Boris in the FT and Times

The Financial Times hasn’t recently been a Tory cheerleader.  New Labour’s business-friendly attitude won it no little approval in the FT, and Livingstone’s London suited the FT’s equally suited readers rather better than one might think.   With that in mind, check out (free registration required) the warning shot across the bows of HMS Boris this morning:

For most voters there has been little to show for Mr Johnson’s seismic victory. Despite his masterful election campaign, his administration appears to lack what political consultants call “a narrative” – a vision that ordinary voters can identify with. Together with the disarray over his appointments, it suggests a lack of readiness for office.

Good to see this more critical, reality based approach rather than the LOL BORIS GOT TO 100 DAYZ WITHOUT TEH PLACE FALLING DOWN stuff we saw over the last couple of weeks.

Next, from the non-financial Times:

James Morris, director of the London Policy Institute and chief executive of Localis, argues that “the governing arrangements of the city need to evolve to cope with the dynamic, changing nature of the governing challenge in London”. Johnson says that he will reduce conflict by “synchronising strategic priorities with local priorities”. Morris advocates a more radical approach. “Borough leaders should be brought into decision-making at the mayoral level, so that London is governed as a single entity.”

With Messrs Milton, Clement and Malthouse having their feet well under the desks at City Hall, plus Daniel Moylan of K&C on the TfL board, plus Richard Barnes of Hillingdon as the statutory Deputy Mayor plus the absurd fondness for the company of Stephen Greenhalgh at Hammersmith & Fulham , isn’t this more or less Mayor Boris 2.0 as we currently understand it?  Obviously that leaves quite a lot of Boroughs completely unrepresented.  All the Labour ones, for instance.

A thought occurs – how on earth can you synchronise priorities between City Hall and Lambeth and City Hall and Kingston-upon-Thames without Lambeth and Kingston having rather more in the way of commonality in ‘strategic priorities’ than they would appear to have now?  The boroughs aren’t all pulling in the same direction by any means.