 |
| Sadiq Khan bids for a third term as Mayor of London (Image: The Guardian) |
You can tell that a general election is around the corner when the Conservative Party is escalating its attacks on the Labour Party. These recent weeks have two particular Labour figures targeted; one being its Deputy Leader, Angela Rayner, who is under increased scrutiny over the nature of the selling of an ex-council house in Stockport. I won't delve into this story as it is an active case with the local council and police involved, and Rayner strongly denies any wrongdoing. The other who is on the backend of constant criticism by his political rivals is Sadiq Khan, currently running for a third term as Mayor of London.
No one has ever won the London mayoral election on more than two occasions. Since it was established in 2000, Ken Livingstone and Boris Johnson each won twice, as has Khan. At every election, we have seen the outcome finalised after the second round of counting. This time around, if the polls were to be true, Khan may not even need a second round as he is miles ahead of Conservative's Susan Hall - 51% to 27%, according to one. This is despite the Tories trying very hard to discredit his apparent poor track record on crime, culture and governance.
Khan's second term has been shorter and arguably more turbulent than his first. Winning the 2021 election over Conservative's Shaun Bailey and a record 21 other candidates a year later than planned thanks to the global Covid-19 pandemic, one of his key priorities was to overcome London from the economic shock brought on by Brexit. The backlash that came with the exit - pushed further by the pandemic - is still felt today; global businesses are fleeing the London Stock Exchange, firms like HSBC are downsizing or leaving the city altogether, while the population and people's working habits are constantly changing. In addition to these, the Westminster has changed its focus away from relying on London in an attempt to 'level up' the rest of the country, announcing budgets that continue to disappoint the Mayor.
Levelling up the UK is vital, but it isn't succeeded for two reasons; firstly, giving financially struggling councils pocket money for selected schemes won't do much to secure brighter futures. Secondly, effectively downgrading London's funding has made the capital city less competitive when the nation needs it to be constantly at its A-Game. Levelling up should have offered a fair spread of long-term investment based on necessity and geography. Unfortunately, as a result, communities simply aren't seeing the positive difference they saw when projects and schemes were funded by the European Union. The outcomes are mirroring the missed opportunities we saw a decade ago with the Northern Powerhouse, which former Chancellor, George Osborne, had championed.
This isn't the fault of Sadiq Khan, who has been a robust opposition figure to the Conservative government. While he is influential, he isn't by any means powerful. There are many areas he has to rely on Westminster to supply the goods. However, the response he gets are accusations of introducing policies that have made the city 'unsafe' and 'undesirable'. Reports of knife crime persist, the expansion of Ultra Low Emission Zones (ULEZ) to the entire Greater London has been met with hostility, and housing rent is ridiculously high.
On the flip side, tourism is booming with it appearing to better pre-pandemic levels. London's air quality is showing signs of much-needed improvement. Travelling across the city is more accessible and affordable. Primary school aged children are guaranteed at least one free hot meal a day, and the Metropolitan Police, who had been under strain after crippling cuts and overseeing cases of horrific individuals and corruption within the force, is on the long road to recovery and becoming more efficient. The capital is far from perfect, however, it is far from the doomed city Conservative members are portraying it to be.
It's easy to pinpoint at isolated examples of where London is going wrong, but they are exactly that. The city is more tolerant and communities largely feel safer, so long as they aren't victims of events influenced outside of London. For example, the Jewish community could feel safer had it not been for the widespread anger aimed at Israel's leader Benyamin Netanyahu, who is still hellbent on attacking Gaza. Khan's support for the Jewish community alone can't influence mindless anti-Semitic attacks on Jewish-led business and people. We can all do better in convincing those who intimidate and taunt members of the Jewish community to disassociate them with a government they largely share no feelings or support towards.
Of course, Khan isn't the model leader (he won't claim to be one either), and London is far from being the super safe and sustainable city Khan wants it to be. He does need to be stronger on tackling gangs who are brainwashing teenagers with drugs and weapons, and hindering their potentials. He does need to find a way of showing London is the UK and global leader on tackling homelessness and social housing waiting lists. He also needs to strike a better balance of supporting residents impacted by green policies. While they are saving and improving lives, they also risk livelihoods who are finding it difficult to adapt.
Khan's life can be made easier if the outcome of the UK general election - to take place by no later than January 2025 - is in Labour's favour. Again, relying on the polls, Keir Starmer is increasingly likely to be the country's next Prime Minister. Having the same party lead Britain and its capital at the same time would be good news for the current Mayor in getting what he wants. It worked for previous Mayor Boris Johnson who enjoyed a positive relationship with then Prime Minister David Cameron (before it was 'damaged' in 2016 during the EU referendum). Starmer is keen to offer the city Mayors - including Andy Burnham in Manchester and Steve Rotherham in Liverpool - greater devolved powers, which they would welcome. It'd certainly give Khan freedom to do more on matters including housing, policing and the economy.
Equally, things could go completely awry if either election don't go Labour's way. If current Prime Minister Rishi Sunak plays an absolute blinder and turns around Conservative fortunes and Khan remains Mayor, it is as you were, which could spell disaster for London's fortunes if the past three years was to go by. And vice-versa, should Susan Hall achieve what seems unlikely (as I write this) and pip Khan to the post, and months later find Starmer with the keys to Downing Street, it risks the capital from achieving its former glory. Starmer may not be that enthusiastic to announce greater devolution if it means applying it for a blue London. Right now, we can't rule anything out. There is too much uncertainty to truly know what London could look like in the next year, let alone five years.
I must conclude with this: a successful London is a successful Britain, if done right and with a balanced political setup. I've often argued that opportunities need to spread across the country, but it shouldn't be done at the expense of London. The rest of the UK needs greater accessibility to London, and London needs greater accessibility to the rest of the UK. We are seeing hints of this in higher education - with universities outside of the capital having bases inside of the M25. This can only be down to the UK government influencing the right decisions. It's time for Britain to be 'collaborative'.
Comments
Post a Comment