Is Sadiq Khan The Right Man For The Job?

[thesshhh]

more Islamic terrorist attacks than ever on London since he has been mayor, and he's always insisting immigrants are always welcome in the capital. Is he really the right man for the job?

[THECORBYLOON]

You asked if UK citizens didn'the have enough layers of government already. For whatever reason, Londoners thought they needed another layer.

[New Judge]

“The real question is, why does London (or any major city) need a £150,000 mayor anyway, wasn't it a Tony Blair invention?”

Indeed Khandro. The very question I was going to ask had you not raised it. Mrs Thatcher went to great lengths to abolish the GLC and life went on quite well as before. (In fact some would argue it went on that much better because there was no longer three-way political strife between the Government, the GLC and London Boroughs). There is thus absolutely no need for a Mayor and assembly.

“There was a 1998 referendum in London asking if folk wanted a London assembly and a Mayor. The vote was 72% in favour.”

Indeed there was. I remember it as if it was only yesterday. One thing I also remember was that the referendum attracted a pathetically low turnout and now I’ve looked it up I see it was just 34%. Using some of our resident Remainers "four-fifths of five-eighths of F-all" that means a mayor and assembly was the choice of less than one in four Londoners.

As I recall, the emphasis was not on an assembly at all. Despite the question on the ballot paper the campaign focussed on “an elected mayor” and made comparisons with the then Mayor of New York, Rudolph Guiliani who made quite a difference to that city by his own personal philosophies and interventions. Politicians, of course, love councils, assemblies, parliaments, and the like. It gives them more strings to their bow so that when they (inevitably) get voted out of one forum they can swiftly stand for election in another. The more the merrier. The tragedy is that because of that it is unlikely in the extreme that London voters will ever again be asked whether they want an unnecessary mayor and assembly. In fact, even if they are asked and they happen to return the “wrong” answer, they will be ignored. Convolutions will follow to ensure that the gravy train will continue down the track, sucking in vast sums of taxpayers’ dosh as it goes, for very little benefit:

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/manchester-mayoral-election-candidates-2017-12521146

[THECORBYLOON]

Regardless of the emphasis, I'm sure the London voters were able to sort the wheat from the chaff when racing their conclusions.

[THECORBYLOON]

The auto correct on this 'phone is doing ma heid in!!!

[mikey4444]

Usual nonsense from the Usual Suspects !

He was voted in, democratically, which no one can gainsay. There are some people that will never get over that as well as being Labour, he is also black and Muslim.

[New Judge]

And just to be clear, Mikey, I have felt the same about the post of Mayor of London ever since its inception. So this covers the Livingstone era, the Johnson years and those of the current incumbent. It makes no difference to me what the political persuasion of the postholder is, nor am I interested in his colour, creed or nationality. It is an unnecessary post (as are most in any form of local government or devolved assemblies) and is an unwanted extravagance.

[Bazile]

Is SK the right man for the job ?
Is

[mikey4444]

That is your belief and you are entitled to hold it NJ.

My point is that as soon as the result was known of the Election, there were some people on here that just couldn't accept the result of the democratic procedure.

[New Judge]

"I'm sure the London voters were able to sort the wheat from the chaff when racing their conclusions."

Well in 1998 two thirds of them couldn't even be bothered to try. I'm not dismissing the validity of the result based on a low turnout. Those who didn't vote all had their reasons and if they wanted to see a particular outcome they should have got off their backsides. I seem to recall that at the time most people couldn't care less. Well now they are paying for their indifference and they won't have a chance to answer the question again.

[Bazile]

Is NF the right man for the job ?

Neither are going to stop terrorists

[mikey4444]

Baz....good point. We have had terrorist attacks for many years, under all sorts of different Mayors, so why would Khan be at fault ?

[ichkeria]

I think in the modern world, with cities becoming so powerful in relation to countries, it makes sense to have these mayoral posts.
The idea that London would not have such a leader actually to me seems strange.

[hereIam]

'Usual nonsense from the usual suspects' ! Why, because YOU don't agree with them mikey ??

[jim360]

On the subject of whether there should be a mayor at all, I rather wonder if it kind of follows on logically from the principles behind Brexit, taking back control and all that, to have more power and responsibility at a local level as opposed to centralised nationally.

Therefore I hate the idea of city mayors ...

No, but, seriously... doesn't it?

[vetuste_ennemi]

I though the point was that you don't need local councils and mayors.

[jim360]

Well, perhaps not.

Actually I do privately hope that maybe Brexit will give the UK an opportunity to sort out its democracy at all levels, because local governments are important but also basically a joke to a lot of people. But that's a pipe dream, I'm sure.

[mikey4444]

hereIam....no...its because I accept the result of the London Mayoral contest, of 2016.

[Islay]

He was voted in with a majority quite a large one if I remember so why not?
As for the suggestion that Farage become Mayor you have 2 hopes, Bob and No Hope and one of them is dead!!

[keyplus90]

He is a good fella and always listens to me.

[Bravehearted]

Sowing the seeds for Armageddon!. I'll say no more.