No, gromit, your pr�cis is incongruous.
The �politics of envy� passage referred to the preceding remarks, not those that followed it. Sorry if I misled, but I thought it was quite clear.
jno, the inconvenient truth you refer to is as follows:
In the 1998 referendum to establish a London Assembly and mayor 34% of the electorate turned out and 72% of those voted in favour. So less than 1 in 4 of the electorate voted for a mayor and an assembly.
In the last mayoral election (2004) the turnout was 37%. Of those, 38% voted for Livingstone as their first choice whilst 62% voted for somebody else. So about 14% of the electorate voted for Livingstone as Mayor. And that was on the back of a manifesto that mentioned nothing about a "pollution charge".
Let�s hope that among the 63% who thought all this didn�t matter and couldn�t be bothered to vote are some of the people who are now moaning about the Mayor�s policies. They might just be persuaded to get of their backsides and cast their vote.
I doubt it very much and to be fair the alternatives on offer do not look too attractive.