All over, bar the counting

So it's all over bar the counting. Ken, and Labour's fate is sealed not only in London but across the country. As I sit down in front of the BBC's Election Night coverage it feels strangely like the last General Election, because to all intents and purposes this is a referendum on the performance of the Government since Gordon Brown became Prime Minister. Oddly, I don't feel Labour's general woes have been reflected in London, as I knocked on doors and spoke to voters across the capital. Whether people in Balham or Barnet have their own reasons to vote for or against the Labour candidate is a separate issue. Personalities have dominated, as they tend to now, especially with the coverage afforded by the free newspapers, blogs, and other media outlets.

Anyway, we did well today. I'm absolutely exhausted, but the hours of traipsing the streets seemed to work a treat. We had the highest turnout of anywhere in the ward, which was good news for our patch at least. Not one person I personally spoke to said they were voting for Boris, although I'm sure they existed somewhere in the ward. Here in Balham it is difficult to tell - we're in an inner London borough (Lambeth) but with plenty of green space and wealthy commuter occupied homes. The place actually looks quite Tory, but the make-up of our street suggests otherwise.

I still have no idea what's going to happen, but I've enjoyed the campaign, and I can sleep well tonight knowing I've done something to prevent London going blue. Tomorrow will tell...

Brixton Market, Wednesday afternoon

I really didn't need convincing that this man needs another four years to carry on his excellent work running London. But I took the opportunity to join the Ken campaign team this afternoon to convince the people of Brixton too - and it really wasn't difficult! After a slightly chaotic start, when we were told that Ken would be arriving on the Victoria Line, then by car, then finally arriving at the tube in the rain, an enthusiastic crowd of Labour and Ken-sympathetic people joined Ken Livingstone and Val Shawcross on the campaign trail around the iconic Electric Avenue, and some of the warmest supporters of this man that I've met so far. I lost count of the number of people who wanted their picture taken with him - market traders stopped what they were doing and owners left their shops to get snapped.

We were also joined by slightly random Japanese television crews as well as BBC London and LBC. Each got a fair assessment of the campaign from the man himself, who pronounced he'd enjoyed himself, although I bet by now he's absolutely exhausted, as is Victoria, his press officer, another party person whom I know through a friend. I bet they'll be glad when all this is actually over - it's not been easy from the press side of things.

I'm too tired to write any more now except to say I've had a fantastic time on the campaign trail myself and I can't wait to get down to the polling station tomorrow!

Lessons to be learned after 1 May

The vitriol and the smears from the Standard have continued right up to the very bitter end, but I think Ken may just clinch this election. Today, their headlines claimed Boris had claimed an 11% surge over his rival, only a couple of days after the Guardian/ICM poll put Livingstone 6% ahead. Or, 4% if you count the people who've actually registered. So, as those who've interpreted this campaign have proved throughout, the truth is somewhere in between and not one candidate has really pushed that far past his rival.

I suspect we're in for a few surprises on Thursday - and not necessarily with the final outcome of the contest. If anything, this election will prove that pollsters' methods are outdated. Have they really taken into account the multiple combinations of first and second preference votes? There are some unholy alliances which will undoubtedly manifest themselves on polling day, and they won't be confined to the 'big four'.

So, to the big organisations who supposedly act as a weather vane for democracy - remember, not everyone in London has access to the Internet. Consider whether your sampling methods are fair and representative of the online and offline electorate. And, a caution to the candidates who judge their popularity by the number of people signed up to their respective Facebook groups. Perhaps I take democracy too seriously, but there's more to this than casually joining an online group when you don't necessarily intend to back it up at the ballot box.

I said in my previous post that I think this election could be won by the bloggers, but the issue is with the gulf of expectation between the number of people who say they'll vote, and those who've already scribbled down their choices by post or will plod down to the polling station on 1 May. More often than not, the results of these knife edge elections will have a number of factors influencing their result. Thursday could bring with it torrential storms and resulting in a huge swathe of less mobile and older people who decide against voting. On the other hand, we could be blessed with fine sunny spells - either way, it'll have an impact on the final result.

Whatever happens - the majority of voters will have made up their mind at this stage in the campaign (even if they weren't telling me so when when I went canvassing the other night!) and the final push of the Ken campaign will hopefully have made a positive impact. Ken's really made this job what it is by constantly pushing the limits and out-politicking everyone else. By doing so he has proved there's too much at stake to leave this fantastic city in the care of at best, a somewhat confused right-wing buffoon, and at the worst, a reactionary unreconstructed Thatcherite. London deserves a bit more confidence in its future than that.

Why this election might be won by the bloggers

Guardian blogger Dave Hill has been blogging about the various TV debates, including the most recent Question Time on BBC One.

The problem with the national TV debates has been that the producers have been desperately trying to make the Mayoral contest relevant to people all over the country. But, although the job of Mayor is a highly influential position, with potential hotlines to the Government and the many other perks of being a world-class city leader, it's genuinely not of any interest to the people of Aberystwyth or Aberdeen, Belfast or Bournemouth.

The same situation is apparent in the national press, although Joe Public arguably gets more opportunities to ignore the London coverage when flicking through their copy of the Daily Mail. Put the other way, it would be like people in London being forced to watch televised debates of the Kesgrave Parish Council by-elections every day for a month.

The two-way (at best three-way, if you count Brian Paddick) debates become inherently confrontational as the programmes have to simplify the issues, and broaden their appeal to justify their airtime. Both Johnson and Livingstone had to resort to getting a little nasty with each other on the ITV debate the other night, and even Paddick, often praised for his good nature, told Boris Johnson to "shut up" on Question Time. Not exactly the most Parliamentary of language, is it? Or perhaps a different set of rules applies for candidates who are not bound by the conventions of the House of Commons...

Perhaps that's why this election, more than any other, will be won by the bloggers and other media outlets where TV targets the wrong audiences, and does so in a way which patronises not only the electorate of London, but the poor souls in the provinces who have to be bored to death by our own local politics.

A response to the Time Out editorial, issue 1963 - 3 April

I wonder how the Time Out editorial team think that political parties are run in this country?

You quite rightly took the decision to stand down your candidate Michael Hodges from the London mayoral election. We agree that standing a candidate on the popular ideals of Time Out readers is the basis for a politically confused campaign (and don't get me started on Boris Johnson...).

But where on earth did you get the idea that political parties can pay their members to go out and campaign on their behalf? I've been a member of the Labour party for the last five years, and I can't remember a single occasion when a cheque dropped through the door for my Sunday morning efforts leafleting on a Lambeth council estate. Political parties are made up of people who care about politics and have a shared set of ideals about how they want to see a country or a city like London run. And, apart from a relatively small number of full-time staff, they certainly don't expect monetary renumeration for their efforts.

(Incidentally, political parties get access to the electoral rolls because they are democratically accountable to their members, unlike fringe loony magazine candidates who are accountable to whatever decisions you take over a cosy cup of tea in your editorial meeting!)

One more thing - what are the discriminatory barriers standing in the way of anyone wanting to run for election as Mayor? There is at least one genuinely independent candidate standing in the election this year - as well as representatives from every other major party. In democracies, people naturally join together to form common associations of like minded people. The 'people's manifesto' which you champion exists in every single one of the manifestos promoted by this year's candidates, no matter how much I disagree with the people in other parties. That's genuine democratic choice.

Yours sincerely

Paul Prentice

Why bringing back the Routemaster isn't the answer for London

Boris Johnson launched his transport manifesto for London today, but his ideas struggle to sound coherent or even workable. The Conservative candidate for the job of Mayor claims Ken Livingstone has "run out of ideas", when the current incumbent of the job has demonstrated anything but. TfL is a remarkably different organisation from the old London Transport inherited some nine years ago. Bus use has risen dramatically - a reverse of the considerable decline outside the capital and there are signs of considerable investment in the Tube (even if the Metronet debacle has somewhat damaged public confidence in the funding structure). It's all down to a co-ordinated, well-funded and integrated transport policy and a Mayor with a genuine passion for the things which make a difference to Londoners.

Johnson's latest wheeze proposes bringing back the Routemaster, seemingly in an attempt to capitalise on public mistrust of their replacements, those nasty European bendy-buses which happily purr down continental boulevards but which have never really caught on in Britain.

The last Routemasters were retired from front-line service in December 2005, minus the ten or so which currently ply their trade on the 'heritage' routes. There was public outcry at the abolition of these venerable old beasts, as many a Time Out article and opinion piece pointed out. What the travelling public didn't quite realise is quite how time expired these vehicles were.

The Routemaster was developed as a replacement for London's trolleybus fleet, in a post-war Britain, catching up on the development of new vehicles had been stalled for at least six years during wartime. The concept of the vehicle was revolutionary for its time, but its basic look and feel was little different from the pre-war 'RT', itself a development of the 1910 'B' type. So, in 2005, a fleet of buses was operating on front line services in central London based on a design which originated before many passengers' grandparents were even born. Operators of the Routemaster struggled to find spare parts, their capacity restricted their usefulness somewhat, and they cost considerably more than one-person buses to operate because of the necessity of the conductor to collect fares and oversee passengers embarking and disembarking.

Boris has announced a competition to design a new Routemaster - a bus fit for the 21st century. But London Transport long ago stopped building its own vehicles, and in an age of standardisation and globalised transport manufacturers, a bus that's specially designed for London use only isn't going to find markets elsewhere. The black cab only survived because its basic design was so adaptable elsewhere.

To Boris and his campaign team, this dewy eyed notion of a cheery conductor returning to shout 'fares please' up the stairs might be a vote winner. But, as TfL have stated, returning the conductor to London's buses, not least developing the replacement vehicle, would cost something of the tune of £108m. Is that a price Johnson is prepared to pay? And if so, how would he fund it? It's a question I've already put to him - and it'll be interesting to see how nostalgia will survive in a mayoral election which is already more bitter than the previous two.

Time to make a choice...the Labour Party deputy leadership campaign

My two ballot papers for the Labour party deputy leadership contest arrived in the post exactly a week ago. I still haven't sent them off. But, after a week more of reflection, hustings and televised debates I'm going to make the following choices.

1. Hilary Benn
2. Jon Cruddas
3. Harriet Harman
4. Alan Johnson
5. Peter Hain
6. Hazel Blears.

Benn really made an impression on me at a conference in February, and I feel swayed enough to give him my support. There's a lot of passion there, some great ideas to change the party and a real sense of optimism. He really seems to believe in politics, and the ability of the Labour party to change the world through its ideology and values. I hint a touch of Blair in the way he addresses people in his speeches, never a bad thing as far as the media are concerned.

He doesn't try to make any secret of the way he's voted in the past for example. I'm not happy with the fact he voted for the war, but at least unlike Harman, who will get my third choice, he is honest about his beliefs and doesn't try to make political capital about the situation there now.

Cruddas is doing very well, and has brought so much to the debate. As an orator, he's gained confidence in public. He voted for the war too, but he's now making welcome contributions to the housing debate and really excellent ideas on how to re-invigorate our party. He recognises that the fact the party has lost 200,000 members we've lost since 1997 is a real issue. I don't think any of the other candidates have really understood this. I'd trust Cruddas as our campaigner in chief.

Harriet Harman comes across as patronising, too middle-class and ideologically inconsistent. Supposedly courting the 'soft' left, she's also proud to have sent her children to a grant-maintained school - never the policy of this government. Irritatingly, she never quite reveals why standing as a female candidate is so important - she just takes it for granted that the general membership will default to a female deputy leader if Brown is PM. If she's really a feminist, she needs to put forward a better case as to why it's important to have men and women at the top in politics. Oh, and saying 'I'm the southern candidate' is just so ridiculous. She does however get my third preference for being an experienced Minister, who has admirably campaigned on human rights and equalities issues. She also has an excellent, well organised constituency party.

I initially thought I'd plump for Alan Johnson in this contest, but he just hasn't tried to win my vote. He came to a London Young Labour reception in February and stayed all of five minutes, barely attempting to convince the assembled yoof that this cheeky working class ex-postman who was brought up by his sister as a teenager would be someone to lead the party's activists into the next general election. I felt he had nothing to offer the youth movement of the party, but he's no. 4 on my ballot because of his Cabinet experience and the fact he comes across well in the media.

Peter Hain has nothing to contribute to the campaign apart from the fact that he was Secretary of State in Northern Ireland when power sharing was restored. He never fails to mention this in debates. Oh, and apartheid in South Africa. Don't forget that. I actually feel sorry for him, but want him nowhere near that Deputy Leader's office. I think, that despite his achievements, he'd be the wrong man for this job.

Hazel Blears is the Marmite candidate. I've met her personally, and she's lovely, but she has been far too close to the Blair regime. I just couldn't trust her to stand up to Gordon. She's got great working class credentials - 'My brother drives a Manchester bus' - but she's also quite divisive. When I was helping out Hilary Benn in ringing councillors to ask if they'd vote for him, all I got was 'anyone but Blears'.

So, there you have it, I'm off the postbox now!