It may just be the fact that this is the first one I've not been able to vote in, but it's more that neither of the candidates has the slightest appeal to me. Khan is a bog-standard Labour career apparatchik who's desperately trying to distance himself from the leadership in order to win, while Goldsmith is a tree-hugging personality vacuum. All in all, meh.
At least in previous contests you had the fun of voting against Livingstone or for Boris. This is just dreary.
I read some comparisons of Khan and Goldsmith's 'policies' the other day. They're both going to summon up half a million houses, improve public transport and make London the 'greenest' city on the planet, so with magical powers like these, it doesn't really matter which one is elected, does it? It looks like a win-win either way.Quote:
Originally Posted by Burney
Yes. The fact that they don't really have the power to do any of those things notwithstanding, it looks like it'll be a golden age for London over the next few years.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir C
It does seem rather strange that the Tory party couldn't find a candidate with more life in him than the apparently comatose wet lettuce that is Goldsmith. Dull bugger.Quote:
Originally Posted by Burney
Well when they're in power, there are much better jobs for anyone of personality or ambition, so the best candidates will steer clear. It's a job that has much more to offer an ambitious candidate when their party's in opposition than when they're in power.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir C
No. I don't live in London. Thankfully.
Do you know how much money the London Mayor can spend? More than the heads of many countries in Europe. That's why it matters.
The two leading candidates are certainly rather less colourful than their predecessors.
Sure, but they can only spend it in very limited areas. Their powers are basically limited to spending on building on Greater London Authority land and transport - both of which are hedged about with so many other influencing factors as to make them virtually powerless.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mo Britain less Europe
I think it's something like a devolved budget of 13bn, isnt it?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mo Britain less Europe
I'm curious to know which European countries have a budget of less than £13 billion, tbh.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Jorge
I'm voting for Caroline Pidgeon, because she opposes the ridicules garden bridge vanity project. Obviously she won't win, so my B vote goes to Khan, because he's not Goldsmith.Quote:
Originally Posted by Burney
Nope, I believe we are supposed to getting one in Manchester* :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by Burney
Clearly not a London Mayor, that would be silly
Is she won of the scary ones with the club foot and the mangy feathers?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ash
Does he mean GDP or budget though?
Either would be piddlingly small, I'd have thoughtQuote:
Originally Posted by The Jorge
Could it be Ireland? The price of spuds on the international market isn't what it was, tbh.Quote:
Originally Posted by Burney
Well yes, Tuvalu is $38bnQuote:
Originally Posted by Burney
Pair of self hating paddiesQuote:
Originally Posted by Sir C
Andorra, San Marino, Monaco? The Vatican?Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir C
Greece?
And that's mostly from selling the .tv thingummy.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Jorge