But Livingstone knew all the tricks. He claimed he had ‘discovered’ a
vast mountain of cash that TfL had been sitting on and not using. He pointed to
official figures apparently showing there was a £700m-odd ‘surplus’ in the TfL
accounts that he would now use to cut fares by 5%. This number was the
so-called ‘operating surplus’ – the difference between what TfL thought they
would spend on running the system and what they actually did, combined with the
difference between what they thought they would get in fare revenue and what
they actually did.
Livingstone knew very well that this ‘surplus’ had existed for years,
particularly when he was Mayor. He also knew that it was allocated to
investment projects, just like it was when he was Mayor. It was money that
appeared spare, but was in fact earmarked for things that would improve the
system. It was why he never once used it to cut fares himself.
It was a common tactic to claim this was ‘unspent’ money, just as the
Conservatives on the London Assembly had tried in 2007. Back then, Mayor Ken
explained why it couldn’t be used:
“There
has been some fascinating speculation in the press that I have a £500 million
slush fund that I can spend between now and the election. You know me; if I had it I would, but I do
not. There is the small matter of the
need for TfL to balance its budget in law, and the balances we carry are all
allocated against the range of projects coming forward.28”
Moreover, Livingstone was equally clear about the choice between cutting
fares and cutting investment. When it was proposed he use this money to fund
fare cuts in 2007, he replied:
“That is fine as long as it also has the honesty to go on and say what I
should cut whilst cutting the fare increase.29”
In the heat of an election campaign, these fine distinctions were
irrelevant and Livingstone knew it. It was a simple calculation. Voters would
understand a proposal to cut their cost of living a lot better than a
complicated argument about surpluses and allocated investment. And people were
feeling the squeeze, so much so they were more than willing to accept a cut to
future investment if it meant immediate relief.
November and December 2011 saw Ken wage a guerrilla campaign against
Boris, using every opportunity to justify and re-enforce his policy. He
suddenly had his compelling offer, and it would prove to be almost irresistible
to voters. It would put us in an awkward position.
Another behind the scenes revelation from "Victory in London - the inside story of hte Boris campaign"
Book Description
The inside story of the campaign to put Boris Johnson back
into power as London Mayor told by one of the top members of his
campaign team who was at Boris's side throughout. In 2012 the political
stakes could not be higher. After one term in office and despite
enjoying personal popularity, Boris Johnson faced an uphill battle for
re-election as Mayor of London. Buffeted by Tory unpopularity, the
toughest financial conditions in years and accusations that he was out
of touch and Mayor, Boris faced the fight of his political life. And to
top it all, he was up against Ken Livingstone, one of the most
formidable and ruthless campaigners in British politics. This is the
first and most authoritative book about Boris Johnson's re-election.
Told by an insider, it will reveal the inner workings of the campaign
and how one of the most high profile politicians in the country and his
extraordinary team pulled off an election victory that was closer than
anyone dared think. Based on an unprecedented level of access to all the
key players, including Boris himself and campaign director Lynton
Crosby, this is a must read for anyone interested in politics. * Launch
Event at Conservative Party Conference. * High profile political
bloggers will push the book * Sunday newspaper serialisation under
negotiation Social Media * The book will be "Book of the Month" for
Bretwalda for November 2012 which will involve an intensive FaceBook and
Twitter push as well as the usual book launch marketing.
No comments:
Post a Comment