Is there any point in talking about local democracy in London in 2006?

Looking at the behaviour of Ruth Kelly over the past day or so, it is very worrying to note that a devout religious fanatic like her should be allowed to decide on what happens to London's democratic future.

She is now very close to giving Ken Livingstone powers that are undreamt of by some of the world's most hated dictators.

Livingstone's dictatorial streaks have now come to the fore, with item after item of his conduct confirming that he is as authoritarian as any that could be spotted anywhere in the world today. In fact, had Livingstone been in charge of the regime in Iraq, instead of Saddam Hussein, it is arguable that many more people would have lost their innocent lives than they have in fact done.

Is it all an exaggeration?

Look at ken Livingstone’s Rightwing record over the past year.

He has been openly praising Margaret Thatcher.
He has now joined the band of the NF-BNP propaganda units to mount the attack on Muslims.

It is the same Ken Livingstone who insulted the memories of those who were massacred by the Nazis. Livingstone abused his post as mayor to insult the Jewish reporter Oliver Finegold whose only offence was to ask the authoritarian Livingstone to explain what had been going on at the meeting that Livingstone was at the time been coming out of.


There have been hundreds of examples of the insane behaviour by this man.

He is the one also to praise the CIA man Bob Kiley for showing how he, Kiley, frightened people at negotiating tables!


For that capacity to frighten, Livingstone was paying Kiley a daily rate of over £3000 from the public purse for doing undisclosed work as a retired ‘consultant’!

Is this the man to be given powers over locally elected councils?