Can anyone explain exactly what the fuss..

[HappydaysArehere]

Can anyone explain what Boris has done for London. The bus has not been an overall success but costs us Londoners a fortune., the bikes are no longer funded by Barclays perhaps because they are referred to as Boris bikes!! They have been the cause of deaths and I am more frightened of them than lorries and buses since I nearly had my lot as one disregarded a crossing and charged towards me. That river crossing is underused and has cost a fortune. The Olympics was gained by Ken Livingstons efforts but he is good at taking credit for other peoples work. He famously doesn't do detail and when at a loss for an answer he blubs, blubs away or throws in a Greek phrase or two. Is he really Prime Minister material? I hope the answer doesn't come when it's too late to realise that entertainment doesn't make for good government.

Opps ... amend 2nd para ..."I DIDN'T accuse him of being corrupt......"

I didn't say he controls the air wally

He's done sweet fuck all to take measures to tackle air pollution. Diesel buses, tackling the congestion etc. These are things he can do something about but hasn't.

We had the return of London smog which he conveniently blamed on volcanic ash. Er no the worst of it was from the cars driven on London streets.

Do you live in London isitme? Because if not then sorry but you haven't a clue.

It is the one thing that annoys me most. Boris never got my vote because he doesn't take his job seriously. At least Ken cared. Boris was parachuted in and treats this as a hobby.

Touché regarding dome. Perhaps not so expensive as an airport! Perhaps it boils down to my dislike of his serial womanising, his self seeking and his general sense of entitlement. Mmmmmm but perhaps I am being unkind!

Iggy ..... you insinuate that I'm a wally, but at the moment to me, you are sounding churlish at best; your exact words were "Boris has ushered in terrible pollution endangering the health of my children."

Please specify what he has done to INCREASE air pollution, on top of that of the million or so new citizens London probably has during Livingstones time, going about their daily lives?

The Congestion Charge was already in place, he is getting Cross Rail done to take more traffic off the roads, the new hybrid buses would have produced less shit that buses/engines from a 1947 Routemaster design, as complained about earlier he tried to encourage more Londoners onto bikes that would produce lower emissions if previously used cars - WHAT realistically could he have done on a Labour left piss-poor budget, to improve the air quality further?

How would Livingstone's £12 million satellite have reduced air pollution by 'watching' cars.

HappydaysArehere .... Re the Dome not as expensive as an airport, I realize you are more used to Labour governments saying they will control, part or nationalize 'stuff' whether the country is on the brink of needing an IMF bailout (when Labour last called them in in 1976) from bailouts on of uncompetitive industry - but an airport unlike the Dome is for millions of people a year for a generation, not for a big honking party on one specific night. And it depends how much of the total cost is paid for by the Private Sector.

But I get it, you would rather excuse and have back the totally incompetent government that over 13-years completely screwed up this nation by a 100-seat plus majority and policy DESIGN, than Conservatives who sorted Labour's shit out from 1979, handed Labour the fastest growing economy in 1997, for them in 2010 to be handed over even greater Labour shit, to pass over to Labour the strongest economy in the G7 by 2015 - its a myopic 'class thang', we'd rather be bust like Greece, than be governed by politicians with the real brains. Marvellous.

Isitmebut, this is fun. I am enjoying the banter. The thing is that my quarrel isn't with the Tories, with the reservation that they delivered Boris to London when Cameron wanted well rid, it is with the man himself.
I am at a loss to know which party I will eventually vote for. I will deliberate and cogitate at great length before placing a cross in a borough which only votes one way anyway.
By the way I can't believe that the extension of Heathrow or one of the other major airports wouldn't be a far more sensible proposition than the costly prospect of Boris Island.

Ps Cross Rail was on Livingston's watch, a project he promoted with great dedication. Boris had little choice but to condone the continuation of its development.

HappydaysArehere .... Re Crossrail, you are not wrong, it appears final plans were put together under Ken's watch, but it appears proposals have been put together since before John Wayne was a cowboy, several on a Tory watch.

Re Heathrow or wherever extensions, the question is, what is Heathrow's current capacity 95%, 98%, whatever, my point is building another runway destroying villages creates capacity for how long?

Whats wrong with getting ahead of the capacity bumping game for decades to come, creating land on an unused area and upset some wildlife instead?

This country creaks from Victorian infrastructure, if the Private Sector picks up most/all of the bill, improving travel links have to be some time, why not now, create real jobs and improve economic growth through such projects and new road links etc.

I reiterate we spent at least £170 bil of taxpayers money of fat Labour government/Quangos, with nothing to show for it but senior apparatchiks fat 6-figure salaries, their fat unfunded liability Public Sector final salaries and children having a private education.

It's a question of priorities and vision, me thinks.

I live in greater London but still groan under the huge council tax. The thought of more financial off loading to pay for huge undertakings that go on for years depresses me. There is always talk about private funding re the Olympics but we still had to pay. What about an airport in another part of the UK? Fed up with carrying the burden.

HappydaysArehere …… re the airport, there is not doubt we need to increase capacity asap, so there will be an expense anyway – and what price can we put on converting a redundant Heathrow into homes the size of a small Garden City.

Re Council Tax up over 110% in 13-years, at least ‘the few’ with non jobs, can thank the many including you, for ‘growf’ Labour style.
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1358144/Labours-3m-town-hall-jobs-bonanza-employed-deliver-frontline-services.html

And when this country could afford infrastructure like an airport, connecting the south with better links to and around the north, new nuclear power stations to stop UK power cuts in the next harsh winter, AND hundreds of thousands of new homes, we chose fat government instead.
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1214001/The-cost-quango-Britain-hits-170bn--seven-fold-rise-Labour-came-power.html

With a 2010 unbalanced economy, still a £100 bil a year budget deficit overspend (from £157 bil back then) and around £1.4 trillion National Debt, I can’t foresee a time that we will be nearly debt free and building new infrastructure will genuinely be called ‘affordable’.

And as I say not only can many projects annually increase GDP/output, if important infrastructure is not replaced when at/over capacity, it REDUCED our annual GDP/output – as just think, there are billions of people in Asia and South America earning more each year as their economies grow, so trade and tourism could increase massively in the decades ahead.

Excuse the bias of the link below, but it does confirm what I thought, at 98% capacity, Heathrow is bursting and we currently need the new capacity in the South – what is the point sending people/goods to our Midlands/North, if it has to come back south? Not to mention carbon footprints and all that hot air.
www.heathrowairport.com/about-us/company-news-and-information/airports-commission

Like it or not, Boris has the hair of a prairie hat (slang), but the brains to be a bit of a visionary and waiting to be over run by airtraffic demand, lose trade/tourists, and THEN spending over a decade rushing to fund/design and fix it (like our lack of nuclear power stations), is incompetent governance. IMO.

OP was on Sunday morning Stig Abell - of Sun and Spectator?
I guess he is of Conservative leaning and LBC IMHO is very pro Tories

Ps regarding cross rail. Proposals are not the same as the actuality of carrying them out. Also, the question I put forward was about Boris and his suitability for higher office based on his performance as mayor. We seemed to have got somewhat sidetracked by your obvious Tory agenda.

Re Boris in answer to you OP I began by saying that (after Ken Livingstone had enjoyed 8-years of government spending plenty) that it could have been 'a lot worse', and fully answered/countered most of your gripes against him - bar the personal ones, which does not have to affect his ability in a cabinet.

As to being 'political', was your last para not so, as there is not an opening for PM and anyhoo, one person does not form a government.
"Is he really Prime Minister material? I hope the answer doesn't come when it's too late to realise that entertainment doesn't make for good government."

As I have said here and another post or two, I am not overly a fan re Boris being an MP, and if I really wanted to be political I'd would NOT have said that "it could have been worse", I 'd have said that based on the performance of the Labour government with £££hundreds of billions, a 100 to 140 odd parliamentary seat majority to mould the UK exactly how they wanted - Boris probably has more ability in his little finger, than all the Miliband half-wits put together - and another Labour term of mayor of London, would have been a disaster for the city.

antimatter, LBC appears to be conducting an election campaign on behalf of the Tories and Boris. ( With the exception of James O'Brian who has consistently quoted his short comings while asking how he has managed to get away with it.). Nick Farrari bangs on as does other presenters. One morning several callers expressed their disapproval of the mayor. These calls were greeted with amazement and not repeated as calls often are to advertise their presenters. However, the "magic of Boris" uttered by one caller was repeated ad nauseum. I have always listened to LBC and found it informative but lately.......However, Ken Livingstone and David Mellor on a Saturday morning are interesting and entertaining. Despite their political differences they get on really well. Mellor has no qualms about speaking his mind about Cameron. The two come over with experience to back them up rather than agenda.
I didn't see Sunday morning. Wish I had although I dislike the Sun with an intense vehemence. I don't know Stig Abel!

Ps just realised who Stig Abel is. I believe I was half listening although Petrie is not a favourite as she appears to rant for the sake of ranting. I expect she thinks this encourages callers. I like Larry Lamb. Balanced discussions in a non confrontational manner.

Influential media with a political bias, go figure.

What if they don't PROMOTE a person, but hush up a government policy that will affect most people in the country re pressure on jobs, homes, and public services e.g. immigration - as THAT is what non Blair/Labour critics had to put up with for several years - welcome to our world

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2354713/BBC-chief-admits-We-deep-liberal-bias-migrants--changed.html

www.thecommentator.com/article/1953/exclusive_bbc_left_wing_political_bias_illustrated_through_uk_political_funding_revelations

He has done nothing to try and tackle the worsening pollution.

E.g. diesel cars and buses - he could have brought in measures earlier but it is being pushed back much later.

He's got money to spend, don't try and fool me with the whole labour left a piss poor budget rubbish. And it doesn't cost much to impose stricter controls on air quality.

Can't stand George Galloway, because he strikesme as a phoney, but I watched his Russia Today show today and Ken Livingstone was on. Galloway seemed to be falling for the Boris show, but I got the impression that Ken does not like Boris much.

Ken said that Boris is not really right wing and that Conservative voters will be disappointed if he ever becomes leader because he doesn't believe in stuff like Thatcher did, apart from promoting himself.

He said that Boris had done very little as Mayor apart from continue Ken's stuff but not invest in building homes for rent. Ken also said that people who don't know Boris like him, but that often those who have worked for him or with him have a different view of him. He mentioned Max Hastings, who was Boris's boss at one paper or journal, as an example.

Ken also said that if Boris had to stand up for 30 minute scrutiny in our PMQs (which, in my opinion, the luvvies are trying to neuter to help their side and to help their weak performers) then Conservatives would soon realise what a mistake they had made in choosing Boris.

Oh! What a tangled web we weave when once we embark on questions relating to politics! However OP better to engage in debate than to sit back and accept headlines in the Sun, etc. I have truly appreciated your input. Of course I agree and don't agree. I remain appreciative of Livingston's efforts while distrusting Boris. I agree that many mistakes were made by the Labour Party but the financial disaster that beset us was part of a world recession which drifted across the Atlantic in a form reminiscent of the Wall Street crash. We were gaining a little ground towards recovery before the Tories returned. Alastair Darling managed in a very difficult situation. This recovery is fragile and based too much on property speculation and ridiculous house prices. The amount we are owing is still growing as has been the amount the Tories have borrowed. Oh! Yes the Tories can borrow as well. However, Osborne has overall, done a reasonable job in a most difficult situation. Looking at the political scene at the moment, I am depressed. We need statesmen and I can't see them. Perhaps Osborne for Prime Minister! David Milliband had political experience which introduced him to the world stage and by all accounts was popular with those personal encounters; Hilary Clinton was one who appeared impressed. Then there is Theresa May but although she appears tough she has also messed a few things up. As you can see I am looking around the political spectrum, excluding Liberals as we need positivity. Kind regards OP

'We need statesmen and I can't see them'

I thought like you until I saw Farage!

Claig, I wish I had seen that show. Good old Ken. Tells it as it is! PMQs! What a laugh! Get ready for the Greek and sidelining jokes accompanied by lots of bbbbbb which gives him time to think.
Farage is impressive and a refreshing change. However, I keep looking for the younger element within his party. It worries me that the majority of party supporters seem elderly men. Am I right? In coalition we might have a chance to see what they are really made of. (Like the Liberals). Again, we need experience or we will all go down the pan. Also we would need to have a wider view of their policies other than detaching ourselves from Europe which becomes a better economic proposition by the day.

' It worries me that the majority of party supporters seem elderly men. Am I right?'

I don't know, but very possibly. However, they have got some good women candidates like Louise Bours, Diane James, Suzanne Evans etc

They are still growing and changing. The revolution has only just begun, the establishment is reeling. They've called Boris back to man the barricades. They know it's over, we know it's over, Isitmebut still doesn't know it's over.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2726672/Clegg-disgusting-Miliband-confusing-Cameron-just-frustrating-survey-voters-finds.html

This is Galloway's show with Ken Livingstone on it

Thanks for the link to the show. That was so interesting. It was reassuring that my opinion of Boris was being reiterated, especially relating to people who actually know him.

I have seen one of those UKip supporters on Question Time and thought she did well but I was searching for more of them. I will look the others up.
Agree with you about George Galloway. He is a very clever snake in the grass or so it seems to me. Thanks again.

HappydaysArehere ….re your post/points starting with the world recession, did you not realise that the FINANCIAL disaster, led to the ECONOMIC one and similar to the Wall Street crash in the late 1920’s, it is WHY we then had the worst recession since the Depression way back then?

Have you not seen the financial figures re the explosion in Bank lending/debt/consumption growth from 1997 that led to the financial crash in late 2007 or REALLY wondered why it happened – and why ONLY the UK’s banks were so badly affected, some had to be part or wholly natiuonalised?

Well let us remember, Brown in 1997 decided to take sole banking supervision away from the Bank of England and form the FSA (see below) with the policy of similar ‘lighter touch’ banking supervision as in America – and so sure that policy was correct, there are numerous news footage examples of Brown lecturing E.U. leaders TO DO THE SAME.

But don’t take my word for it, Gordon Brown has already confessed and apologised for it – did you not get the Labour Party/supporter memo?????

“Gordon Brown: I made ‘big mistake’ on banks before financial crisis”

metro.co.uk/2011/04/11/gordon-brown-i-made-big-mistake-on-banks-before-financial-crisis-650630/
“Gordon Brown has admitted making a ‘big mistake’ in regulating Britain’s banks before the country was plunged into recession by the 2008 financial crisis, as current chancellor
George Osborne prepares to hand power back to the Bank of England.”

“Labour's lax regulation of the City contributed to RBS collapse – watchdog”

www.theguardian.com/business/2011/dec/12/labour-regulations-city-rbs-collapse
“FSA says Labour leadership had encouraged it to take a 'light touch' on banks and must take share of blame for financial crisis”