For goodness sake. Why is it that our London mayoral campaigns are so bad at projecting any kind of big idea or vision?
I’ve just watched Brian Paddick, an excellent candidate in so many ways, on the Newsnight debate. His opening statement raised a couple of problems, notably knife crime, but offered no believable solution. Even his passionate explanation at the end about what he would do about knife crime was too bland and unspecific to seep into people's minds. In fact, the kind of local partnership between police and neighbourhoods is exactly what was done so successfully in New York, and Brian should have said so far more explicitly.
Nor has there been any distinctive analysis about what’s gone wrong with London: the greedy decision by Livingstone to add another million people to the population of London, with predictable results for transport and public services.
Why is it that politicians, and Lib Dems in particular, are so naive about this - that somehow, just by mentioning a few problems, people will suddenly vote for them? Or that anyone will remember what they say when they haven't the faintest idea what they exist for?
Arkwright's Mill, Cromford, in 1947
15 hours ago