Loading summary
Transcript27 lines
- [00:00]
A
Hello and welcome to Hot Seat. I'm Martin Rogers and I'm here with Professor Tony Trevors to discuss the upcoming London mayoral election. Is this a two horse race and what role have the smaller parties got to play?
- [00:12]
B
It's certainly turned into a two horse race. It's worth remembering that when the Greater London Authority was first created, it was thought that these races first certainly for the assembly, but also for the Mayor, would allow much more participation by smaller parties. And that with the supplementary vote for the Mayor and the additional member system for the assembly, it would allow greater plurality in voting. What's actually happened is that the mayoral race has turned into a two horse race and that's indirectly fed through to the assembly where it seems to have squeezed the votes for the smaller parties and certainly for the Lib Dems in recent years.
- [00:53]
A
You see that continuing going forward or are the two personalities of the candidates enforcing the two horse race nature of it?
- [01:03]
B
I think there's no doubt that Boris Johnson and Ken Livingstone are absolutely and definitively the kind of politicians who further exaggerate the two horse race nature of what's going on. They are highly visible celebrity candidates and they represent the Labour Party, the Conservative Party. And so it pushes even further into that space of the two horse race. But also I think almost produces a forced choice. Do you want this or definitely want that? And so I think yes, they do. These particular candidates make it even more the two horse type of contest.
- [01:40]
A
In addition to those two, we also have Brian Paddock who is again standing again. What impact has, has the same candidate standing over and again had on this election?
- [01:52]
B
I think the electorate probably will think it's a bit odd, no evidence about this, but I think having all three major parties with the same candidate this time as in 2008 looks as if somehow the political parties can't think afresh, can't be creative. Now that should give an opportunity for the Greens. Jenny Jones is a well known Green politician in London. I think she'll be looking for the protest vote. And beyond that there's an independent who has been definitely trying to make waves, who's trying to get more prominence in the election because it is very difficult for other than the major candidates, frankly the top two to get any prominence in the race.
- [02:35]
A
Is this election important? Why?
- [02:39]
B
There's no question that the Mayor of London race, which is only one of a number of local elections or local type elections going on this year, there are others in the rest of much of the rest of England and in Wales and Scotland, but there's no doubt that because of its London's enormous importance and the visibility of the contest between the major party candidates, and because it's Ken Livingston, Boris Johnson, it just sort of means the media can't avoid giving it an enormous amount of attention. So I think it will be the leading feature of this year's local elections. But it's worth remembering there will be referendums on whether or not to introduce mayors in other big cities, such as Manchester, Leeds, Birmingham, Bristol and so on. Liverpool's already decided to have one under the existing powers the City Council has. So it will be interesting, I think, beyond London this year, because other cities will also be voting on whether or not to move towards holding an election for a mayor, which, if they vote yes, would take place in November.
- [03:41]
A
Is London a Labour city surrounded by Conservative suburbs?
- [03:45]
B
There's no doubt that when the current Greater London area was delineated by a Conservative government in the 1960s, part of the reason for pulling the boundaries out from the old London County Council area was to bring in suburban, often Conservative voting areas to make London more likely from time to time to vote Conservative. And indeed it has been plural ever since. Some of the time it votes for Labour, some Conservative. Now in the last few years, since 1997, there is some evidence that London has shifted somewhat towards being more a Labour city. So the Labour Party does slightly better in general elections now in London than nationally, and the Conservatives a little bit less well. But even despite that, it's still plural. So the Conservatives can still win when they have a good year.
- [04:35]
A
How much can the mayor really do? How much power sits within the hands of that office?
- [04:41]
B
There's no doubt that London politics, like all big city politics, stands slightly separate from mainstream, what you call it, Middle England or Middle Britain politics. So I think to be mayor of London, you have to show yourself independent of your own party and so on. Some issues have a stance that's well away from the centre of gravity of, say, for Boris Johnson, the Conservative Party. So I think that whilst it's impossible for either a Labourer or a Conservative mayoral candidate entirely to escape the fortunes of their own party, they have also to be seen to be independent themselves and strike out. So getting the best things of being Labour or Conservative, but avoiding the things that would damage you in London, how.
- [05:28]
A
Much power is within the mayor's hands? So within the austerity financial situation we have nationally, how much power does the mayor have to set priorities, spend money, etc.
- [05:45]
B
In normal academic parlance about mayoral government, I mean, the London Mayor is a strong mayor version of a mayor, but in a relatively weak upper tier London government system. So the mayor does not have control, for example, over most of the resources that London spends, nor indeed over Social Security and other aspects of what would be thought to be the issues and the policies that can direct the way London develops over time. So I think in the end the mayor is heavily dependent on central government policy, certainly in terms of the competitiveness of London compared with other cities and other countries in the world. And you can see this very clearly with the reform of the benefits system, which has enormous impacts in London, even though it's a national policy and actually in reality has much less effect in the rest of the uk. But the mayor can't stop that.
- [06:42]
A
There's a lot of talk amongst the candidates between the candidates from the candidates about the cost of living and how they will be able to improve the situation through sometimes quite traditional stances. So Boris Johnson is going to be putting himself forward to cutting taxes, keeping them low. Livingstone is planning to spend lots of money. Will the the promise to keep fares down significantly be detrimental to London in the longer term?
- [07:21]
B
There's no question that Ken Livingstone is offering a popular policy with a lower fare offer. I mean, he will be cutting fares if he wins in October. And Boris Johnson has countered that with a commitment to cut the council tax. Not as visible, but nevertheless in the same. And it does suggest that both candidates think that people are worried about their domestic and personal finances and need help. The Livingstone policy of cutting fares is interesting because it puts him in the position of effectively being a sort of low tax politician and reducing public spending because a pound spent on cutting fares can't then be used for investment. And there's no doubt that the London Tube and other public transport system does need investment. But this is a political judgment. I mean, he's judging that people want money in their pockets more than they want it spent on paint and tiles in Tube stations. That's a legitimate political decision to make, even though some people would argue that the money would be better spent on investment for the long term.
- [08:24]
A
Will lower fares stop projects like Crossrail and the London Overground that's taken over from the East London line?
- [08:33]
B
I think things like Crossrail and the Tube upgrades have got large chunks of money, mostly from government grants which are ring fenced and broadly protected. But at the margin, if there are lower taxes and lower fares, there is less money for the GLA and for transport for London as one of its bodies to spend. And so we would end up with slightly less public expenditure, which I think would particularly be seen on the underground, where there is undoubtedly a need for investment, massive investment all the time. So it's a marginal impact, but I don't think it would get in the way of big projects. It would sort of slightly slow down spending on some of the smaller items, which are nevertheless important.
- [09:16]
A
And who's going to win?
- [09:18]
B
I'm always cautious about calling elections, predicting elections before they take place, but frankly, even if I normally did, I do think this one looks very close. I mean, Boris Johnson has the capacity to outperform the Conservative Party. Ken Livingstone is a doughty fighter who's been around for a very long time. Both of them very well known. The polls have moved backwards and forwards. Johnson was ahead then, Livingstone was ahead, now Johnson's ahead. I suspect it will go on moving around. It'll be a close fight. But what you can say is that if Johnson doesn't win, it's not good for David Cameron and if Livingstone doesn't win, it's certainly not good for Ed Miliband.
- [10:01]
A
Are there wider national issues coming from this? When you bring up Cameron, Miliband, national picture, how much of a blow would it be to the leaders or a spur for them if their candidate wins?
- [10:17]
B
Well, I think from David Cameron's point of view, if Boris Johnson wins, it's good. It's not quite as bad for him. If Johnson loses because it is midterm, he'll say, well, these things happen to governments in midterm. But the other thing about this, as far as Cameron's concerned, is that Johnson wins keeps him out of Parliament. And there are those who think that in the longer term, Boris Johnson has aspirations at higher jobs in national politics, and there's that as well. As far as Livingstone and Miliband are concerned, I think if Livingstone doesn't win, it is problematic for Miliband because it is midterm. And Labour ought to be doing really well in local elections, including this one. London is sometimes seen as a Labour city, so Livingstone ought to win. If he doesn't, I think it would add to the narrative that Ed Miliband has difficulties and so it would be probably more problematic for him if Livingstone loses than it would be for Cameron if Johnson loses.
- [11:18]
A
What are the prospects for the future past this election? Johnson, if he wins, will have a second term. Is he likely to stand for a third if he wins? If Johnson wins, will Livingstone stand again? Where are the two parties likely to go for future candidates?
- [11:40]
B
I think if Johnson wins this time, 2012 he almost certainly wouldn't stand again in 2016. I think if Livingstone wins, then it will be tempting for him to stand again in 2016. If he doesn't win, who knows? Labour might well win in 2016. Whatever happens this year, be very tempting for Ken to try again because I think he believes he does this job better than anybody else. So I wouldn't rule out Ken for 2016, whatever happens this time. Beyond that, I think that both parties and the Liberal Democrats need to start to find a way of nurturing potential new candidates so they can bring them forward to stand in this election, so that they have a route to this kind of office, which it would appear they've all found difficult so far. I mean, Labour's effectively run with. Well, they've certainly run with Livingstone twice, nearly three times. The Conservatives run with Steve Norris twice, Boris Johnson now twice. And the Lib Dems have run with Brian Paddock this time and last time. And I think that that means all the parties need to find a way of bringing forward candidates, allowing them to have more choice and more attractive candidates in the long term in this kind of race.
- [12:56]
A
What sort of candidates are they likely to.
- [12:59]
B
I think the evidence is they probably need to be somebody with political experience. They need to be somebody who is reasonably attractive and well known to the public. I think it is possible an outsider could make it, but it's more likely to be somebody with a bit of name recognition, but also somebody who can convince the London electorate that they care about the things that the London electorate does. Bit more liberal on social issues than perhaps the UK norm, but still quite tough on crime and sort of law and order issues as well.
- [13:32]
A
Thank you, Professor Trevors. You're off the hot seat.