People don't get it

It is hardly suprising that according to YouGov, large swathes on London voters don't understand how the voting system for mayor and assembly works. Neither is it surprising that a great number of voters, including many I have met recently, don't realise that they will have up to four votes on three different ballot papers.

The Electoral Commisson has spent a great deal of effort and money running ads in all of the London newspapers and at bus stops reminding people that there is an election. I'm sure everyone knows there is an election on. I'm also sure most people don't really get how the preferential Alternative Vote system works.

Voters get two choices as I'm sure my readership knows. Of course, those voting for Ken or Johnson for Mayor only really get one. The second preferences only count for those voting for candidates finishing outside the top two after the first choices are counted. Only in the last decade has Britain moved away from plurality (First Past the Post) voting to more proportional voting systems for regional and European elections.

It probably doesn't matter that much that some people might not make a second preference as most will vote Labour or Tory. What does matter is much of the effort in explaining the voting system has been left to partisan door-to-door canvassers and party literature. How about using some of the broadcast slots reserved for party election broadcasts for a spot by the Electoral Commission to actually explain this in a neutral way?

Boris bus bunkem

Even the Evening Standard was forced to print Johnson's admission that his plan to replace bendy buses was a total mess. I can't believe how Tory editor Anne McElvoy managed to allow him to be dubbed "Blundering Boris", though it barely detracted from another edition of biased and unbalanced reporting of the race for Mayor.

I'm pleased the total lack of substance to Johnson's "flagship" transport "policy" has finally been exposed. I have been writing for weeks that this new fabled replacement to the bendy bus doesn't even exist on a drawing board, let alone on any streets.

Dave Hill gives a fantastic account of the spiralling costs of the pie in the sky costing of this policy. This includes last week's Newsnight debate where Paxman persistently asked Johnson to cost his policy, which he could not do. Last month Hill quoted one of my posts and asked that despite the fact I am ""Labour-focussed," but does that mean a lot of neutrals aren't thinking the same thing?" Good question. I think they are thinking that.

Now that all polls show both candidates neck and neck, the real challenge starts for Johnson to prove himself. As polling day nears it will be almost impossible for Lynton Crosby to keep him out of the news and this must be a good thing for Livingstone.

Integrity

The Gilligan - Johnson campaign has sought to taint Ken Livingstone and his team as lacking in probity and integrity. The constant drip of allegations has been unhelpful of course. Ken has been in power for eight years so it is much easier for the mud to leave a smear even if it doesn't stick than if he was enjoying his honeymoon period in office.

The Gilligan - Johnson team has constantly attacked Ken's aides like Lee Jasper and civil servants, Peter Hendy of TfL. Surely this should open Johnson up for questions about his own team. Hypocritcally, he has refused to say who they are. That isn't fair game, though politics has never been fair. Johnson will not say because he is protecting them and becuase his master, Lynton Crosby has been working hard to keep attention away from Johnson and on Livingstone. The less exposure Johnson has the less damage he can do.

Ken seeks a third term just has he is becoming more radical and has really grown into what was an unknown job in 2000. London needs his vision and ambition and it looks like he is finally coming into his own.

Johnson is "flakey" according to Michael White. I agree. He has made much of his "plan" to replace bendy buses with a new Routemaster. On LBC this morning he admitted that "The bus we are going to bring in is not yet on the drawing board,'' so why make a play of something you can't deliver?

Will the green agenda win?

How green London can be is one policy area the Mayor has real power to make a difference in. Ken Livingstone has already moved London towards becoming a "sustainable city 2020" and introducing the low emission zone and Congestion Charge. I have documented my support for this previously and it needs stating again because it is so vital.

In today's Guardian Society John Vidal appraises the leading candidates, quoting numerous 'greens' who variously support Livingstone. Anyone who cares about London and who cares about the envirnment should read it.

London currently leads world cities in tackling climate change. Boris Johnson would see this end. Tony Juniper of Friends of the Earth says that "(London) has emerged as a leader in the struggle to avoid catastrophic global warming. This is in large part down to the leadership of Ken Livingstone." Stephen Haile of the Green Alliance dubs Ken a "trailblazer (who) sets the standard for leadership and action matched by no one else in British politics."

This is fine praise. Coupled with progressive transport policies that will make a real difference to London, Ken really trumps it for those who can bothered to find out.

The Evening Standard's grossly biased coverage of the election makes it easy for Labour/Ken supporters to get pessimistic. I don't believe this is necessary and it certainly won't help get Ken re-elected. Thankfully The Ipsos Mori poll published today shows Ken in the lead, if only by 2% - though this is remarkably similar to last week's ICM poll. A significant number of Londoners are progressively minded and will back Ken. The Labour movement needs to keep reminding them why. A better environment and better transport are two great reasons.

Second preferences have it

Any form of opinion polling should be looked at with a careful eye. Whether by telephone or web, successful polls always need willing respondents and that will inevitably exclude some people. Nevertheless, Ken's campaign was still on risky territory by initially challenging the Evening Standard's YouGov polls, which showed at least a 10% lead for Johnson. This is based on the theory that many Labour voters are hard to reach.

YouGov didn't weight their results for the ethnicity of London or filter out those unlikely to vote, rendering their results unreliable. They did garner positive

Today's Guardian ICM poll puts Johnson one point ahead. Livingstone is far ahead among women, non-whites and those in inner London. The key to victory resides in getting Labour voters to actually vote. Closing the "Labour gap" between those who identify with the Party and actually vote.

Labour also badly needs the Lib Dem second preferences. My belief that most Lib Dems are inherently more right than left is borne out by the poll findings showing that Paddick supporters are more likely to give Johnson their second preferences than Ken. Having watch Paddick "perform" at the Evening Standard's Influentials debate on Monday I can understand why Lib Dems might like our Brian. He was wooden, as if being interviewed for a job. Most of his responses were taken straight from a management manual. When asked what book would guide him through mayoralty he said "I want to listen to London, not be guided by a book." Great. Thanks Brian. Unfortunately his supporters hold the key, but Ken's strategy of wooing them by bigging up his environmental credentials is exactly the right one for the sandal brigade.

Spin it all

This is too good not to share, politicos and PR people among us, is this really what we do? Of course not.

Are bendy buses really London's biggest problem?

If you only read Andrew Gilligan's column in the London Evening Standard you might think so. He quotes an October 2007 Daily Mirror article describing the horrible death of 21 year old Lee Beckwith in East London, after the young man was dragged for "more than a mile" by a number 25 bendy bus, without the driver realising.

Clearly the safety of bendy buses needs to be looked at properly, because nobody wants to see unnecessary harm caused, together with fare evasion on those routes. The fact remains though that Boris Johnson's much fabled new Routemaster doesn't exist. Bendy buses were introduced to high demand routes where double deckers are inaccessible and impractical because boarding takes too long.

I noted with interest a report to Swansea City Council by First Group about introducing bendy buses to the city (they are also used in Nottingham, Leeds and Manchester already, among others). Though conditions there were not thought to be comparible to London, it was noted that accidents involving the buses are "well below expectations when compared to the standard UK First Bus fleet." Worth noting. Perhaps we can learn from this in London? Or listen to it?

The most important transport issues facing London are capacity and affordability. Our network is over crowded, so we need more of it. Simple. Ken Livingstone has already got these projects agreed and underway for London, Crossrail, East London Line extension and has proposed further schemes like the Oxford Street Tram. Johnson has no new ideas of his own, which worries me. If he became Mayor , I doubt he would offer anything new or exciting, only projects he didn't devise or think of.

When offered a choice between two candidates, with the same policies, I'll be voting for the one who actually thought of them in the first place. Not the one who only has one, unworkable idea.

Ken versus Boris and Andrew

Taking transport and the so called "issue" of bendy buses in London, Andrew Gilligan has sought to attack Ken Livingstone's campaign in favour of his former paymaster Boris Johnson, yet again.

Despite the claims of Gilligan tonight that TfL's Peter Hendy acted politically in defending the use of these buses against Johnson's slurs, this wasn't the case. The "evidence" he presents shows Hendy defending the policy he enacted. That he names Johnson's campaign doesn't make a civil servant political, he was simply stating the case against someone who was criticising TfL policy. Civil servants are also meant to be anonymous traditionally, so Gilligan's article flouts that practice.

This is a red herring. Ken's transport policy for London is progressive, making travel affordable for those on low incomes and free for the young and old. Expanding the network by delivering Crossrail and better rail services will make London easier to get around for everyone. Contrast this with the Tory proposals. Replace bendy buses with an accessible Routemaster that doesn't exist. Scrap the £25 congestion charge for gas guzzlers. What effect will that have? The bendy buses will remain on the streets (where they are needed on crowded routes like the 38, 73 and 29), while the air will be more polluted. That is it. Progress versus regression.

The two visions laid out by the leading candidates for the Mayoralty are starkly different. One is ambitious, one is piecemeal at best. However, Ken's campaign needs to work hard to ensure this message gets through to voters. Johnson is being treated as a serious candidate because, with the help of his friends in the media and at Associated Newspapers, he is being seen as one, according to opinion polls.

This is going to be a hard fought campaign. For the first time since I was a pre-teen, the Tories are being treated seriously. However, the last time that happened, Labour had no record of delivery to speak of. Ken does and that gives him a position of strength.

Ken's campaign launch

I attended Ken Livingstone's campaign launch today at Royal Festival Hall. He set out his vision for London, one with better transport, lower crime, more youth provision, more affordable housing and less pollution. I was impressed, though not suprised.

Following my earlier post that Boris Johnson had no actual plan to replace bendy buses with these mystical new Routemasters, he admitted today that he really doesn't know how he plans to implement one of his best known "policies."

The choice for London is stark, ambition and progress versus stagnation and confusion.

How exactly is Boris Johnson proposing to bring back the Routemaster?

Boris Johnson keeps saying that he wants to bring to London a modern version of the Routemaster bus. Great. Only one small snag, how exactly? Where does this new bus exist and how much will it cost?

It doesn't. So nobody knows how much it will cost to research, design, build and buy. A mayoral term lasts four years, product development and licencing would take longer than that. So even if Boris managed to get a design approved it is unlikely that he would be able to replace bendy buses with a new Routemaster duting his term of office anyway.

If this is all he has to offer then London deserves more ambition than a vague and unresearched idea. It is nothing more than that.

"A spokeswoman for Johnson said the new Routemaster bus had not been designed yet it was not possible to say how many would be needed or what the total cost would be."

Boris commits to air-conditioning on tube

Boris Johnson has "pledged" to add air-conditioning to the sub-surface (District, Circle, Hammersmith & City and Metropolitan) lines on the tube. Great. Except that this is already happening as part of the PPP upgrade. Something new would be nice.

Livingstone's London cycle hire scheme

Just thought it worth pointing out that Ken Kivingstone's proposed bike hire scheme was not copied from Boris Johnson's. Mayorwatch quite rightly points out that Ken's scheme was proposed over a month before Boris was even selected as Tory candidate. There is nothing like incumbency. Ken was negotiating this in August.

Ken's London transport manifesto

Reading Boris Johnson's transport manifesto last week one could be forgiven for thinking that Crossrail and the East London Line extension weren't happening. He just seems obsessed with bendy bus soundbites. Ken's manifesto, out today, is full of ambition and progressive proposals for London.

There is a lot to get excited about in London over the next four years with the Olympics and new transport developments. On my way to watch Leyton Orient I go past the Olmypic site at it's Northern peak, by the A12 in Hackney Wick. The sheer scale of the development and the positive change it will bring to London hits you. The city will change immeasurably in the next four years.

I feel that none of the ambitious projects, Olympics, Crossrail and the East London Line Extension, would have happened under the Tories or if Johnson had been Mayor. There is obviously a great deal that could go wrong.

One part of Ken's transport manifesto that didn't get much pick up today was the plan to introduce a bicycle hire scheme, a mirror of the hugely successful one in Paris. Other new projects of note include extending Croydon Tramlink to Crystal Palace and the Oxford Street transit. Wresting control of London's railways is also being discussed. This would make a massive difference to South Londoners who don't get the benefit of the tube or Oyster pay as you go.

Progress versus posturing. That choice was made very clear today.

Jasper quits, what next for the Evening Standard?

Hopefully now that Lee Jasper has quit after the reporting of his embarrassing flirty emails yeaterday we can focus on policy in the run up to the election.

In the last couple of days there have been some good articles focusing on the issues vexing London at the moment. The Independent on Sunday's Gilligan interview, today's Guardian Livingstone interview, we have to remember that it is Ken versus Boris, not Ken versus Gilligan/Evening Standard.

Gilligan claims he isn't returning a favour to Boris Johnson for employing him at the Spectator after he lost his position at the BBC after the Hutton Enquiry. Dave Hill's "What if Boris wins?" reminded me that Johnson previously offered his support to the thankfully now jailed convicted fraudster Conrad Black.

More importantly for London, Boris has unveiled his transport manifesto. This includes "consulting" (read abolish) on the western part of the Congestion Charge zone and to get a no-strike deal with the tube unions. I can't see that happening and anyway, strikes have hardly been the scourge of the travelling public in London recently. There was no vision, no schemes to get excited about or to reduce carbon emissions.

Perhaps the only thing exicting about what Boris says is how he says it, not what he says. London needs more.

What else has Lee Jasper supposedly done?

Now the Daily Mail is accusing Lee Jasper of sending "sexually charged" messages to a woman in charge of an organisation in receipt of LDA money. This doesn't look great and takes the campaign onto a new level.

However, I'm more interested in the concept that many of the accusations against Jasper stem from alleged relationships, personal or political, that he may have with those in the ethnic minority community network. I don't think I'm missing the point, but isn't that exactly what you want in that sort of position? Surely the reason Jasper was appointed was precisely because he had such connections?

Oxford Street tram

I have just picked up that on Tuesday Ken Livingstone renewed his pledge to run a tram from Tottenham Court Road to Marble Arch along Oxford Street. Oxford Street is always blocked with buses and taxis despite all other traffic being banned. I always feel embarrassed that this is meant to be one of our flagship tourist destinations, rather it resembles a noisy and polluted shambles.

Getting rid of traffic will make the street more pleasant and show that London can really take on the challenges of climate change and of creating livable spaces - like the changes in Trafalgar Square from a few years ago.

Big up Ken. What vision has our Boris offered so far? Mayoralty should be about big projects and making people proud to live in their city. Look at the work of Bertrand Delanoë in Paris in bringing the Paris Plage and Rock en Seine or the transformation of Barcelona under Pasqual Maragall i Mira to see the pride and rebirth a forward thinking mayor prepared to face criticism from conservatives can do.

Conrad Black's appeal should fail - get the man in jail!

Does anyone remember the Canadian who renounced his nationality to become British and become a British peer? Conrad Black was recommended to become a Lord by then Tory Leader and current Shadow Foreign Secretary, William Hague.

Black was convicted of fraud last summer and has somehow dodged jail. His days of freedom seem numbered now though as his latest appeal against his conviction. The Press Association reports that:

"US prosecutors said an emergency request by lawyers for the 63-year-old former owner of the Daily Telegraph that he should remain free on bail pending the outcome of an appeal should be denied."

Get him behind bars like all other convicts.

Oh, I must thank Hague for giving us this wonderful man.

The campaign against Ken

It has been commented that I was wrong to state that the campaign against Ken Livingstone and Lee Jasper has singly been at the hands of the Evening Standard. It was cited that Channel 4's Dispatches aired an attack of Ken's powers. The programme argued that the Mayor has too much power. The summary states that Martin Bright:

"(investigates) the lack of checks and balances on the mayor which allows him to create and instigate costly and controversial policies, at public expense without wider scrutiny or approval."

Ken himself stated that if extra checks and balances were put in place, he would be happy. He also responded in more detail in Bright's New Statesman, setting out why he thinks he deserves to win in May. You may recall that part of Bright's programme sought to investigate whether a glass Ken had used contained any trace of alcohol. I really cannot take this seriously. Radio 4 reported on Dispatches and what others were "reporting."

Dave Hill reports on last night's Influentials Debate, where Ken gave a strong defence of his record and against Gilligan's attacks. Ken stated "what hasn't been produced is any evidence to sustain...the Evening Standard implying that Lee Jasper has been a beneficiary of this. That's what's outrageous." Without laying specific evidence and proof, Richard Barnes' "tide of corruption" claim does not stand up.

The Evening Standard and those campaigning for Boris want us to be caught up in these arguments rather than positively campaigning on Labour's undoubtedly progressive record in London. I'll finish with a short list:

• Congestion charge
• More social housing
• Free travel for the young and those on income support
• Plans for a sustainable city by 2020
• Improvements to buses

Lee Jasper, the media...

Yesterday's post that the police have stated that they cannot charge Lee Jasper with any offences seems to have caused a stir. There are two points here:

1. My main point from yesterday being that the Evening Standard had been all over the Lee Jasper story, but once something that didn't suit their line came out, almost nothing
2. Second being that commented on here yesterday by the "GLA Spokesperson" that nobody has actually presented the police with criminal allegations - they'd much rather mouth off to the press than have to offer substantive proof

I have no vested interest in Lee Jasper and I've no idea whether any of these allegations have any vestige of truth about them. My point is that the Tory media are hounding him and are using people like Richard Barnes to do their dirty work. As yet Barnes hasn't come forward and given whatever evidence he may have for making these allegations to the police.

Therefore, I find Libdemvoice's thoughts amusing, when they say my post was "Labour spin" about the police "clearing" Jasper of charges he hasn't been charged with. The challenge is actually to see whether Barnes will put up or shut up - and the Evening Standard will follow suit.

I'm not going to respond in detail to Sharon's charge sheet, these charges are not for me to answer. If the police cannot investigate because nobody has made any allegations to them, the same applies to the District Auditor, someone has to complain for there to be an investigation. My experience from Islington and the Standards Board's investigation into the appointment of Helen Bailey by the Lib Dems as Chief Executive of the council isn't a good one. Aside from the findings, it took three and a half years, lots of expense, while Bailey remained in post.

Lee Jasper to face no charges

The police have decided that Ken Livingstone's suspended race advisor Lee Jasper hasn't committed a criminal offence. The politically motivated campaign against Jasper and Livingstone by Associated Newspapers and the London Evening Standard has been brutal. Trawling thisislondon and dailymail.co.uk I see no mention of this. So far this "scandal" has only been written about by BBC, The Guardian and a couple of local papers.

I'm sure there will be a response from Gilligan and the Standard but as yet, they haven't published one. Not that surprising really when one considers this is hardly the news they will have wanted and likely to be exactly the news Livingstone expected when he asked the police to investigate.

There is a bit more buzz on the blogosphere. Laughably the "Battle for Britain" now claims the police are corrupt for convicting Nick Griffin on "lesser charges" than Jasper. Author Philip Bryant does describbe himself as a "nationalist nutter" though. Some more balanced and journalistic reoprting is found on Mayor Watch, while Lib Dem Voice thinks that Livingstone was possibly wrong to ask th epolice to investigate in the first place if there was nothing to answer for. I think that is a little naive considering the mealstrom that built up.

Next up for Jasper, complaints that despite his job being politically restricted, that he told The voice newspaper that he was backing Ken for Mayor. Does that count as campaigning? It shouldn't really surprise anyone that he would say this when he owes his position to his boss, Ken.