Skip to main content

Are you local?

Since our beloved Prime Minister chose to avoid going to the country in Autumn 2007, it does not seem hugely likely that he would call a general election in 2008. So, it seems likely that 2008 in British politics will be more interested in local elections than anything else. We have the interesting challenge of the London mayoral elections. This may yet prove to be a more open and interesting contest than it appears.

To be honest, the Conservatives, by choosing Boris Johnson, have essentially admitted that the game is up. Although the gaffe-prone and disorganised Henley MP- we are told- is also possessed of finely tuned media antennae, the same could be said of Charlie Caroli. In fact, as at the Ealing Southall by election, it is the weak judgement of David Cameron that fixed on Boris as pretty much the only figure prepared to take on Ken Livingstone. Boris Johnson can not win the London election.

Ken Livingstone, however, is increasingly embroiled in his own problems. The disgraceful "friendship" he struck up with the odious Hugo Chavez - the authoritarian ruler of benighted Venezuela- has asked questions about Mr. Livingstone's judgement, and quite frankly his probity. It is by no means certain that Mr. Livingstone, despite being able to shake off other recent criticism, has clear answers to what, prima facie, looks like foreign funding of his office, through the "Venezuela Information Office", funded by Chavez. If Mayor Ken proves unable to provide satisfactory explanations for the various movements of money, then he will face unrelenting pressure. Being a political "cheeky chappie" does not give license for corruption.

So, the media, this time, will certainly give more notice to the Lib Dem candidate, former police Chief, Brian Paddick. I have only met Mr.Paddick once, but was exceptionally impressed. He is not a politician, but he has presence and ideas. Doubtless the hostile press will emphasise what they see as his negatives: "gay cop" or "soft on drugs", but most people in London accept that the current drugs policies have not worked well, and that new and practical ideas are needed. As far as sexuality is concerned, in one of the most tolerant cities in the world, it is probably a plus. Brian Paddick is an informed and interesting candidate. In the face of the comedy act between Boris and Ken, I think Brian Paddick will do extremely well- London could certainly do with more of his can-do spirit.

As far as the broader local elections are concerned, the outlook is by no means clear. The Conservatives will be looking to make further gains, but they have gained so much in the last decade, that it may prove difficult to maintain forward momentum, which would prove pretty inconvenient from the point of view of the national electoral cycle. It may be hard to feel that the party is poised to take power were they to make minimal progress in real elections (whatever happens in the opinion polls). Of course the same applies to the Lib Dems, but in this case expectations are fairly low, so in the battle of exceeded expectations, there could be a slight advantage for them.

The Prime Minister argues that 2008 will be the key year for British politics. he may be right, but he may not even have that much time. If the perceptions on the locals are bad, the sense of inevitable doom may gather around his administration. yet if labour did unexpectedly well, the pressure could return to the Conservatives. The race remains tight. The Liberal democrats will then come under very strong scrutiny: in a hung Parliament, what would Nick Clegg do?

He had better have a very clear answer. For the Liberal Democrats, a hung parliament is as much a challenge is it is an opportunity. The political weather that decides the Lib Dem strategy is being formed now and over the next six months: the 2008 locals will be hugely important.

Comments

Anonymous said…
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

Popular posts from this blog

Waiting for the Barbarians

What are we waiting for, assembled in the forum? The barbarians are due here today. Why isn’t anything going on in the senate? Why are the senators sitting there without legislating? Because the barbarians are coming today. What’s the point of senators making laws now? Once the barbarians are here, they’ll do the legislating. Why did our emperor get up so early, and why is he sitting enthroned at the city’s main gate, in state, wearing the crown? Because the barbarians are coming today and the emperor’s waiting to receive their leader. He’s even got a scroll to give him, loaded with titles, with imposing names. Why have our two consuls and praetors come out today wearing their embroidered, their scarlet togas? Why have they put on bracelets with so many amethysts, rings sparkling with magnificent emeralds? Why are they carrying elegant canes beautifully worked in silver and gold? Because the barbarians are coming today and things like that dazzle the barbarians. Why don’t our distingui...

Liberal Democrats v Conservatives: the battle in the blogosphere

It is probably fair to say that the advent of Nick Clegg, the new leader of the Liberal Democrats, has not been greeted with unalloyed joy by our Conservative opponents. Indeed, it would hardly be wrong to say that the past few weeks has seen some "pretty robust" debate between Conservative and Liberal Democrat bloggers. Even the Queen Mum of blogging, the generally genial Iain Dale seems to have been featuring as many stories as he can to try to show Liberal Democrats in as poor a light as possible. Neither, to be fair, has the traffic been all one way: I have "fisked' Mr. Cameron's rather half-baked proposals on health, and attacked several of the Conservative positions that have emerged from the fog of their policy making process. Most Liberal Democrats have attacked the Conservatives probably with more vigour even than the distrusted, discredited Labour government. So what lies behind this sharper debate, this emerging war in the blogosphere? Partly- in my ...

Lib Dem v. Tory (Round 2)

The Liberal Democrats stand for a distinct political ideology. It is an ideology built around both socially and economically liberal precepts. In as far as our ruling Labour government can be said to have an ideology at all, it coincides with Liberalism only incidentally. Labour stands for pragmatism, and where it does not there is still a core of values that are collectivist and not individual. Sometimes people are prepared to claim the moral high ground for policies of social solidarity and redistribution of wealth. Liberals may argue in favour of equality of opportunity, we can not argue in favour- as Socialists do- of "and equal society". The reason is simple: Socialism does not work. If one places equality above freedom, then eventually we get tyranny. This is why, while we may argue in favour of a more equal society as being a stronger society, the tools that we may use to gain -in our view- socially desirable outcomes must rest upon freedom above all else. As PJ O'...