Just a query re. mayoral election/economy

Sapphire

Just wondered – were Sadiq Khan to be elected London mayor, what effect would that have on London's economy? Labour don't exactly have a good record for improving economies – quite the reverse, in fact. Given that the whole country is so reliant on the economy of London, would any fall in it have a massively detrimental effect on Britain?

I've voted for Zac. He is my local MP and from experience I've found him to be excellent, fair and dedicated. For me, he would be a stable influence, which is what I believe we need at the moment. :cool:

Masomnia

I'll be voting for Zac on Thursday. I don't think Kahn being elected will be *too* bad as I don't think he'll have the power to do too much damage, but I certainly think Zac will be better for London. I've met him and heard him speak and he seems very genuine and sensible.

Unfortunately I think Sadiq Kahn will win though.

michaels

Sadiq Khan has definitely managed to present himself as 'not a loon' - then again Londoner's voted fro Ken Livingstone so clearly being a loon is not a disqualifier.

I think the fares fee is misguided to say the least, the only option is either less transport investment or more transport costs paid for by general taxation. Few woudl argue that London has over invested in its transport infrastructure so instead it will be council tax payers reaching into their pockets to subsidise travel for others which is often regressive. Commuting from outside London Council tax area I am obviously quite happy if London council tax payers are paying more so I can have cheaper tube travel

chewmylegoff

The fact that the best candidates the main parties were able to serve up for what is a reasonably powerful position were goldsmith and khan simply underlines the awful standard of politicians in this country. I live about 2 miles outside London now so won't be voting but I'm not sure I would bother even if I could.

richdeniro

Wow people actually voting for Zac. It's hard to look at him and actually think the last time he used public transport in London.

Personally I couldn't vote for a multimillionaire who voted in favour of the disability cuts in the budget. Says a lot about his character.

Sapphire

richdeniro wrote: »

Wow people actually voting for Zac. It's hard to look at him and actually think the last time he used public transport in London.

Funny – my experience of Zac is at complete variance with yours. I believe he does use public transport. He has also had a regular job (as an editor of an environmental magazine), so he has worked in the so-called 'real' world, contrary to what those who wish to smear him would like to imply. He's also a very good, hard-working MP and his own man, and I happen to think he would make a very good mayor. The fact that he doesn't blow his own trumpet is to his credit, in my view – I prefer a mayor not to be a media personality in the way that Livingstone and Boris have been.

In any case, my query related to how a labour candidate would impact the economy of London and thereby the rest of Britain, given labour's record when it comes to the economy. I was not, in this case, intending to go into the background and sympathies of Sadiq Khan (or Zac).

I don't think Zac's looks have any bearing on when he used public transport in London (though in passing, I'd say he is not hard to look at by any means ).

cells

Zacs biggest problem is his soft weak voice in the last discussion I watched he was the biggest man in the group of 5 but had the quietest voice even more quiet and soft spoken than the women in the panel almost to the point you couldn't hear him.

He should bung a few quid to the sound tech in the studio to boost his mic or better yet take some speaking lessons.

HornetSaver

Well, the people of Hartlepool carried on voting a monkey into office until politicians got the message and abolished the position altogether.

I therefore say Londoners should write-in their favourite animals on the ballot paper, accept that things will stay more-or-less the same for four years, and then take it from there. Okay, it's a longshot. Although I suspect the Queen's Corgi for Mayor will garner similar odds to those for Leicester City for the 2016 Premier League title this time last year, and that wasn't such a bad punt was it?

Given Londoners' tendency to elect mayors who - for all their good qualities - are capable of offending large numbers of people the world over, I don't think my proposal is as big a risk as some will make out. Who is a well paid dog or suspiciously dry dolphin going to offend?

vivatifosi

London will carry on as usual and continue being a world leading city, nothing will change that. Ken Livingstone managed to both not wreck London and get re-elected. I would expect both candidates to manage at least the former.

vivatifosi

michaels wrote: »

Sadiq Khan has definitely managed to present himself as 'not a loon' - then again Londoner's voted fro Ken Livingstone so clearly being a loon is not a disqualifier.

I think the fares fee is misguided to say the least, the only option is either less transport investment or more transport costs paid for by general taxation. Few woudl argue that London has over invested in its transport infrastructure so instead it will be council tax payers reaching into their pockets to subsidise travel for others which is often regressive. Commuting from outside London Council tax area I am obviously quite happy if London council tax payers are paying more so I can have cheaper tube travel

I'm glad they invest in transport too. I don't think there's much of an alternative though. Look what happens in our neck of the wood... even short bus journeys are a couple of quid and journeys that cost that little in London cost £7 or more here. Consequently it becomes cheaper to run a car. Imagine London with more expensive public transport and consequently more cars:eek:. Not v pleasant.

Though the winners are definitely those on the fringe of the tube network yet living in Herts, Bucks, etc.

HornetSaver

vivatifosi wrote: »

Though the winners are definitely those on the fringe of the tube network yet living in Herts, Bucks, etc.

If you regard being able to get a seat on the tube in the morning (or standing room only on the first fast train) for many, many times the price of a tube journey from a London borough as being a winner, then yes.

If you regard buses off limits to the people of Hertfordshire destroying the roads (drive from London to the Arriva bus garage in north Watford and tell me that's an exaggeration) as winning, then yes.

If you regard the entire motorway and A-road network coming to a standstill every time a bunch of tube drivers decide that £49k per year isn't good enough as winning, then yes. And they decide that it isn't good enough on a regular basis, believe you me.

If you regard house prices rising 25% per year because a bloke whose only job is to develop infrastructure can't build the houses necessary for his city's labour market as winning, then yes, we're winning all right. And those winners who work in London but live in the home counties because they can't afford to live in London in the first place, well they're extra ******* lucky, because they're spared the burden of voting for someone else as well.