilst admitting its relative triviality spoke for a bit too long about bike theft. Overrunning his time a little he spoke of a London grounded in "basic, old-fashioned, common-sensical values" with an internationalist flavour.  The theme of citizens standing up to anti-social behaviour didn't get a mention this time. Having a larger number of active supporters helped him get the occasional applause when he was at his best, i.e. being flamboyant with language or cracking a joke.

It was good to see the candidates talking to Londoners as much as to hardcore Tories (partly because the media were in attendance and non-members can vote in the open primary), a lot of the answers focused on helping those on the bottom rung and the issues that concern normal Londoners day to day. The Olympics was only mentioned once and only in passing, however.  As one of the biggest issues in London it must surely merit a discussion at the the next hustings.

The differences between their policy platforms are largely in emphasis rather than substance, there weren't any real disagreements at all so the Q&A was just a race to get the key points in first.  It would have been more interesting if someone like Lee Rotherham was in the mix to shake up the debate a bit.

All in all, I'd say the candidates were more or less on a par with each other. Boff and Borwick exceeded the expectations of some with solid, engaging performances. Lightfoot clearly demonstrated his knowledge and competency but I think lacks the necessary charisma. Johnson's performance was sub-potential, he needs to up his game. He looked a bit too disinterested at times and shied away from policy detail... but they're both things he can remedy.

Noon update: My scribbled notes of each candidates' main points in the Q&A have been added below, feel free to add any I might have missed in the comments...