Posts in the ‘Getting an easy ride’ category

Why we must stop Boris at the polls today

Thursday, 1 May 2008, 1.26 by Mr. Stop Boris

The Tory Troll earlier posted a summing-up at the end of a 50-post campaign against Boris, which has been one of the best-researched and most strident on the web.

Here at the Stop Boris campaign, we have also been blogging for some time now, as a way of spreading the word about why we need to vote against Boris Johnson today.

Our campaign started in July last year, when it was first announced that Boris Johnson was going to put himself forward for the Conservative Mayoral candidacy. While most people dismissed him as a joke, it was clear to us that in modern politics, in a personality-driven campaign, there was a very real threat that Boris could be elected.

The Stop Boris group on Facebook was set up, and its Posted Items and Wall remained the focus of the campaign until March this year, when the idea of stepping things up with campaign posters first dawned.

Somewhere to host the posters was needed, and before we knew it we’d had the StopBoris.org domain and a nice chunk of web space donated to us, so it seemed rude not to set up a web site too.

Mrs. Stop Boris suggested she should create an accompanying application for Facebook users, which she did with aplomb, and tonight sees its user base on the verge of hitting 1,000.

A static web site proved, within just a few days of launch, inadequate for tracking a fast-moving campaign, rich in developments and arguments against Boris, so that’s where the Stop Boris blog came in, and it’s on researching and writing for this I’ve spent nearly every free moment for the past six weeks.

So I’m now able to look back over the 183 posts prior to this one that I’ve written on this blog, and bring you a summary of the compelling case against electing the woefully unsuitable Boris Johnson as Mayor of London, divided into 15 headings which seemed vaguely appropriate at the time…

Some links to posts are in bold/larger type, indicating some sort of relative importance in their subject area. I don’t pretend it’s been done in a scientific way, though.

The people who know Boris know he’s completely inappropriate to be Mayor

Of course, only those who aren’t desperate to get him elected are admitting it publicly. Even plenty of people who are in or support his own party are worried about the damage he’ll do to the Conservative brand if he becomes the most powerful Tory politician in Britain.

He holds offensive views that make him unsuitable to lead a diverse city

For years he filled his writing with outrageous statements, many of which he has refused to apologise for. Even when he has said sorry for things, it’s been a grudging apology riddled with caveats. Issues include homophobia and pandering to racists. No wonder the BNP have called on their voters to give him their second preferences.

His flagship policy is a complete and utter mess

The main policy associated with Boris for many months was his plan to replace bendy-buses with a "new Routemaster". It’s been discredited on so many grounds it’s extraordinary he’s still persisting with it.

He is by far the weakest candidate on tackling crime; his Mayoralty will see more deaths

He’s the only main candidate with no pledged target on cutting crime (he just whips up fear about it without being able to tackle it), and his Freudian slip shows this is because he knows his planned budget cuts will mean they can’t cut crime at all.

And while crime may well rise under Boris, so will pedestrian deaths on the roads as he reverse the progress that has been made in making London more pedestrian-friendly over the past few years.

He is atrocious on the environment

There’s a general consensus among environmentalists that Boris, a climate change denier and anti-Kyoto campaigner, would be a disaster on green issues the world over.

His entire campaign has been fake and micromanaged by Lynton Crosby, and he has never focused on the issues

He just knows a few focus-group tested lines but has no substance behind any of the sentences he’s learnt and certainly has no concrete policies to back them up. When asked about his own policies he instead turns everything into a tenuously linked and generally unfounded attack against Ken Livingstone.

Most of his policies are the stuff of cloud cuckoo land

He promises a no-strike deal with the RMT union. The RMT say they would never, ever, ever sign such a deal. It’s almost certain that they will go on strike if he tries to impose one, in fact. And that’s just one of his policies: the majority of the others are also fanciful. Or just rubbish.

He can’t be taken seriously

He’s built his entire career on being a buffoon, an idiot, a fool, a clown. He simply can’t be taken seriously. Imagine him trying to address the city after a terrorist attack? "How many are dead? Oh, cripes!"

He simply isn’t up to the job

He has a track record of incompetence, gaffes, sackings and not being able to take anything seriously or dedicate himself to anything for a prolonged period of time. And he’s barely managed to find anyone who’s willing to join his administration so who knows who’d end up doing any of the real work?

He only entered into this contest for a bit of self-publicity – he never actually wanted the job, but now he’s in too deep…

People have been underestimating his chances

Many anti-Boris people think he’s just a joke and there’s no serious chance of him getting the job. These people are complacent and might not get out and vote. They need to be alerted to the danger urgently and dragged to the polling stations! :)

He claims to support ‘zero tolerance’ but has broken the law a number of times himself

Evidently he thinks the law only applies to the little people, not VIPs like himself.

His campaign is riddled with outright dishonesty

His campaign team have been paying people to comment on blogs such as ours and The Tory Troll’s, pretending to be normal members of the public. Fortunately we exposed them and they then left us largely in peace.

Aside from that, the team have also been spreading various lies and half-truths to scare people into voting for Boris, who has let a number of lies slip himself.

His media cronies have run half his campaign for him

Certain nasty parts of the media have made no attempt at balanced coverage of this election, instead doing everything they can to discredit the current Mayor and promote Boris, despite there being no case for doing so. Just about all the newspaper leaders endorsing Boris failed to give a single positive reason to vote for him.

The Evening Standard’s own journalistic team even tore Boris’s manifesto to shreds while managing to pick only modest holes in Ken’s, yet their billboards and pages have teemed with anti-Ken, pro-Boris propaganda for months.

He doesn’t care about ordinary Londoners

He has no real roots here and is completely out of touch with the concerns and lives of everyday Londoners.

Campaign videos

Sometimes 25 pictures a second are worth 25,000 words a second, or something.

Campaign posters

They still hold true, seven weeks on from creating them.

How to stop Boris

So, all that said, here’s how to vote most effectively to stop Boris.

Good luck, Boris-stoppers.

This election is going to be extremely close. We need to get Boris-stoppers and Boris-sceptics to the polling stations in their millions.

Do whatever you can to encourage people to vote today and we can stop Boris.

A grassroots campaign taking on the might of the Standard and the Sun. Are you up for the fight? Let’s do it.

Lack of gaffes ≠ statesmanlike competence

Friday, 25 April 2008, 22.23 by Mr. Stop Boris

It’s hardly a surprise that someone called ‘Labourboy’ should suggest Boris would not be a good Mayor, but it is an interesting point he makes, that the media appear to be setting the bar far lower for Boris the clown than they would be for anyone else.

Of course it is a minor miracle that he’s managed to go so many months without any major gaffes, but he has said a few moderately ill-advised things, and more to the point he certainly hasn’t said anything that would qualify anyone else to be taken seriously as a Mayoral contender. Like, you know, some properly thought-through policies, or evidence of relevant experience for managing an £11bn budget and 105,000 staff.

Preaching to the choirmaster

Thursday, 10 April 2008, 20.30 by Mr. Stop Boris

This morning’s LBC debate wasn’t worth getting up early for.

There were one or two good moments, like the opportunity to remind people that not only would Boris be bumbling and incompetent in a crisis, but also in the immediate aftermath of the 7 July 2005 bombings, he wrote a piece criticising Islam and stating that the Koran was inherently violent.

This reminder sent him off into the most over-the-top display of mock outrage, accusing Ken, who’d quoted him, of "demeaning the office of Mayor" by issuing such a "smear". Once again, Boris claims that it’s a smear to simply read back what he himself did genuinely write.

But overall, this morning’s debate did little to further the Stop Boris cause. That’s not to say Boris performed brilliantly – obviously, that will never happen because he is incapable of doing so – but there were no quotable gaffes or idiotic cock-ups.

Being on the radio presumably helped, as it meant he could read from whatever notes he wanted without having to look away from the viewers’ gazes; undoubtedly what also helped was the fact that the show was hosted by Nick Ferrari, the right-wing talk radio host who was David Cameron’s first choice for Conservative Mayoral candidate, before he worked his way through several other people who rejected him and ended up scraping the bottom of the barrel by begging Boris to take on the job.

Ferrari is a militant motorist who loves taking his 4×4s around London, and has a history of falling out with Ken Livingstone. As such it was pretty hard to see how he would be unbiased, and certainly he didn’t hold back: when the subject of apologising for London’s role in slavery came up. Ken famously did this last year, and Brian Paddick agreed that this was right, he incurred instant strong scorn from Ferrari. Naturally Boris didn’t think an apology was necessary for decades of treating ethnic minorities as a secondary race – hardly a surprise given his own record in the area of race relations – and there was no disputing this from Ferrari.

So basically Boris got an easier ride here than the others, because the show’s outspoken host is just the kind of reactionary that Boris’s campaign is targeting. Indeed, it sounds like Ferrari spends much of his time on air ranting in an effort to bring his listeners around to his right-wing way of thinking about the world, so he might just have created some Boris voters over the years!

Even in a friendly environment, though, Boris still kept interrupting and talking over other people. He just can’t control his manners.

Roll on the next few televised debates, when we shall hopefully once again see the real Boris slipping out from behind the façade!

La la la la not listening can’t hear you la la la la

Wednesday, 9 April 2008, 23.43 by Mr. Stop Boris

The closer the election gets, the more shockingly biased Associated Newspapers’ propaganda pamphlets – printed with ink that won’t rub off onto your bum-cheeks – become.

Dave Hill’s been behaving like a thoroughly professional journalist throughout this campaign, giving each candidate a fair hearing, carefully weighing up their policies’ pros and cons and reporting things as he finds them throughout. He certainly hasn’t come to his blog with any particular axe to grind, unlike, say, a certain blogger sitting very near my computer at this moment, who’s only too happy to grind an axe (or preferably to bury it in Boris’s head) at any opportunity.

But even non-partisan Dave lost his rag with the latest Evening Standard bias yesterday; I say ‘lost his rag’, but that is perhaps overstating things somewhat, given that the title of his article is merely "Tut, Tut, Evening Standard". (Mind you, I’ve just noticed that his permalink, i.e. the link I just put in, gives away that that wasn’t the title of his first draft!) But it’s clear that the Daily Mail group of newspapers, for so long desperate to be rid of Ken Livingstone, are hell-bent on getting their crony Boris [who, don’t forget, saved Andrew Gilligan’s career when he was sacked from the BBC by offering him a job at the Spectator] into City Hall, no matter what the cost to their journalistic reputation.

So, how would they cover last night’s Newsnight debate, which by common consent no-one did stunningly well in but Boris definitely lost, in their evening freesheet, London Lite?

The answer is that they:

  • freeze-framed through the debate to find a still where Boris looked serious, Paddick looked reasonable and Ken looked a bit silly;
  • mentioned, for the headline and opening, that (unlike a certain other candidate) Boris has pledged only to serve two terms as Mayor (which is irrelevant anyway when he couldn’t possibly get re-elected after four years of incompetence and gaffes);
  • spent two-thirds of the article bigging up the pledges Boris has announced, which are a checklist of the things the Evening Standard has been moaning about in relation to Lee Jasper etc.;
  • mentioned one single topic from last night’s debate, namely Ken’s promise to resign if he breaks his word by putting up the Congestion Charge for sub-band G cars if re-elected;
  • somehow managed to segue this into a reference to a poll finding that Ken is the candidate considered least honest by the Londoners questioned;
  • er…
  • that’s it.

Seriously. No mention of Boris’s bus-based blathering, when Jeremy Paxman had to ask him the same question 12 times and still didn’t get an answer. Nothing. No coverage of the debate at all. This is a propaganda effort the Chinese government would be proud of.

They claim to be "London’s Quality Newspaper", but on the evidence I’ve been seeing, even despite its lightweight content and short articles, the only one of the big four to come close to deserving that title is thelondonpaper, which is at least even-handed in its treatment of the candidates in this election. Better to have one or two fair paragraphs about each candidate than 20 grossly distorted ones, after all.

Mind you, even thelondonpaper is short on coverage of last night’s debate. It goes some way to making up for this with an intriguing nugget of information about Boris’s fundraising:

It has emerged Johnson met up with old pals from the Bullingdon Club—an exclusive Oxford University set which includes Tory leader David Cameron—to appeal for funds for his campaign.

The Bullingdon Club, lest we forget, is renowned for its members’ disgraceful behaviour in Oxford. David Cameron and Boris Johnson were in the club together, and essentially what they did was:

  • Book a posh restaurant, using an assumed name (their reputation preceded them);
  • Turn up to dine – and get completely and utterly drunk;
  • Smash up the place, causing as much damage as possible;
  • Ask your rich parents to foot the repair bill to appease the distraught restaurateur;
  • Repeat at will.

Another famous Bullingdon alumnus is Darius Guppy, by the way: a lovely bunch, all in all.

So now it sounds like Boris has been catching up with his fellow Bullingdon thugs to try to get cash out of them. Makes sense: after his woeful performance on Newsnight last night, his campaign is looking pretty damaged, so I’m sure they won’t mind throwing money at it to try to restore it. What’s good enough for a restaurant…

Rewriting history in Epping Forest

Sunday, 6 April 2008, 13.03 by Mr. Stop Boris

I’ve just received a very interesting tip-off about Boris’s Epping Forest canvassing gaffe.

The source of this story, it seems, was an article on the Epping Forest Guardian newspaper web site:

[Boris] may well be ahead in the latest opinion polls in the mayoral race - but we can tell him that he is targeting the wrong electors!

He has written to the Epping Forest Guardian - which covers the entire local authority district, and no part of any London borough - seeking voter support.

In a letter emailed to Epping Forest Guardian editor David Jackman, for inclusion on our letters pages, Mr Johnson wrote: "Last week the contest to become Mayor of London Mayor began. A contest that will make a big difference to your lives in Epping Forest." […]

When contacted by the Guardian, Mr Johnson’s campaign office issued a statement saying it was aware that "many" residents of Epping Forest were not eligible to vote - yet the facts are that NO residents of Epping Forest district are entitled to vote in the London mayor elections.

All good stuff of course – a nice illustration of Boris’s incompetence and how poor his grasp of even the most basic information about London really is.

However, the story has since taken a rather sinister turn. This is a link to the article – and this is what the page now says:

The selected article was not found.

Who has got to them, and how did they persuade them to erase an embarrassing piece of history in this way?

And in the light of today’s Boris campaign material masquerading as front-page news in the Sunday Telegraph, just how many favours can Boris call in via his powerful media cronies?

Fortunately, Google’s cache has retained a copy of the original article.

And when that eventually disappears (when Google notices that the article has been removed), all will not be lost: we’ve saved our own copy too. We’re too good to you, Boris-stoppers, we really are.

Dirty tricks in the Telegraph

Sunday, 6 April 2008, 12.20 by Mr. Stop Boris

As I tried to get to sleep last night, the penny dropped about just how calculated today’s Sunday Telegraph front page and accompanying interview really are.

These are no ordinary articles. To call them journalism would be insulting to reporters up and down the country who spend their days trying to get to the truth.

What these articles give is a carefully calculated platform in which to rebut – sometimes subtly, sometimes obviously – all the most serious allegations raised by campaigns like ours at StopBoris.org over the past few weeks and months.

Once you start analysing it, it’s clear that the writing of this article was not approached as an opportunity by a journalist to profile honestly a candidate their newspaper’s readers might have been thinking of voting for. This article was approached with a checklist of points to rebut and suggestions of how to rebut them.

Can this really be true, I hear you cry. Yes, it can: Lynton Crosby leaves no stone unturned in his campaigns and will manipulate every last detail of his candidates’ media coverage, if the media let him. Of course, Boris worked for the Telegraph for 20 years so there’s no doubt he’d be able to call in a favour or two there if he wanted to. On today’s evidence, he wants to.

So let’s have a look at a likely checklist of things the article needed to rebut, and some quotes from the article which by an amazing coincidence address those points perfectly.

Allegation against Boris Rebuttal in this article

Boris is being nannied/muzzled.

Does he mean Mr Livingstone is looking weary? "I think so," he says and then asks his aide: "Am I allowed to say that?" "Say what you like," she laughs.

Boris’s campaign is trying to focus a negative spotlight on Ken rather than a positive one on Boris’s own policies.

Boris Johnson falls uncharacteristically silent when asked what he really thinks of Ken Livingstone.

The normally exuberant Tory mayoral candidate shakes his head and makes a gesture with his hands as if to say "do not ask". […]

Mr Johnson appears more comfortable when talking about his own agenda.

Boris has no proper grasp of facts, figures and statistics.

Mr Johnson, who is often taunted for being light on detail, constantly reels off statistics as he talks.

He relays that there are 8,000 buses in London, 32,000 black cabs, 34,000 licensed mini cabs; that drivers have paid £330 million in congestion charge fines; that the amount of garden space lost to building would cover 22 Hyde Parks; and that there is a traffic light in Trafalgar Square that is red for one minute 45 seconds and green for just 12 seconds.

Boris has less appeal to ethnic minority candidates.

At least half the people who stop to talk to him are black or Asian, which would seem to disprove Mr Livingstone’s claims that he does not appeal to ethnic communities.

All the countless inappropriate things he has written or said in the past and now wishes to bury, which we (and other opponents of Boris) are highlighting to reveal the truly nasty politician behind the mask.

"There’s been lots of sub-radar stuff. They’ve read every column I’ve ever written to see if they can find something to turn into a smear about a position I don’t hold.

"I was quite surprised by the complete intellectual dishonesty in some of the ways they’ve tried to misrepresent me. I feel determined not to let them get away with it and we won’t."

Boris is far less keen on anti-car measures than his rival candidates, having opposed the congestion charge and generally pandered to pro-car feeling.

Risking the wrath of critics who say he is anti-car, Mr Johnson does not shrink from admonishing motorists who drive into London. "I’m a passionate cyclist. I don’t feel it is sensible to drive a car to work in the centre of London. I think, on the whole, it would be better if people found other means of doing it.

"I feel very strongly that it is crazy that we all drive our cars to schools over such short distances. It’s absolutely nuts. Try getting in a car at eight in the morning - what is going on? We are mad."

Boris’s campaign is so out of touch with ordinary Londoners it thinks revelations about Ken Livingstone having successfully kept some of his children private from the media are in some way damaging.

Mr Johnson has so far steadfastly refused to get personal. There would be plenty of ammunition if he wanted to.

Revelations this week about Mr Livingstone’s three secret love children only underline his vulnerability on personal issues.

(And of course we all believe that Boris didn’t want them to bring that up.)

This week’s Guardian/ICM poll suggests the election is much closer than previously thought so Boris should be worried that it might not be ‘in the bag’.

If the reaction of people on the streets of Bexleyheath in south-east London is anything to go by, Mr Johnson does not have to worry about the smears.

(That’s Bexleyheath, in the heart of a borough with 52 Conservative councillors and 9 Labour ones. I wonder why they claim to have met only one person who wouldn’t be voting for Boris.)

Finally, just to make sure anything else that might come up against him is pre-emptively rubbished…

"Well, I think he [Ken Livingstone] will fight dirty. They are already doing blatant misrepresentations of our positions, just absolutely ruthless, going around lying about what we are offering. We are offering free travel for the elderly. They are literally going round houses, knocking on the door and lying. […]

"They [Labour] will say absolute codswallop, don’t take any notice of the lies they will tell," he warns the gathering.

"Can I say lies?" he asks nobody in particular, before continuing: "Yes, lies."

The right-hand column of the above table contains about 75% of the main interview article.

And of course, don’t overlook how little truth the Telegraph’s lawyers think they have any evidence of there being in these allegations of "dirty tricks" and "lies". Having given the nod to the article being published, in which the clear implication in e.g. the last quote above is that Ken Livingstone is personally involved in lying, they then insisted on the following being tossed into the mix in the summary article on the front page:

There was no suggestion that Mr Livingstone was in any way involved in the dirty tricks campaign.

Apart from the suggestions throughout the rest of their coverage, of course.

As I wrote last night, this article represents a huge step up in the level of media manipulation and cynical electioneering by the Boris campaign. Don’t fall for it. Look for yourself at the things Boris has written in the past, the positions he has consistently held on things like the environment and the Stephen Lawrence inquiry, and the racist articles he paid Taki for and published in the Spectator.

And I have no idea if Ken’s campaigners are lying on the doorstep, but Boris’s were certainly lying on the doorstep of the Time Out hustings. Strangely, the Telegraph have overlooked that.

The pot calls the kettle a piccaninny

Sunday, 6 April 2008, 1.29 by Mr. Stop Boris

I’m gobsmacked by what I believe is now today’s Sunday Telegraph front page article, Boris Johnson: I’m the victim of dirty tricks in London Mayor race.

The amount of cheek present in anyone whose campaign is being run by Lynton Crosby accusing anyone else of dirty tricks is staggering.

The Telegraph even states as a matter of fact (without offering any evidence) that Boris’s opponents have used "push polling", which is a well known favourite technique of Mr. Crosby himself.

Boris also accuses his opponents of "sub-radar stuff", despite it being well documented that Crosby’s own strategy for Boris is specifically known as an "under-the-radar" campaign.

He continues:

They’ve read every column I’ve ever written to see if they can find something to turn into a smear about a position I don’t hold.

It’s extraordinary that Boris would suggest that simply by highlighting things that he himself has written, we opponents of his (I assume StopBoris.org counts as an opponent, even though we don’t have our own Mayoral candidate) are somehow misrepresenting him. If we mention that he thinks gay marriage is in some way comparable to a union between "three men and a dog", or that he spent column after column repeatedly attacking the Stephen Lawrence inquiry as unnecessary and "Orwellian", it’s unbelievable that his response is to say we are smearing him, and that he doesn’t hold positions that he himself has written that he does hold.

This is the man who was happy to employ and publish outrageous articles by out-and-out racist Taki; the man who’s taken six years to appreciate that "piccaninnies" might be an offensive word to ethnic minorities; the man who supported George W. Bush’s election and re-election; the man who strongly opposed the repealing of Section 28 because he thought it would lead to enforced "homosexual instruction" in the classroom; the man who promised to help an old fraudster friend track down and beat up a journalist; the man who is in the tiny minority of politicians in the developed world who still opposes the Kyoto protocol to tackle climate change (Bush being the only remaining developed world leader not to sign up to it); the man who opposed the National Minimum Wage; the man who claims he did or didn’t snort cocaine based on who’s listening at the time, and did or didn’t have an affair based on what evidence has so far emerged.

With so much evidence that Boris is an untrustworthy charlatan at odds with the vast majority of Londoners’ views, why would anyone need to make anything up to ’smear’ him?

And meanwhile, a single recent appearance of the Back Boris team involved them issuing outright lies on crime and likening Ken Livingstone to mass-murdering dictator Robert Mugabe. Do these things not count as ‘dirty tricks’?

The Sunday Telegraph’s front page article represents a desperate escalation of tactics by Lynton Crosby, attempting to deflect attention away from his own campaigns lies, smears and deceptions by screaming blue murder about vastly exaggerated ‘dirty tricks’ being used against him.

As Boris-stoppers we must do all we can to help our fellow Londoners cut through this thick layer of meta-lies, and see Boris’s campaign for the cynical charade it really is, yet again trying to keep the spotlight off Boris by pushing it back towards his opponents, and raising the dishonesty and bluster levels higher than ever.

Boris turned up to something!

Tuesday, 1 April 2008, 18.42 by Mr. Stop Boris

Perhaps it will be easier to report the rare occasions Boris does turn up to an event than the numerous things he bottles out of in the coming weeks.

Last night he went to an actual hustings with actual members of the public and TV cameras and everything - extraordinary! It’s almost as if he’s campaigning properly in an election or something!

There was a catch, though. This hustings was organised by the Evening Standard (and the almost-as-objectionable ITV London Tonight), and was held in Knightsbridge, far and away one of the wealthiest areas of the capital, which also happens to be in the more recently added half of the Congestion Charge zone, and home to a lot of 4×4-drivers who’d be liable to Ken’s proposed £25 CO2 Charge.

So, guess what the outcome was at the end of the debate when they held a vote to ask the audience who they thought would be getting their vote? You’ll be gobsmacked to learn that the winner was Boris.

I wonder why he decided this was the event to turn up to, rather than the Time Out hustings tomorrow or Radio 4’s Any Questions?

On the Time Out front, Boris’s team last night tried to cover their gaffophobia by blaming Time Out themselves; Time Out have since responded at length to set the record straight. Of course, it’s their word against his, but their account is pretty detailed, and there’s clearly a lot of nannying and manipulation going on from Boris’s side.

And let’s face it, who are you going to believe, some journalists, or, er, another journalist, who’s now also a politician, who’s additionally desperately trying to get elected, using what looks to be the second most dishonest campaign of this election (after the BNP, of course)?

Boris’s environmental pledge: plant far fewer trees

Wednesday, 26 March 2008, 22.16 by Mr. Stop Boris

Boris has been grabbing the headlines today by pledging to plant 10,000 trees around London over his first four years as Mayor.

But in 2002, the current Mayor launched the Million Trees Campaign, which aims to plant - surprisingly - a million trees around London by 2012. By the end of the 2006/7 planting season, the fifth year of the campaign, a total of 425,000 new trees had been planted in London.

By comparison with this total of nearly 100,000 per year, Boris’s 10,000 trees in four years looks utterly pathetic.

Of course, that hasn’t stopped the media lauding the plan as some kind of eco-revolution. Get serious, please - this is the man who wholeheartedly supports George W. Bush’s policy of boycotting the Kyoto agreement to combat climate change. (The USA under Bush is the only developed country in the world not to sign up to this, in case you thought this might not be a particularly extreme stance to take.)

Everyone knows Boris hasn’t a green bone in his body, and offering to plant a handful of trees over a long period of time goes no way whatsoever towards demonstrating otherwise.

P.S. To pay for the trees, Boris has pledged to scrap the Mayor’s newspaper, The Londoner, which is basically his equivalent of those newsletters/magazines that most local authorities send out from time to time to update their residents on what they’ve been up to - and, of course, to put their own spin on things. You know the sort of thing: the local media are up in arms about library closures, then you receive the Borough News which tells you how the council are consolidating some of their library resources into one much better library which will save you Council Tax, and so forth.

So The Londoner is biased, of course. But goodness me, to read some of the things Boris has been saying about it, you would think it was literally nothing but outright lies from the front cover to the back. In a city where the only city-wide paid-for newspaper and two out of the three freesheets are produced by the Daily Mail group, between whom and the Mayor there is little love lost, it’s not surprising he might want to point out a few falling crime figures or other things the Standard and its offshoots may ‘overlook’.

And of course, Mayor Boris wouldn’t need the Londoner anyway. Why invest time and money putting together a newspaper that looks like the Evening Standard but talks up your achievements instead of knocking them, when you can just let the Evening Standard do the work for you?

Surreal Metronet coverage

Thursday, 20 March 2008, 21.41 by Mr. Stop Boris

Tonight’s London news programmes’ election coverage was centred on Gordon Brown’s unsurprising endorsement of Ken Livingstone, what with him being in the same party and all. (They have ‘history’, of course, but some of the coverage would make you think Brown would seriously have refused to endorse him, which hardly seems likely.)

Both ITV and the BBC made reference to Metronet (which will bring me to Boris shortly, don’t worry). One of the most ill-informed questions I’ve seen on the news in recent memory was put to Brown by Alistair Stewart, whom I think I’ve mentioned my dislike for before, but really, this was just amateur. He said, “Do you really think Londoners can trust Ken Livingstone with a £5bn budget [don’t know where he got that figure from - I’ve always heard of it being £9-11bn] after the Metronet fiasco?”

Seriously. A supposedly respected veteran news broadcaster asking Gordon Brown whether Ken Livingstone could be trusted with big budgets after Metronet!

(For anyone as unenlightened as Stewart appeared to be, Brown forced the Metronet Tube deal on Livingstone against his loudly publicised wishes - and against a legal challenge Ken brought against the government in the courts to try to prevent them pushing it through.)

Anyway, this site is called Stop Boris, not Stop ITV’s London Tonight Being So Atrocious, so you’ll be pleased to hear that when I switched over to BBC London I was soon presented with The Blond himself, putting across a point about Metronet so convoluted that it must have taken quite some time for his campaign team to dream it up.

Apparently the current Mayor is indeed to blame for wasting money in relation to Metronet. Boris declares that Ken wasted the money he spent taking the government to court in the early days of his tenure to try to prevent the whole Metronet debacle from ever happening!

Now, StopBoris.org is already under enough suspicion of being a front for the Ken campaign (a commenter on PoliticalBetting reckons we’re Ken’s £100k-salaried ‘cronies’ - not a figure I’m ever likely to see on my payslip!) without me doing too much defending of Ken, but honestly! Boris has come out with some rubbish in this campaign, and this can certainly join the heap of nonsense. Had Ken been successful in the courts, he’d've saved many times over the money he’d spent on legal fees. And perhaps if he hadn’t opposed it, Gordon Brown wouldn’t have coughed up the £2bn to bail out Metronet from central government funds quite so readily, risking Londoners having to bear the whole bill themselves instead.

More evidence that Boris will say anything, no matter how illogical or downright nonsensical, if he thinks it will add to his chances of winning.

Needless to say, by the way, his point wasn’t challenged by anyone on BBC London. This is becoming a regular and worrying feature of the election coverage in all media. (Except StopBoris.org, obviously.)

Logic problem

Thursday, 20 March 2008, 18.32 by Mr. Stop Boris

On last night’s BBC London news I witnessed what must surely be a conscious tactic being adopted by Boris Johnson’s campaign: soundbites which are not just putting a spin on the issue at hand, but actually make no logical sense in response to the subject at hand.

This post is rather long so I’m going to make use of the ‘More’ feature on this blog. (You’ll have to excuse my lack of brevity - I’m new to this blogging business…)

(more…)