Memories of the loony left in Brent

It is over two decades since the politics of Labour were dominated - at least in the public mind - by the antics of the so-called 'loony left' in London and some other cities. Yet behind the caricatures of extremism, there were some figures whose lives were irrevocably changed by the period. Some politicians - Ken Livingstone and Paul Boeteng among them - went on to have a second chance (and did rather better second time round). Other figures have faded from memory. One part of London that was perhaps most associated with the barminess of the period was the borough of Brent. And one case that attracted national attention was the story of the Sudbury Infants School head teacher Maureen McGoldrick in 1986, who was suspended by Brent Council for allegedly making a racist remark to one of their officials. Jim Moher was on the board of governors at the school at the time, and his feelings about how unfairly she was treated drove him into Labour politics where he became a moderating force in the local party, stood as a parliamentary candidate and became a leading Labour councillor. In a well-researched book that he has published himself, Stepping on White Corns, he uses the McGoldrick affair as the springboard for a fascinating account of the politics and personalities of Brent Labour politics at the time. Moher's book is strongly critical of the way in which highly politicised 'anti-racism' came to dominate education in the Brent of the eighties, in place of the basics that were more important to Black parents. This is not an easy read - and it would have benefited from a good sub-editor - but anyone with a fascination for Labour or education politics of the time will find it a rewarding and challenging account. The extent to which local politics has changed is shown by the presence of an introduction by the current Brent Labour group leader, Ann John. The book is available from the author at 51 Medway Gardens, Wembley, Middlesex HA0 2RJ price £11.50 including postage & packaging.

What Ken needs to do to win

Perhaps as one of those New Labour types whom Ken cheerfully enjoyed smashing into the ground in 2000, I should be sitting this mayoral election out, particularly since I don't have a vote in the capital any more. I helped Frank Dobson win the Labour nomination at the time (though was not part of his mayoral campaign team) fearing that Ken might resort to cronyism, gesture politics and consorting with extremists if he became Mayor, having remembered the less attractive features of the eighties GLC. But while Ken has been his 1980s self to an extent, he has also made a big difference to the capital. The congestion charge has been a success, buses are more frequent, the Oyster card is great, crime is down and the capital will host the 2012 Olympics. True, taxi fares are also utterly extortionate now, but this is a success list any mayor would die for. And one look at his motley crew of opponents, including the charming but utterly unconvincing Boris Johnson, makes it clear that Ken is the only candidate capable of leading the capital. So I hope he takes Jonathan Freedland's excellent advice on how he needs to do it in today's Guardian: debate more, promise this is your last term, offer to hire Brian Paddick, get out the vote and be your cheeky, populist self. He needs all the help he can get.

Lee Jasper's suspension

Ken Livingstone should have suspended Lee Jasper much sooner. The allegations - and the apparent evidence - of wrongdoing were fairly compelling weeks ago. Particularly disgraceful was the way in which Jasper's personal dislike of Trevor Phillips was allowed to be turned into a vendetta apparently using public money. That Ken has waited so long to make his move may suggest a commendable loyalty to a friend, but it was bad politics. Whether or not the various enterprises to which Jasper lent his support turn out to be the turkeys they are portrayed as in the media remains to be seen. But the whole affair can only have given Boris a boost that he doesn't deserve.

Missing the mark on Ken

Martin Bright's Dispatches documentary on Ken Livingstone and his 'court' last night missed the mark for two reasons. First, Bright threw every piece of anti-Ken propaganda, weak or strong, into his story. And second, it was preceded by the over-the-top comment piece in the now very anti-Ken Evening Standard, where Bright maintained he had decided this very weekend not to vote for Ken in the forthcoming Mayoral elections. Nobody could have been in any doubt about Ken's far-left affiliations when they voted for him, and the fact that the Mayor has the powers he has is a strength of the office rather than a weakness. What exactly was achieved for London in the years between the demise of the GLC and his election? Councils couldn't and wouldn't agree anything that they perceived as against their very local interests. The Congestion Charge, winning the Olympics, improved public spaces (at Trafalgar Square, and soon, at Westminster), and better buses are neither to be sniffed at nor discounted because of a £500 room service bill in China or even the Mayor's penchant for a nip of whiskey when facing the GLA. Moreover, in the globalised world, it was hard to see what objection one should have to London having offices in Brussels, India or China. Of course, the Venezualan and Cuban links are cretinous, although they seem perversely to have aided Londoners; the provision of platforms for extreme Islamists is wrong; and the campaign against Trevor Phillips was petty-minded, and wasteful of taxpayers' money. The Mayor also clearly spends rather too much on glossy propaganda. And the voters of London are entitled to weigh all this in the balance when they vote in May. But Bright would have had a more convincing case - and persuaded more voters - if he showed us, for example, rather more of how Socialist Action had misused its position to the detriment of Londoners - if they have done so - and rather fewer Liberal Democrats with an axe to grind or faux-outrageous examples of Ken living up to his cheeky chappy image.

Ken's Achilles Heel

I will freely admit that I underestimated Ken Livingstone when he was bidding for the London Mayorship in 2000. His congestion charge, even if its impact has lessened over time, was a bold and wise move for a major capital. Some public spaces, such as Trafalgar Square, are the better for having less traffic. Buses are plentiful, though the bendy-buses are a menace at pedestrian crossings. With David Blunkett's help at the Home Office, London policing is largely better, and most crime is down. In many ways, London has regained the civic identity that it had lost when the Greater London Council was launched. But, there are worrying signs that Ken has retained some of his less attractive practices from the GLC days, and has surrounded himself with advisers who could drag him down. And today's report on the Today programme - following a lengthy series of Evening Standard reports (albeit with the overweaning bias of one Andrew Gilligan, whose reputation precedes him) on unsuccessful companies backed with London Development Agency money - that Ken's race adviser Lee Jasper (right) had been trying to use public money to launch a campaign to discredit Trevor Phillips (left) is deeply worrying. This is said to have happened - and the emails read out on the programme sound pretty clear in these matters - when Trevor was in the running to head the new Equality and Human Rights Commission, a job he now holds. Ken should suspend Jasper now and launch an independent investigation into this and other recent allegations about his race adviser. The danger is that if he pretends these are not important issues, he will hand the election to Boris on a plate. And however entertaining Boris may be on Have I Got News For You, I'm with Luke Akehurst in his assessment of what his election would mean for London.