How Ken Livingstone defeated Tony Blair to become London Mayor
Ken v Tony: How London elected its first mayor
10 minutes ago
Share
Save
Tony Grew
BBC News
Share
Save
Getty Images
Rivals for power: Ken Livingstone and Tony Blair come face to face
Regional mayors are now commonplace in England: Andy Burnham in Greater Manchester, Ben Houchen in the Tees Valley and Tracy Brabin in West Yorkshire are all well-known spokespeople for their areas.
But the most prominent directly-elected mayor in Britain was also the first: London.
As is fitting for a city as exciting as London, the first election for that coveted position included allegations of betrayal, stitch ups and intrigue – and one candidate ended up in prison.
Twenty five years ago Tony Blair's government, elected in 1997 and known as New Labour, was very keen on a new form of devolution.
9:11
London's mayor at 25 - what's next?
They wanted mayors like those in America, big personalities elected with powers and budgets (but not too many powers, or too big a budget).
In the end, only one was created by Blair's government.
The 1998 Greater London Authority referendum, held in May that year, asked whether there was support for creating a Greater London Authority with a directly elected mayor and Assembly.
The voters were less keen than New Labour - just 34% turned out to vote, but the majority was clear nonetheless: 72% in favour.
The 'Yes' vote won in every London borough, with support lowest in Bromley with 57% and highest in Haringey with 84%.
PA Media
Just four mayoral candidates taking a ride on the new London Eye
Now London was to have a mayor, who would it be?
The obvious candidate was Ken Livingstone, the former left-wing firebrand (and publicity-friendly) leader of the Greater London Council (GLC), who went toe-to-toe with the Thatcher government - and lost.
The GLC was abolished in 1986, leaving London in the unenviable position of having 32 boroughs (and the City of London) but no overall strategic elected body for the largest city in Europe.
However, Livingstone's ability to alienate prime ministers wasn't confined to Conservatives.
Getty Images
Ken Livingstone during his time as leader of the GLC
Tony Blair was also not a Ken fan.
"Red" Ken, as he was known, was Old Labour, not New Labour.
The message from Downing St was clear: Stop Ken.
The party management tried to get the very popular Mo Mowlam to stand, then switched to Frank Dobson.
A bearded, avuncular figure who was serving as New Labour's first health secretary, he was 'persuaded' to stand against his old comrade Ken.
Dobson had initially, and somewhat bravely, declared his desire to remain at health, but then had to give up his cabinet seat to run for a job he didn't want.
The internal workings of Labour can be difficult for outsiders - and many insiders - to navigate.
In this case, an electoral college was mandated which led to the popular Livingstone not winning selection.
The vote was a third each for party members, trade unions and London MPs and other elected representatives.
In the final ballot Livingstone won 60% of party members and 72% of affiliated unions, but Dobson won 86% of MPs, MEPs and Greater London Assembly candidates.
Dobson therefore won a narrow overall victory, and the Blairites were accused of rigging the whole thing to keep Old Labour Ken from the nomination.
Livingstone for his part had promised not to run as an independent, then decided that that was what he was going to do after all.
PA Media
Tony Blair backed Frank Dobson as Labour's candidate for Mayor
The Tories also had a colourful time choosing their candidate.
In September 1999 the novelist Jeffrey Archer was selected by party members, beating Steve Norris.
But in a plot twist reminiscent of one of his books, Archer withdrew from the race a few months later after it was alleged he had committed perjury in a famous libel case.
Lord Archer had secured the Conservative nomination with backing from former prime ministers Margaret Thatcher and John Major, who in 1992 had made him a peer.
Five years earlier, in 1987, Archer had won a libel case against The Daily Star which published a story that he had paid off a sex worker called Monica Coghlan.
After his selection as a mayoral candidate, a former friend of Archer's told the News of the World that he had lied in the libel trial and asked him to provide a false alibi.
Archer stood down from the race, and starred in a production of his courtroom play, The Accused, in London's West End while waiting for his trial to start.
In July 2001 he was found guilty and spent two years in jail, but retained his peerage and membership of the House of Lords as there was no mechanism to remove them at the time.
PA Media
Lord Archer was found guilty of perjury and spent two years in jail
Norris was selected as the Conservative Party candidate to replace Archer.
A very different type of Tory, Norris advocated for gay rights and had a relaxed approach to monogamy.
He was also a former transport minister who was obsessed with buses.
In that role, he had a hand in approving the Jubilee line extension from Green Park to Stratford, and the privatisation of London's bus services.
In the rough and tumble world of turn of the century politics, he was given the nickname "Shagger".
A brief snippet from a Guardian profile piece published during that first mayoral campaign gives a flavour of Norris' complex appeal.
"The day his original candidature was announced was marked by a letter to the Times from his father-in-law, a retired rear-admiral, expressing astonishment at Norris's public plans to marry the fourth of his famous five mistresses … since as far as the rear-admiral knew, Norris was still married to his daughter."
Norris was a self-made man, a millionaire car salesman who grew up in working class Liverpool, attending the same school as Paul McCartney.
Not many 2025 Tories can boast that sort of hinterland.
PA Media
Steve Norris was a socially liberal Conservative and bus obsessive
There may have been some intrigue in the Lib Dem selection process, but it is lost to history if there was.
Their candidate was the estimable Susan Kramer, who was subjected to condescension and mansplaining throughout the campaign - this was a time when female Labour MPs were referred to as "Blair's Babes" by tabloid and broadsheet newspapers alike.
Livingstone was to mount the first - and so far only - successful independent bid for Mayor of London.
Dobson ran a campaign that never really captured the imagination of London's voters, and his old comrade won the historic poll despite a late surge in support for the Tory candidate.
The May 2000 election was a disaster for New Labour: Dobson got just 13% of the vote and was eliminated in the first round along with Susan Kramer, who polled a respectable 11.9% for the Lib Dems.
Livingstone led by 39% to 27% of first preference votes and polled a total of 776,427 votes to 564,137 for Norris, after second preferences were calculated.
It was a bloody nose and a notable defeat for the previously unassailable Tony Blair.
The BBC News website has an archive of reports from this election, a time capsule of the way politics used to be.
It reported that Dobson's "humiliation in the mayoral poll was underlined as he came fourth in the mayoral contest in Barnet and Camden - the seat which includes his parliamentary constituency".
The BBC News website reported the Mayoral election in May 2000
The 2000 election reports reveal Livingstone said he would "fight for the interests of Londoners as mayor, demanding more money from the government and telling ministers they were wrong over plans to partially privatise the London Underground".
London Underground, now part of Transport for London, remains in public hands under the control of the Mayor of London.
It also reported that Blair "made it clear Mr Livingstone would not be allowed to return to Labour after standing against an official party candidate".
Blair was wrong about that: in 2004 Livingstone was the Labour candidate, and he won, again defeating Norris.
Livingstone was his party's standard bearer again in both 2008 and 2012, on both occasions losing to a young Conservative contender called Boris Johnson.
But that's another story.
Listen to the best of BBC Radio London on Sounds and follow BBC London on Facebook, X and Instagram. Send your story ideas to hello.bbclondon@bbc.co.uk
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
29 minutes ago
- The Guardian
US-China trade talks: ‘framework' deal amid dispute over rare earths
Officials from the US and China have agreed on a 'framework' to move forward on trade after two days of talks in London stemming from their confrontation over tariffs. The US commerce secretary, Howard Lutnick, expressed optimism on Tuesday that concerns about critical or 'rare earth' minerals and magnets 'will be resolved' as the deal is implemented. Lutnick told reporters that the framework puts 'meat on the bones' of a deal reached last month in Geneva to ease retaliatory tariffs. Its implementation had faltered over China's curbs on critical mineral exports. The deal also would remove some US export restrictions that were recently put in place, Lutnick said. 'We have reached a framework to implement the Geneva consensus and the call between the two presidents,' Lutnick said. 'The idea is we're going to go back and speak to President Trump and make sure he approves it. They're going to go back and speak to President Xi and make sure he approves it, and if that is approved, we will then implement the framework.' In a separate briefing, China's vice commerce minister Li Chenggang said a trade framework had been reached that would be taken back to US and Chinese leaders. 'The two sides have, in principle, reached a framework for implementing the consensus reached by the two heads of state during the phone call on June 5th and the consensus reached at the Geneva meeting,' Li told reporters. Lutnick said China's restrictions on exports of critical minerals and magnets to the US would be resolved as a 'fundamental' part of the framework agreement. 'Also, there were a number of measures the United States of America put on when those rare earths were not coming,' Lutnick said. 'You should expect those to come off, sort of as President Trump said, in a balanced way.' Li said: 'Our communication has been very professional, rational, in-depth and candid.' All eyes were on the outcomes of negotiations as both sides were at an impasse over export restrictions, with US officials earlier accusing Beijing of slow-walking approvals for shipments of critical minerals. The world's two biggest economies were also seeking a longer-lasting truce in their escalating tariffs war, with levies reduced temporarily. 'We're moving as quickly as we can,' US trade representative Jamieson Greer told reporters. 'We feel positive about engaging with the Chinese.' With Reuters and Agence France-Presse
BBC News
an hour ago
- BBC News
UN panel urges UK to renegotiate Chagos Islands deal
A UN panel has urged the UK to renegotiate a deal returning the Chagos Islands to Mauritius, saying it "fails to guarantee" the rights of the Chagossian deal, signed last month, returned sovereignty of the Indian Ocean archipelago to Mauritius, but the UK retained the right to run a military base on Diego Garcia, the largest of the Chagos preventing the Chagossian people from returning to Diego Garcia, "the agreement appears to be at variance with the Chagossians' right to return," the UN experts wrote.A Foreign Office spokesperson said the UK-Mauritius deal had been "welcomed by international organisations including the UN secretary general". The panel of four experts were appointed by the UN Human Rights Council, but are not UN staff and are independent from the said by the UK keeping the military base of Diego Garcia, the Chagossian people were hindered from being able to "exercise their cultural rights in accessing their ancestral lands from which they were expelled".The panel called for the current deal to be suspended and for a new agreement to be the agreement, the UK would pay an average of £101m a year for 99 years to continue operating the military base on Diego Garcia, in concert with the Chagos Islands are located in the Indian Ocean about 5,799 miles (9,332km) south-east of the UK, and about 1,250 miles north-east of UK purchased the islands for £3m in 1968, but Mauritius has argued it was illegally forced to give away the islands in order to gain independence from Garcia was then cleared to make way for a military base, with large groups of Chagossians forcibly moved to Mauritius and the Seychelles, or taking up an invitation to settle in England, mainly in Crawley, West then, Chagossians have not been allowed to return to Diego the UK-Mauritius deal was signed last month, two Chagossian women living in the UK - who were born on Diego Garcia - launched a last-minute legal bid to stop it, saying the agreement did not guarantee the right of return to their island of birth. The deal includes a £40m trust fund to support Chagossians, a component that the UN panel also questioned would "comply with the right of the Chagossian people to effective remedy... and prompt reparation". "The agreement also lacks provisions to facilitate the Chagossian people's access to cultural sites on Diego Garcia and protect and conserve their unique cultural heritage," the panel Foreign Office spokesperson said: "We recognise the importance of the islands to Chagossians and have worked to ensure the agreement reflects this."Shadow Foreign Secretary Dame Priti Patel said the Conservatives "have been warning from the start that this deal is bad for British taxpayers and bad for the Chagossian people"."It is why I have introduced a bill in Parliament that would block the [agreement] and force the government to speak to the people at the heart of their surrender plans," she the House of Commons and House of Lords have until 3 July to pass a resolution to oppose the deal being ratified.
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
ALEX BRUMMER: If this is a fixed economy, I'd hate to see a broken one
Nearly half a century has passed since Margaret Thatcher skewered the incumbent PM James Callaghan at the 1979 election with her famous ' Labour Isn't Working' poster, which showed dole queues stretching across the horizon. We are not quite there yet. But after years of low unemployment in Britain, Rachel Reeves and Sir Keir Starmer have brought chaos – in just 11 months – to what was one of the strongest labour markets in Europe. Last October's Budget and its central and perhaps most hated policy – an increase in employers' National Insurance to 15 per cent – added no less than £23 billion to bosses' wage bills. And for all this Government's promise not to raise taxes on 'working people', it's now clear that this misguided and self-defeating pledge is having a vicious impact on jobs. Companies are proving reluctant to take on new workers, are deliberately not replacing colleagues who move on and are taking the opportunity to cut costs by making people redundant. The only silver lining is slowing wage increases, at least in the private sector, should make it possible for the Bank of England to lower interest rates by a further 0.25 per cent this summer to 4 per cent – making mortgages and borrowing cheaper. The public sector is another matter, of course, and has enjoyed lavish raises at the expense of the productive part of the economy – to say nothing of its far more generous gold-plated pensions, paid out of direct taxation. But overall the picture is dire. The National Insurance increase, along with a hugely generous rise in the minimum wage – now one of the highest on the planet – surging fuel costs and rising business rates, have shattered business confidence. Companies are shedding jobs at an alarming rate. Figures collected by HMRC show that 55,000 jobs were lost in April alone and numbers 'were notably weaker' than expected, according to bankers Goldman Sachs. Vacancies are tumbling, too – these stood at 736,000 in the three months to April, down from 760,000 in the previous period, and were at 1.4 million as recently as 2022. The unemployment rate, which was 3.6 per cent of the workforce prior to the pandemic, has now zipped up to 4.6 per cent. And the worst part? There's more to come. Businesses are steeling themselves for socialist firebrand Angela Rayner's beloved Employment Rights Bill, currently grinding its way through Parliament, which will make hiring new workers even more expensive. To peals of outrage (and a front-page Daily Mail headline: 'Deluded'), this week Sir Keir claimed to have 'fixed' our public finances, thus making possible his Government's U-turn on snatching the winter fuel allowance from millions of pensioners. Well, if this is what 'fixed' looks like, Sir Keir, I'd hate to see the economy 'broken'. Rising unemployment is a menace. It inevitably raises the cost of Britain's already gargantuan welfare bill – and it simultaneously reduces Government revenues due to lower income tax and National Insurance receipts. In 1979, unemployment stood at 5.3 per cent – and, despite the Iron Lady's famous poster, it rose to a staggering 11.9 per cent by 1984 on her watch. We are a long way from those days. Yet as I have said before, Ms Reeves – with last year's £40 billion tax-raising Budget, locked Britain into a doom loop of plummeting business confidence, rising unemployment and reduced job choices. Yesterday's multi-year public-spending review will splash the cash on investments in nuclear power, science and technology, roads and railways. As helpful as all that may be, it will mean more Government borrowing and debt that will take years to pay off. Expect unemployment to keep on rising until the Government changes course.
