For those not following the London Mayoral election the Liberal Democrats
are in the process of selecting their candidate. Applications closed
yesterday (June 17) and following interviews & appeals the shortlist will be
formally announced on July 12, with a postal ballot declared on August 12.

However three main candidates are already emerging:

* Lembit Öpik - former MP for Montgomeryshire and ex Lib Dem spokesperson
for various portfolios including Wales, Northern Ireland, Housing, Education
and Business. Best known for supporting unusual causes such as asteroid
deflection shields and making it easier to use Segways, for a high media
profile and a high profile personal life. Website:
http://www.lembit4london.co.uk/

* Brian Paddick - 2008 candidate, former member of the Metropolitan Police
who finished up as Deputy Assistant Commissioner. Achieved notoriety whilst
Borough Commander (or whatever the post formally is) of Lambeth (2000-2002)
for his approach to cannabis. He has been a very late surprise entry into
the race this time round. I haven't seen if he has a website live yet.

* Mike Tuffrey - sitting London Assembly Member (list), Lib Dem group leader
2006-2010, also former leader of Lambeth Borough Council (1994-1998) and one
of the joint last ever members elected to the Greater London Council.
Website: http://miketuffrey.com/

Amongst the transport policies, Öpik is pledging a 24 hour tube. Whenever
anybody questions the viability of this online his campaign manager insists
that it just requires political will to be done and New Year's Eve shows
that it can happen. Tuffrey is pleding express buses at peak hours and more
orbital routes, as well as raising extra funding through a municipal bond
scheme and switching to green energy.

I won't vote for any Liberal Democrat candidate and I wouldn't vote for Brian Paddick even if he weren't a Liberal Democrat.

Mr. Tuffey's advocacy of express buses is interesting - at least to me - because I have long thought that the massive expansion of bus services in the outer suburbs in recent years has been misconceived. Far more relevant to the transport requirements of most Londoners would be express buses.

Travelling by bus in London is slow and frustrating, partly because our road system has been sabotaged, partly because buses are large and clumsy and partly because buses have to stop so frequently. On judiciously selected routes, express buses could for many people be a huge improvement over normal buses.

Mr. Tuffey's idea about municipal bonds frightens me. This is a recipe for bankruptcy. Issuing bonds is a just another way of going into debt.

On Sun, 19 Jun 2011, Robin9 wrote:

I won't vote for any Liberal Democrat candidate and I wouldn't vote for
Brian Paddick even if he weren't a Liberal Democrat.

Might i ask, at the risk of going firmly OT, what your objection to
Paddick is?

Tuffey's advocacy of express buses is interesting - at least to me -
because I have long thought that the massive expansion of bus services
in the outer suburbs in recent years has been misconceived. Far more
relevant to the transport requirements of most Londoners would be
express buses.

Travelling by bus in London is slow and frustrating, partly because the
roads have been sabotaged, partly because buses are large and clumsy and
partly because buses have to stop so frequently. On judicially selected
routes, express buses could be a huge improvement over normal buses.

I hope the selection won't be judicial. Judicious, perhaps, but i'd rather
it was made by transport planners than judges!

It would definitely be interesting, though. The outer suburbs are the
areas where car use is highest, but also perhaps where it is least
problematic - there are more roads and fewer people.

Anyway, in inner or outer suburbs, where are these buses going to go? Into
town, like the existing railway lines? Or to local centres? His site:

http://miketuffrey.com/mike-tuffrey-...lan/transport/

merely says "Run express bus routes at peak commuter times, to speed
people to work, and more orbital routes round London to relieve pressure".

Mr. Tuffey's idea about municipal bonds frightens me. This is a recipe
for bankruptcy. Issuing bonds is a just another way of going into debt.

Presumably, the GLA already has ways of getting into debt - can it borrow
from banks? Might bonds be preferable to that? Or would they be used in
addition to, rather than instead of, loans?

tom

--
Don't believe his lies.

I've never liked the man. I first heard about him when was a senior police officer in Lambeth. He was in the news quite a lot and I got the impression that this was by design. He got a lot of publicity by adopting a tolerant policy towards the drugs trade and he was not averse to being interviewed about this on the radio.

Later he resigned from the police force and again secured masses of publicity. He was soon announced as the Liberal Democrat candidate for the Mayoral election. His campaign seemed to consist mainly of making some rather obvious snide remarks about the other two parties. He had nothing new or constructive to say about the two big issues the Mayor Of London has the means to tackle: housing and transport. I sensed that the main reason he wanted to be Mayor was to be able to settle an old score with Ian Blair.

All in all I formed the opinion that Brian Paddick was a publicity-seeking, self-serving weasel.

Re judicial instead of judicious: Touche! A sloppy mistake, the result of posting hurriedly.

On 21/06/2011 21:59, Robin9 wrote:

I've never liked the man. I first heard about him when was a senior
police officer in Lambeth. He was in the news quite a lot and I got the
impression that this was by design. He got a lot of publicity by
adopting a tolerant policy towards the drugs trade and he was not averse
to being interviewed about this on the radio.

Later he resigned from the police force and again secured masses of
publicity. He was soon announced as the Liberal Democrat candidate for
the Mayoral election. His campaign seemed to consist mainly of making
some rather obvious snide remarks about the other two parties. He had
nothing new or constructive to say about the two big issues the Mayor Of
London has the means to tackle: housing and transport. I sensed that the
main reason he wanted to be Mayor was to be able to settle an old score
with Ian Blair.

All in all I formed the opinion that Brian Paddick was a
publicity-seeking, self-serving weasel.

So what we need is a politician who doesn't want publicity, campaigns on
something other than "well at least I'm not him --", has real answers
to complex and long-standing problems, has no grudges, and is not a
self-serving weasel.

Could such a person actually exist on a non-trivial stage in a modern
popular democracy?

--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

On Tue, 21 Jun 2011 22:58:21 +0100
Arthur Figgis wrote:
Could such a person actually exist on a non-trivial stage in a modern
popular democracy?

Probably not. Most of the public are dumb - they don't listen to the arguments
on both sides and weigh up the options, they just go with who they like or
whoever "feels" right. Whatever the hell that means. You could have the worlds
greatest economic genius , guaranteed to sort out the economy , but if he
had a dull personality he'd almost certainly lose against a cheap showman like
Blair or a talking head on a stick like Cameron.

B2003

What we need is a public-minded individual who recognises that publicity is useful but is not an end it itself, and who has analysed both the issues facing London and what powers the Mayor really has and who has consequently worked out what issues the Mayor should concentrate on.

Does such a paragon exist? Of course. We have innumerable good, conscientious people in this country. Unfortunately, because they are good and conscientious, they will never be adopted by the established political parties whose members want candidates who share their own mean-spirited prejudices and priorities.

What we do not want is a self-serving professional politician who went into politics with no intention of working to make life better for the people but instead merely to further his career, to line his pockets and to indulge his prejudices.

On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 09:49:14PM +0100, Tim Roll-Pickering wrote:

* Brian Paddick

Last time round, his transport policies we

* women-only tube carriages (sexist and stupid)
* free wifi across London, paid for by cutting TfL's communications
budget (stupid, and would only have applied to the inner boroughs but
you can bet the outer boroughs wouldn't get a discount on our taxes);
* lots of ANPR and linking it to "GPS technology", whatever that means;
* a high speed rail link to Scotland (which is outside the mayor's
remit)

So, despite me being a member of the Lib Dems, I didn't vote for him,
because he's an idiot.

Tuffrey is pleding express buses at peak hours and more
orbital routes, as well as raising extra funding through a municipal bond
scheme and switching to green energy.

Uh-huh. The mayor has no say in energy policy, and municipal bonds
would require an act of Parliament.

--
David Cantrell | Minister for Arbitrary Justice

If you can't imagine how I do something, it's
because I have a better imagination than you

On Wed, 29 Jun 2011, David Cantrell wrote:

On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 09:49:14PM +0100, Tim Roll-Pickering wrote:

Tuffrey is pleding express buses at peak hours and more
orbital routes, as well as raising extra funding through a municipal bond
scheme and switching to green energy.

Uh-huh. The mayor has no say in energy policy, and municipal bonds
would require an act of Parliament.

Like Crossrail, new tram schemes, or many other things mayoral candidates
propose, and that mayors have done. Can't we take it as read that "through
a municipal bond scheme" means "through getting a private bill to enable
municipal bonds through parliament and then exercising the powers it
confers"?

I'm not saying it's a good idea, mind!

tom

--
The best way I know of to win an argument is to start by being in the
right. -- Lord Hailsham

In the interests of neutrality here's Brian Paddick's pitch to Lib Dem
members on why they should pick him:

http://www.libdemvoice.org/brian-pad...012-24581.html

(I'm sorry that it's not a piece with any of his policies on transport - or
much else for that matter!)