SPECTAT O R
The Spectator, 56 Doughty Street, London WC1N 2LL Telephone: 0171-405 1706; Fax 0171-242 0603
CAPITAL PUNISHMENT
Barring some unpredictable reversal, Lord Archer of Weston-super-Mare will be the Tory candidate to be Mayor of Lon- don. He could even win the job, if Labour continues to tie itself in knots over the can- didacy of Ken Livingstone, and on the face of it that would not be a disastrous out- come.
His speech to London party activists on Tuesday night was as polished, manicured and blow-dried as one might have expect- ed. He glared at his audience in the melo- dramatic way the Tory faithful have come to love. He pitched his voice high and low; now Dalek, now singsong. He wanted Lon- don to be a cleaner city. He supported the police. He had been across the globe to confer with the Mr Bigs of other capitals, such as 'Hizzoner' Rudolph Giuliani of New York. He faced no difficult questions about dealing in the shares of companies with which his wife was involved. There was one slight moment of tension, when someone asked about clearing out the call- ing cards left by prostitutes in telephone boxes. Lord Archer chose to give us his views on graffiti. We gathered that he was against it.
Instead, he gave a general pledge that if London chose him it would not be asking a `saint' to look after its affairs. This showed an attractive candour, and it is an interest- ing reflection on modern politics that hav- ing a skeleton in the cupboard is now seen as a rather useful prop, something that can always be dragged out if the media show any sign of apathy about your doings. Apart from his pledge to appoint a 'Com- missioner for Dirt', however, Lord Archer was coy about his plans to improve the life of the metropolis. Indeed, he was easily beaten for originality by Andrew Boff, who solved the problem of the prostitutes' call- ing cards at a stroke. He would fine the telephone companies supplying the num- bers, he said — which may be offensive to liberal principles, but at least had the merit of being an idea. On questions of policy, in fact, Lord Archer sounded less assured than Steven Norris, who burbled engagingly about the need to combat racism, and at the same time to reassure the Met that its officers were not racist. Mr Norris sounded proper-
ly caring about a homelessness programme he had helped pioneer in government, while at the same time, Mr Chairman, he yielded to no one in his condemnation of those who are so thoughtless as to sleep in doorways (great applause). It would be out- rageous if the media were allowed to bounce the Tories into a decision on their candidate, said Mr Norris, though of course, Mr Chairman, Bob, we have to recognise that the media will be very important, not that he would dream of mentioning how the Evening Standard and others will persecute Lord Archer.
One could, in a moment of mental weak- ness, despair of all the Tory candidates, and abstain. It is a comment on the sloth and cowardice of the many ex-ministers that they have not put their names forward. This is, potentially, a fascinating and wonderful job. The mayor will have responsibility for `transport, strategic planning, economic development, the environment and culture, and will have the duty to promote the health of Londoners'. He or she will have wide powers of appointment in transport, development, the police and fire services.
The trouble with Jeffrey Archer is that one senses that he is not so much interested in promoting the health and happiness of Londoners, as in promoting himself. On Tuesday he said he looked forward to being the 'first citizen' of the capital. He is on record as saying that he knows he will have succeeded if, in four years' time, people `stand up when he comes into the room'.
Jeffrey Archer is a gifted and charming man, and a much better writer than is often acknowledged. But somehow it sticks in the craw to call him London's 'first citizen' and, though he is, more or less, a welcome sight walking into any room, The Spectator can be relied on to stay sitting down. When one reads the lavish testimonials of Lady Thatcher, Mr Major and others, one has the uneasy sense that they are repaying all that Krug and shepherd's pie.
Above all, one had no sense from Lord Archer that he saw his campaign as part of the Conservative fightback, or that he would use his position to goad Tony Blair, or propel Mr Hague into Downing Street. The only candidate who made the effort to sound coherent with the Tory campaign to win the next election was Steven Norris. Only Mr Norris, for instance, could be bothered to mention education, and the continuing misery of those who are forced to use inner-London schools. In an ideal world, and without in any way meaning to depreciate Lord Archer's achievements for himself and for the Conservative party, Steven Norris would be the Tory candidate.
Lord Archer made much last night of Mr Blair's comment that if it were a choice between a vote for Archer or a vote for Liv- ingstone, he, Blair, would vote for Archer. Thoughtful Tories, on the other hand, will see that this, at first blush, and in those cir- cumstances, would be a good reason for voting for Livingstone.
Previous page
