Pax Londinium Posted by Adam Blickstein

Boris Johnson's accession to Mayor of London is one of the more curious and fascinating political stories of the year. Elected to the post Friday, he ostensibly becomes the first Tory to lead London in recent history and their first mayor since the post was created in 2000. While London's mayor lacks the central power in the American tradition - with power split with the London Assembly and Westminster - he does direct municipal and transportation planning.  And as with New York, the wellspring of London's power is largely dictated by the financial prowess of business interests (largely dictated by Westminster derived policies) located in The City, so it is no surprise that one of Johnson's first visitors on Friday was none other than Michael Bloomberg:

"Michael Bloomberg is trying to be very helpful by giving us lots of advice, including advice on the pitfalls," one aide to Johnson said.

Senior Tories believe the Bloomberg/Johnson meeting will send the signal that the Tories now control one of the biggest political offices in Britain and that the new mayor is up to the job. Members of the Cameron circle admit the leadership feared at one point that Johnson could harm the party in the runup to the general election if he made gaffes.

Johnson and the ousted lefty Labourite Ken Livingstone inhabit diametric political traditions, but share a knack for speaking and acting without inhibition and sometimes with ignorance of political repercussion. And while London flourished despite, not because of Livingstone, it's not certain Johnson would offer anything better, except yet another major political boost for the Tories heading towards the next Parliamentary elections. In the end, Johnson's election - which only occurred after second preferences were tallied - probably had more to do with dissatisfaction towards Labour overall and a tiring of Livingstone's antics more than widespread accolades for Johnson's policies and persona.

It seems to me that London (and perhaps most major global cities that are integral international commerce cogs) would be best served electing a mayor in the Bloomberg mold: a non-partisan, successful businessmen, and savvy city manager than cares more about the health of the city rather than the health of his image. This is especially important in the next 5-7 years as London's mayor is going to have to deal with the Olympics and more importantly the post-Olympic planning, which could easily become a cesspool of misspending and waste if political personality and posturing triumph over sound policy.

Comments

[peace]

This should be a warning to Hillary Clinton and the DLC who have always taken a stand that was somewhat to the right of their base. Tony Blair and Gordon Brown invented New Labor which tried to triangulate against the more leftist parts of their own party. This made Blair and Brown support privitization of the railways and the American invasion of Iraq. However these actions alienated the core Labor voters and Labor has been steadily losing to the inept Tory opposition. If Hillary Clinton somehow got the Democratic nomination, she would face the same problems as Gordon Brown with the left wing of the party due to her recent comments about nuking Iran.

[Frank]

Heh:

"the Bloomberg mold: a non-partisan, successful businessmen, and savvy city manager than cares more about the health of the city rather than the health of his image."

Michael Bloomberg doesn't care about the health of his image? C'mon. The endless flirtation with the presidency? HIs name on everything in Manhattan? Let's get real, here. The guy's a total media wh*re.