What an odd idea of democracy, Boris
7:56 am - November 27th 2008
| Tweet | Share on Tumblr |
Boris Johnson beat Ken Livingstone in the London mayoral contest last May in big part because a lot of people wanted the right to drive their vehicles wherever, whenever and as fast as they like. Now he’s taking the first step towards paying them back for their support by announcing the abolition of the western extension to London’s congestion zone.
Actually, bicycle-riding Bojo didn’t have the ungreen guts to simply abolish the zone off his own bat. He disguised the decision as the product of a public consultation exercise. And he warned those who were ‘consulted’ that abolition would cost a lot of money, cause a lot of congestion, pollute the air in London even more than it is already and generally make life more difficult and unpleasant in the city. So he could palm off all responsibility for this environmental disaster in that bumbling Bojoish manner with a ‘Look, I did my jolly best to make the environmentalist case but the public just weren’t having it and who am I to ride my bicycle roughshod over their democratic verdict?’
The problem is that Bojo’s consultation exercise, in which he promised to ‘listen to the people of London’ and go along with whatever they said, has about as much to do with democracy as a phone-in talk show. Those who bother to express their views are those who feel strongest on the subject.
So, unsurprisingly, it’s those who were being made to pay more for the privilege of driving their petrol combustion engines through any semblance of a sensible transport and environmental policy who shouted loudest. Out of 28,000 responses (London’s electorate numbers 5,044,962, by the way), 67 per cent of individuals and 87 per cent of businesses said get rid of the zone, let us drive for free. You’d have had a similar response if you’d proposed abolishing car insurance.
Much less well-publicised has been the response to Transport for London’s mini-opinion survey on the subject. This was organised to see how representative the responses to Bojo’s consultation exercise were.
The answer is: hardly at all. In the TfL survey, only 41 per cent of individuals (out of 2,000 surveyed) favoured getting rid of the western extension and only half of businesses (out of 1,000). Thirty per cent of individuals favoured keeping it as it is and 15 per cent said they would keep it but make changes to the way it operates (such as easing restrictions in the middle of the day).
On a crude reckoning that makes a 45:41 per cent majority in favour of keeping a modified scheme – which is an odd sort of popular mandate for its abolition. If Bojo goes ahead with getting rid of it – and incurs all the costs of doing so, including the removal of signs and cameras and road marking and all the rest, as well as the estimated £70 million annual revenue loss – let it be clear that it is his decision. He should not be allowed to hide behind some floppy notion of the ‘people’ having spoken.
| Tweet | Share on Tumblr |  |
This is a guest article. Steve Platt is a former editor of New Statesman magazine and is now a contributor to various publications, including Red Pepper. He blogs at Plattitude.
· Other posts by Steve Platt
Story Filed Under: Blog ,Local Government ,London Mayor
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Reader comments
So long as we hold central government to similar standards…
I’m not surprised by the level of criticism of this post.
Where are you all?
(Maybe that because it’s particularly well-delivered and articulated, perchance?)
He should not be allowed to hide behind some floppy notion of the ‘people’ having spoken.
The trouble as I see it is that the ‘public consultation’ is a red herring. Boris was elected mayor by the people of London. What further consultation is required? The tories have been openly describing themselves as “the party of the motorist” for years now. A vote for Boris Johnson was clearly a vote against the principle of the congestion charge. Or am I the only person who thinks that. The fact that he’s trying to dismantle the CC is just the logical consequence of him being elected. And the fact that he’s trying to distance himself from any negative consequences of this dismantling is just mainstream politics as usual.
I suspect most people have better things to do on a Friday evening, Aaron!
Livingstone went ahead with the extension despite the majority of residents opposing it in his consultations. Johnson said in his manifesto that he would put up the proposals for a second public consultation and scrap them if residents were opposed. That is democracy at work. What’s your problem? Interesting you state on another thread that “lliberal” as used in the title of the blog is merely ironic. It certainly is !
Here’s what the Lib Dems think:
http://glalibdems.org.uk/news/000605/gla_liberal_democrats_say_scrap_the_western_extension_of_the_congestion_charge_zone_now.html
Oh dear! Yet again you take a position on an issue just to directly oppose the Tories and end up looking like Labour party skivvies.
The best thing about this site is the sheer idiocy of the articles and the way you middle-class socialists twist the truth just so you can vent your spleen at the Tories. I really think some of you should seek counselling. Its an unhealthy obsession, this Tory hatred.
What qualities are required to be editor of the New Statesman?
Given the central government way of handling consultation is to “consult” and then ignore, excuse me if I can’t bring myself to cry too much of a river over someone actually following the results of a consultation.
Let’s face it, consultation in this country (probably all countries) is a joke, it’s not empirical, it’s not weighted and it’s mostly ignored regardless.
However, I do find it amusing that you counter a consultation of 28,000 with a survey of 2,000. I’m not even going to go in to the potential for bias either in the questioning or sample picking, though I would appreciate a link to the survey results so we could tell for ourselves.
Now, there’s another argument here about whether populism is the right route to take, but then the people *did* elect the guy knowing he pledged to scrap this extension…which is ultimately democracy in action.
In short, don’t claim democracy isn’t taking place by counter-acting with an even less democratic account of opinion; and certainly don’t claim democracy isn’t taking place because a guy elected on a platform is following that platform through.
Jesus, I’m beginning to see why Labour have so much support if people honestly believe NOT following a manifesto pledge is democratic…
Article makes an excellent point but, as others have said, ‘consultation’ has an inverted meaning in politics, and a fake consultation is standard practice at all levels of government. Nonetheless, it should be resisted. Perhaps he should have held a local referendum?
Reactions: Twitter, blogs
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
