Do you think Dave is gunning for Boris?

[limitedperiodonly]

First Teresa May wallops him for buying a dodgy water cannon and says she'll never allow it to be used on London streets, and today Dave makes a speech condemning money-laundering in London's property market, like as if it's the first time he's noticed it, even though it's been going on for years with Boris being very relaxed about it.

I'll swap you an Osborne Budget joke aimed at Boris, for your alluded Cameron vs Boris money laundering accusation, which opens up a different debate, the Cameron replacement 'contenders' firing opening shots at each other.

Firstly because it appears that the property purchases while mainly in London, are all over the country (and if wan't and London only targeted by the authorities, they would buy outside) - and secondly this policy for the Property Register to disclose companies holding property is part of a potential tax evasion/disclosure agenda Cameron supported/started a few years back, resulting in many countries signing a full tax disclosure agreement in 2017 and the rest in 2018 I believe.

And Osborne a while ago looked to ensure no companies escaped Stamp Duty because they were companies, which he raised and at one time, was looking to put a capital gains tax on overseas companies when selling - but I don't know it that went through and can't be arsed to check.

Boris's powerbase was as a one off Mayor of London, as a Conservative MP he is one of a few hundred, but he plays the long game, so no one should write him off yet.

But I wish Cameron would just stay and head all this potential internal bun fight, off at the pass.

No, nothing to do with Boris.

I think that before the election Dave was wary of taking on Boris because Boris was the most popular Conservative politician and had actually won an election outright.

Since the election, and Dave's slim majority, he feels emboldened and wants revenge.

I also think that in indicating that he won't serve as PM beyond this term, Dave has started a race much like Blair did.

I'm not a Conservative voter and dislike all the main players in this psychodrama. However, I don't blame Dave, Gideon and Theresa for putting the boot into Boris. How long must they have waited?

He strikes me as a dilettante who has been playing on borrowed time and has seriously misjudged this one. There have been recent stories about him mouthing off to a taxi driver and poor reception to him giving a piggy-back ride on his bike to his wife.

Six months ago the ride for his wife would have been laughed off.

I could definitely picture him riding aloft his rickety water cannon, perhaps playfully squirting photographers, at one of his hilarious press conferences before May shot him down.

Now I wonder whether he's going to be surcharged for the £200,000+ cost of this vanity project which the owners were going to send for scrap until he came along.

I read one Twitter comment that asked: 'How far away were you when the Germans saw you coming?'. He disabled the chat after a number of similar comments.

I also think May's dealings with Michael Gove showed that you mess with her at your peril.

'money-laundering in London's property market, like as if it's the first time he's noticed it, even though it's been going on for years'

This has nothing to do with Boris. Everybody and their dog knows what goes on

"London is now the global money-laundering centre for the drug trade, says crime expert

The City of London is the money-laundering centre of the world’s drug trade, according to an internationally acclaimed crime expert.

UK banks and financial services have ignored so-called “know your customer” rules designed to curb criminals’ abilities to launder the proceeds of crime, Roberto Saviano warned. Mr Saviano, author of the international bestseller Gomorrah, which exposed the workings of the Neapolitan crime organisation Camorra, said: “The British treat it as not their problem because there aren’t corpses on the street.”

His warning follows a National Crime Agency (NCA) threat assessment which stated: “We assess that hundreds of billions of US dollars of criminal money almost certainly continue to be laundered through UK banks, including their subsidiaries, each year.”

Last month, the NCA warned that despite the UK’s role in developing international standards to tackle money laundering, the continued extent of it amounts to a “strategic threat to the UK’s economy and reputation”. It added that the same money-laundering networks used by organised crime were being used by terrorists as well."

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/london-is-now-the-global-moneylaundering-centre-for-the-drug-trade-says-crime-expert-10366262.html

"London property boom built on dirty money

Billions of pounds of corruptly gained money has been laundered by criminals and foreign officials buying upmarket London properties through anonymous offshore front companies – making the city arguably the world capital of money laundering.

Some 36,342 properties in London have been bought through hidden companies in offshore havens and while a majority of those will have been kept secret for legitimate privacy purposes, vast numbers are thought to have been bought anonymously to hide stolen money."

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/london-property-boom-built-on-dirty-money-10083527.html

Boris has nothing to do with this. this is "modernisation", where you become a "global leader" and point the finger at others.

We're "global leaders" in offshore wind turbines and possbly rooftop ones too. You set the agenda and lecture others, it's "modernisation". No one can criticise you because you are the "global leader".

"The UK Has More Offshore Wind Turbines Than The Rest Of The World Combined — And Another £21 Billion Are Planned"

uk.businessinsider.com/uk-has-more-wind-turbines-than-the-rest-of-the-world-another-21bn-worth-coming-2014-11

Ending corruption is a laudable thing to do. Taking leadership of it is laudable. If anyone criticises London, they can be asked "who is the global leader" in fighting corruption?

Theresa May was right to overrule Boris on water cannons, but it is not Boris's fault. "Cameron's brain", Steve hilton, and the modernisers are all for 10,000 mayors etc and obviously these mayors will end up with their own fiefdoms which will challenge a national policy. This is a misguided policy but Boris didn't form that policy.

Blair is known for his "philanthropy". Everyone of the great and good is in a "charidee", possible drawing a large salary. Therefore, they can't be criticised. They're "global leaders".

limitedperiodonly ... The Mayor of London and Prime Minister will always lock horns to some extent, due to the mayors independent and specific rather large mandate to do whats right for London.

The Prime Minister and Chancellor rarely get on.

So based on whats gone on before and looking at what I'd say has been a RELATIVELY positive relationship between the three, I'm not quite sure what 'revenge' is needed.

The biggest job will be up for grabs, I hope you are wrong that like Blair, Cameron's declining power of patronage will affect his last few years ability to lead - and would point out Osborne was far happier to be number 2 than 'the clunking sulk' Brown - but they are all competitive and I'd guess Cameron will have his 'fav' to take his job.

But I don't think Cameron has any power to suggest/appoint, it will somehow be by party election so he'll have one vote of many.

As for UK banks and the huge money laundering through London and subsidiaries.

Firstly we have to remember that as London is the largest of the three main global centres nearly every bank in the world has a London Branch, there are fewer UK banks, they closed a lot of overseas offices, and you cannot just walk into a UK bank with cash, even several £thousand.

If someone dodgy sold an overseas property elsewhere they'd held for years and bought a London property, how could anyone tell if the original funds were from dodgy sources?

Furthermore London has a huge Fund Management industry here, so money laundering would be easier to come into London via that route.

So while I'll willing to concede London IS a money laundering centre, I can't see it being to overt/easy to trace/stop.

The Mayor of London and Prime Minister will always lock horns to some extent, due to the mayors independent and specific rather large mandate to do whats right for London.

Thank you for your explanation. I know a little bit about it, but it's kind of you to take he time.

The Mayoralty of London, as opposed to the Mayor of the City of London, is a relatively recent thing.

Metropolitan government was abolished in London and other major British cities in the 80s possibly because people had the cheek to vote for candidates who opposed the government of the day.

London now has a Mayor but the position is a joke. I am embarrassed by Johnson and appalled that my fellow Londoners want to vote for him.

I didn't vote for Ken Livingstone, who was an independent, either. But I have to say that he had far more coherent policies for London and Londoners.

Johnson doesn't have policies for anyone apart from what suits Boris Johnson on a particular day. I'd have more respect for him if he did even if I didn't agree with them.

When I compare London with other world cities, such as New York with leaders such as Guiliani, Bloomberg and now de Blasio I weep.

I respect New York, but it isn't the city that London is. The voters and the candidates are better than we are though.

What makes me smile though is the prospect of that tousled-haired fraudster getting stuffed.

limitedperiodonly ... Labour's 'Red Ken' as he was affectionally called in the old days was only independent as he wasn't co-operating with a Labour government.

A few of the last Livingstone policies/ideas I remember was thanks to his relationship with the dodgy dictators in South America he looked to get an oil deal for London with (if memory serves) President Chavez of Venezuela, and looking to fund a London Spy satellite to look down on us for some reason. Hmmm.

I'm sure Indy ken did good things when money was flowing, as did Boris when money was a tad tighter.

Like I said, I didn't vote for Ken Livingstone.

I agreed with his public transport policy - both in the GLC Fares Fair days and when he was London mayor. But there were other things, such as the Chavez deal and support for political groups I didn't agree with, that put me off.

I almost voted for Steve Norris, a Conservative, until he proposed to ban lorries from London during the day and send them in at night.

Good for car-driving commuters from Greater London but not so good for people like me who live in Central London and would presumably have to buy ear plugs to sleep at night.

Boris Johnson is a comedy character and an opportunist. Worse than Livingstone IMO, but that's my opinion.

I once voted out of desperation for Brian Paddick. I thought that at least he understood policing. He lost and then he showed off his arse in the shower on I'm A Celebrity, Get Me Out Of Here.

What kind of fool am I?

We don't have credible candidates for London Mayor and many voters want to vote for clowns.

I cringe at the idea that the face of London is a posh version of Fred Scuttle.

I also remember the chilling way Livingstone ousted the elected Labour leader of the GLC after about 24 hours. People think he's cuddly.

But then I suppose all successful politicians have a ruthless streak.

limitedperiodonly .... I was born and dragged up in London, but left decades ago, so I don't really follow Mayor elections any more.

IMO whoever is appointed mayor needs to check their party loyalties/ideology in at the door on their first day and be able to work with the government of the day (for the good of London) - and I'm not sure all candidates can.

Boris may/does come across as a buffoon but he isn't, he is very bright and was capable of putting a joined-up-thinking London Plan together.

Whether he did and how much he was 'big picture' constrained by much tighter finances I don't know, I can't be arsed to look for a list what he did achieve.

I'm sure that under Labour when Council Taxes went up in some S.East areas up to 125% over 13-years, there were superficial feelings of good local government, as the cash was splashed, but come 2008 as real earnings fell, similar annual rises were not possible by responsible governance.

You don't appear to list policies to create businesses/growth/jobs/transport/homes in London, which to me would always be the starting point when deciding to elect a Mayor, as other 'nice' policies can be bolted on to that - whereas if those basic policies are not in place, as an example London might be quiet - but thats because fewer are going to work, travelling or building anything.

I was born and dragged up in London, but left decades ago, so I don't really follow Mayor elections any more.

Oh. I live here. I do.

Well, I suppose Dave would like Ossy Osborne to take over leadership of the Tory Party. And Boris does rock Daves boat