« Brown may rely on Conservatives to part-privatise the Royal Mail | Main | Annabel Goldie emphasises the need for a close working relationship between Holyrood and Westminster »


Has Alan Sugar expressed any interest in the role?

If so, is he planning to be an independent or look for a party's nomination, & if so which party?

I'd quite like to see Peter Jones out of Dragons' Den in charge, myself. :)

Not a great deal of difference between the figure for Sugar and for Ken! In any event, would Sir Alan want the hassle of doing it? I rather suspect not.

All elections in the next few years may well suffer the "Glenrothes" factor. How Brown's headmaster could have been so smoothly slipped in (!) is beyond me.

Who cares?

"We should shoot one banker a week until the others improve."

For the first time ever, I think I (almost) agree with Ken Livingstone. Certainly the directors, executive and non executive, who ran NR, RBS & HBOS into the ground should be pursued through the courts, both civil and criminal, as they would be if they had been trading an SME whilst insolvent. The same goes for the senior management and traders who were dishonest or covering false accounting.

Back to the London Mayor. Is Sir Alan Sugar really a Labour Party member?

"Has Alan Sugar expressed any interest in the role?

If so, is he planning to be an independent or look for a party's nomination, & if so which party?"

He has expressed interest in being the labour party candidate.

I don't think Sugar would do as well as people think. Part of his success would depend on the BBC continuing to show The Apprentice with him in the hot seat for the next three years. But if he were adopted as the Labour party candidate they would have to find someone else to star in it, and if this hypothetical star does as good as or a better job than Sugar then he'll look a joke in the public eye.

And if they don't replace him then either the popularity of the show has withered away by that point or its fans will be annoyed that his political posturing has taken their favourite programme off the airwaves. So I don't envisage a scenario where Alan Sugar could gain anything from such a move.

All rubbish except Jon Cruddas. Even though he's a lefty he does appear to be a principled man. Alan Sugar would never be able to cope with the abuse he would inevitably recieve.

Sugar is just the sort of rich bully boy I'm sure Labour would delight in having on board. Nasty piece of work, plus loads of dirt on him.

"Sugar is just the sort of rich bully boy I'm sure Labour would delight in having on board. Nasty piece of work, plus loads of dirt on him."

I should think if he stood, the staff at City Hall would be the first to encourage all their friends, family and everyone they knew to vote for Boris for fear of the spectre of "SrAlan" pointing his finger at them and barking "You're Fired"!

Alan Sugar has always come across to me as the Leader of the Alan Sugar Party.

Alan Sugar has a strong CV, a high profile and is - surprisingly - a Labour supporter. I think his problem lies in the way that Labour activists would view him, as his behaviour and back story are heavily at odds with their prejudices. I lived with a couple of left wingers in East London some years ago and they hated Sugar, often citing him as the unacceptable face of Thatcherite capitalism. The Labour troops certainly don't love him the way they love Livingstone - or the way ours love Boris.

Would a spoonful of Sugar help the medicine go down?

Sugar for Labour and Ken as an Indy coupled with the 1st/2nd preference system could make things really interesting.

This is a mouthwatering contest for the neutrals and political anoraks.....just think of the permutations?

If Ken finishes third would Ken's supporters give their 2nd preferences to the soft-centrist Tory or the Labour hardman?

If Alan finishes third, which way would his supporters jump?

Or what about Boris slumping to third, in which case that would favour Alan...presumably?!

2012 could be very interesting indeed. Stay tuned, folks........

Sugar has stated that he has always really been a labour man, due to his background.

Synical types note the amount of extraordinarily rich people who choose to be in the public eye and still wish to be regarded as having something of the common man about them.

......."I'm still Jenny from the block".

Oh comstock...comstock....time to take your medicine! This over-excitement will do you no good at all... ;-)

I think Ken Livingstone has run out of steam. He had his two terms but is now Yesterday's Man. He really should retire now with grace rather than be like some "comeback kids", former MP Tom Iremonger Ilford North springs to mind, who try to win back a former position but crash and burn at the attempt.

I don't believe Sugar would be particularly well liked as a candidate, which lets face it both Ken and Boris were in their different ways.

Not everyone likes celebrity candidates. What next?

Anyway, the Conservatives can win again in 2012 - Labour did in 2004 in mid-term.

"David 'Mastermind' Lammy"

Tim, you seem to be in fighting mood today. I like it.

Unless Boris screws up badly, and I wouldn't put it past him, he'll get in again.

Sugar? I can't see it, the guy would have to soften his edge a bit. Besides which he is exactly the sort of person who is over qualified for the job. We really should have politicians that are divorced from active business dealings whilst in power. I don't believe we would accept a clergyman as mayor of London. When did it become desirable for our politicians to be knee deep in the possibility of slush. |We certainly don't need amateurs running our nation.Isn't it crystal clear that our current political system is in deep need of root and branch reform. I am happy to wait a while longer for clarity from David Cameroon but I will not wait forever, what is it going to be a proper Conservative revolution or more of this trivial medocracy we currently insult by calling a democracy. Seems to me that D.C. Is going along with the civil service view regardless of its total lack of transparency. We don't have a very clear direction and we are way to deep in the fog of PC to talk straight with one another. We will have to have very wise deprogramming
materials aimed at dissuading people from the dangerous doctrines that Labour has forced on them which so far we have done little other than reinforce. If this is not quickly reversed the Pressure Cooker of PC may well simply fail catastrophically. I wonder how many people are really aware of how caustic the moral decline of this nation has been. Our Pensions have been spent, and our futures may be in debt, but we are all stakeholders in planet earth. Bring back Sunday, reduce our dependancy on the car, steep back track from the brink. Its in our hands.

If Alan Sugar stands for Mayor, he should be required to step down for managing any and all of his businesses. In addtion he should be forced to sell all his interests in anything that would benefit from his position as Mayor.

The fact that he has property interests to develop all over the city should singularly disqualify him from standing for mayor where he would be allowed to issue building permits to feather his nest.

Just stepping down would not be enough as his minions would then get approvals.

He is a hard man with no regard to his employees. He pushes them to bend the law or do anything possible in order to enter his good graces. (Evidence the Apprentice and the gruelling and silly tasks he puts people through) These tasks are designed to allow the ruthless to win and not the ethical.

I have no admiration for this man, his so called success, or his politics.

Let's hope Boris does a stunning job by 2012 that we would not have to hear the Sugar name again. Let's see which of the two will survive this downturn.

Sir Alan Sugar has done Government TV ads for DfCSF, DfIUS & LSC‏ promoting apprenticeships.org.uk. He is also doing apprenticeship roadshows in London (26 February), Leeds (4 March), Newcastle (12 March) & Birmingham (19 March) with the Rt. Hon. Ed Balls MP & the Rt. Hon. John Denham MP.

He might be a bit less authoritarian than Boris but I doubt it. I wonder if his first action upon being elected would be to ban something.

I think Alan Sugar would make a great mayor. He knows what it is to live in poverty. He has shown by the way he as built his wealth up from nothing that he is hard working and as the ruthless streak.
Alan Sugar is a family man who there as never been any sleazy stories about and for me he has sound principals and good ideals.
He may not want it but I think he would be better at it and give London a far better image than the buffon who is Mayor now who is incapable of even keeping the buses running!!

Why does everyone assume Boris is going to run again? If he makes a good fist of it might he not just quit while he's ahead? Things tend to go sour in the second term, would it not be better for him to leave others to run in 2012, thereby freeing himself up for a return to the Commons in 2014 (just in time to be appointed to Dave's second cabinet, perhaps?)

Oh Jack, Jack! Just as we thought your spelling was improving you spoil it all with "buffon"! Back to school for you I'm afraid.

All this about Alan Sugar....not always the success he would like to play himself out to be, thinks Gotden Brown is good at economic management and AMSTRAD for one produced some fine crap in its time.

Bring him on! Boris will make mince meat of him.

Eh? Is Gianluigi Buffon now mayor of London?

If he can manage that as well as his football commitments then fair play to him.

Labour aren't going to let Ken Livingstone run for Mayor again, not unless they're taken over by Trots again. Ken Livingstone wouldn't win again anyway, if he ran as an Independent he would come behind the Liberal Democrats probably now, Alan Sugar would almost certainly win standing against Boris Johnson, Ken Livingstone and whoever the Liberal Democrats deigned to put up.

I don't think anyone else in that above list would be a serious challenge to Boris Johnson. Alan Sugar would wipe the floor with any of those other names.

Comrade Livingstone’s response to people who complained that he acted like an elected dictator as London Mayor was to tell them to vote him out of office. They did, and he’s never stopped complaining. Unfortunately LBC has given Livingstone a Saturday morning ego show which he uses as an elaborate ‘soapbox’ to constantly criticise Boris in Livingstone’s quest for re-election in 2012. So it’s no surprise Livingstone is now giving newspaper interviews about his continuing political ambitions. A very telling sentence in that Evening Standard’s interview is: "What drives me is power."

And it’s no surprise that the Comrades – still reeling from Boris’ victory – must be looking for a candidate because part of the Left’s tactics are to harass opponents, and they need to start their political war of attrition against Boris.

Alan Sugar’s candidacy for the Comrades was mooted last summer – here’s a link to Jonathan Isaby’s blog in the Daily Telegraph of 23 June, 2008 ;):

And, I’m sure Steve Foley is quite right – the only party Sugar really supports is the Alan Sugar Party – viz. most of his company names feature his initials. It’s one thing to watch Sugar as the television ogre in “The Apprentice” using his charmless bullying tactics on hapless wannabes, but not the best plan to woo an electorate. Moreover, I wouldn’t imagine that most people [apart from Jack Stone, and “Yet Another Anon”] would vote for somebody with such an antiquated management style as mayor of London.

As for Livingstone’s comment about killing bankers – no surprise there – he’s got form in advocating the demise of those of whom he disapproves – viz. the Saudi Royal Family about whom he said: "I just long for the day I wake up and find that the Saudi royal family are swinging from lamp-posts."

Boris isn't worth having anyway. Who cares.

Someone has beaten me to it! I was going to suggest that Draper-Stone thinks an Italian goalkeeper is the Mayor of London.

"He might be a bit less authoritarian than Boris but I doubt it. I wonder if his first action upon being elected would be to ban something."

Boris is only authoritarian in the same way I am. In so much as I insist on things being done the right way. Sugar on the other hand is a typical successful business man, ruthless,callous and all to willing to walk all over those he considers his inferiors.
Give me the likes of Boris every time, over the type of cynical business man that Sugar most clearly is. Boris will win a 2nd term and then he will return to parliament a better wiser and more mature politician. Boris may have many detractors, the one thing all of them have in common is a real fear of conviction politics. Keep up the Good work Boris many of us love you.

I put Vince Cable in the 'other' category. Think about it - he is the one and only senior politician the Lib Dems have with any sort of public recognition. The Mayor of London is an office that is more about individual personalities than probably any other except the PM, in which it ought to be possible for an individual star in an otherwise indifferent or unpopular party to make an impact. Assuming the Lib Dems don't enter any sort of coalition government following the 2010 general election and if Cable himself is up for it, if I was a Lib Dem strategist I'd put him up in 2012 like a shot. Given that in three years' time, London is likely to be hurting very badly indeed from the recession/depression, bankers will be hate figures, that Cable has made a successful career out of banker-bashing and that he can play the 'I told you so' card while bulletproof, he seems a perfect fit. Added to which there may be a lot of resentment over the final bill for the Olympics, for which Labour and the Conservatives (games won on Livingstone's watch and persevered with on Johnson's) will be held equally culpable.

LOL at Leo Enticknap’s post recommending Vincent Cable as a 2012 candidate for Mayor of London! I cannot see how Cable’s “banker bashing” – to quote Leo Enticknap – constitutes any form of qualification. Indeed, if that’s what Leo Enticknap thinks is admirable, why isn’t he backing Livingstone who advocates shooting bankers?

As for the Lib Dem’s chances of winning the London Mayoralty – more LOL. They have never even managed to win one Assembly seat outright.

I speculated that they'd put him up, not that he would win.

"I cannot see how Cable’s “banker bashing” – to quote Leo Enticknap – constitutes any form of qualification."

It reflects public opinion and focuses it on a scapegoat, which is a well-known and sometimes successful election tactic. Furthermore, Cable has been publicly bashing bankers since long before it became fashionable (i.e. he was warning against reckless mortgage lending well before the Northern Rock collapse), which gives him credibility in continuing to do so now.

"Indeed, if that’s what Leo Enticknap thinks is admirable, why isn’t he backing Livingstone who advocates shooting bankers?"

Once again, I didn't state that I'd think it admirable, or that in this case that it would be successful; simply that it made logical sense for the LDs to try it.

I have no wish to see the LDs anywhere near any elected office. For one thing, their proposal to replace the council tax with a local income tax would leave me a lot worse off. The question in the survey invited me to speculate who would make a credible threat to Johnson in the 2012 election. Jill of London appears to have misunderstood this, and consequently to have failed to make the distinction between answering that question and wishing that threat to materialise, which I most certainly don't.

Leo Enticknap – whilst appreciating you think Cable could be a credible threat to Boris – on a theoretical level because you said you’ve “no wish to see the LDs anywhere near any elected office” – I am disagreeing with you.

Cable has been “banker bashing” for decades – dating back to the 1970s when he was a Labour councillor in Glasgow, and joined Gordon Brown in his “Little Red Book” in suggesting the nationalisation of Scottish banks – for ideological reasons.

Moreover, as I pointed out the Lib Dems haven’t even managed to win one Assembly seat outright, I cannot see Cable breaking their cycle of complete failure on the Mayoral candidate front.

Leo and Jill,

Cable has been on the television rather a lot since the banking crisis started - as a symptom of Labour's general economic mismanagement - and he has always been critical of them but the views he has expounded have been far from consistent. Now "Mail on Sunday" readers have to put up with him as well.

Hello Super Blue!

Yes, Cable has been backing into the limelight ever since he was joint assassin of Ming Campbell, and – despite that act of gross disloyalty – became his party’s ‘acting’ leader.

However, I would query how critical Cable has truly been of this current government’s economic mismanagement – after all he was their trailblazer for nationalising certain banks.

And – yes – Cable, and consistency rarely go together! Indeed, as an example of economic inconsistency, Financial Times journalist Sam Jones – in a piece headed “Vince Cable, loony” [!] – berates Cable for getting his facts wrong in a Guardian article about BARC – and for being inconsistent: “So apparently the LibDem Treasury spokesperson would rather the UK taxpayer was taking the risk here. Odd, because not so long ago, Cable was thundering on about the unbearable burden the taxpayer was being forced to bear.” Link: http://ftalphaville.ft.com/blog/2008/10/31/17684/vince-cable-loony/

The comments to this entry are closed.


ConHome on Twitter

    follow me on Twitter

    Conservative blogs

    Today's public spending saving

    New on other blogs

    • Receive our daily email
      Enter your details below:

    • Tracker 2
    • Extreme Tracker