Jon Cruddas says there is only one choice in the mayoral election to ensure a vibrant and progressive capital

IN MANY elections over the past few years, the media talking heads we have to endure while waiting for the results to come in have blamed low turnout on the lack of choice. To an extent, I can sympathise with that analysis – the main parties have converged tactically in pursuit of a narrow segment of the electoral terrain. Many commentators have concluded that is, at the very least, a factor in the lack of engagement as measured by voting turnout.

Meanwhile, in this electoral cycle, there can be no doubt what the big political story is: with the personalities involved, Ken Livingstone versus Boris Johnson is almost the next best thing to a presidential contest.

But what is unfortunate is that the story has so often been described as a clash of personalities rather than politics. In reality, this is an election where the pundits really should not be allowed to get away with saying: “They’re all the same”, because the choice could not be clearer. Londoners face starkly diverging political visions and programmes when they vote for their Mayor.

In Ken Livingstone, we have a Mayor who has consistently brought in progressive policies that have benefited millions of Londoners – often in the face of serious resistance.

We all know about the big projects Ken has steered through: the pioneering congestion charge or setting up the C40 group of the world’s largest cities to tackle climate change.

But it’s Ken’s bread-and-butter policies for improving daily life for Londoners – especially the worse-off – that we should be really focus on. We have seen the biggest investment in buses since the Second World War. Thousands of new affordable houses have been built – and there is a guarantee to insist that new developments are at least 50 per cent affordable housing, which is absolutely critical in my constituency. Similarly, the thousands of new police officers deployed in local community teams represent a huge step forward in the way we police our communities.

One policy that has been beneath the radar of too many Westminster politicians and pundits is the London living wage – one of Ken’s policies that should be top of the progressive agenda. Ken has created a unit at the Greater London Authority whose responsibility is to research the real cost of living in the capital and calculate the hourly pay rate necessary to match it – that figure is the London living wage. GLA procurement is carried out on the basis that contractors agree a clause guaranteeing to pay their staff the living wage as a minimum.

Given the huge size of the GLA’s budget – as well as the number of direct GLA employees – there are numerous workers across London who earn a living thanks to this policy. Even more important, the knock-on effect is to drive wages up across the board, with the GLA rates becoming the norm in many low-pay sectors. Local authorities are following the Mayor’s lead and Ken is working closely with other campaigns to pressure private sector employers to follow suit. Many have done so. The London living wage may never make the headlines, but it is making a huge difference to tens of thousands – if not more – of the poorest Londoners.

In-work poverty is an issue that ministers have fought shy of addressing – preferring to believe employment is a magic bullet to solve poverty – but Ken has tackled it head on.

Across the board, his work has made the difference to thousands of working-class Londoners who rely on the services that Ken has invested in.

Then comes the choice. Boris Johnson, the Tory candidate, has it all. Compass’ dossier on Boris Johnson’s past comments is pretty chilling stuff. It’s like a checklist of Thatcherite platitudes. He was against the national minimum wage and better parental leave, opposed the Kyoto Treaty, and supported Section 28, private schools and wants the private sector involved in the National Heath Service.

His track record is bad enough, but his proposals for a Johnson mayoralty prove what kind of choice Londoners have. His hostility to trade unionism is represented in his desire to deny the right to strike for transport workers, while his pledge to scrap Ken’s 50 per cent target for affordable houses shows he is on the side of big developers, not those who are desperate for a home.

He even opposes Ken’s environmental policies around the low emission zone, and is proposing a massive new international airport. He opposes Ken’s pledge to bring more transport routes, such as Croydon Tramlink, into public ownership. He has said he will be looking for “big ticket” savings (otherwise known as “cuts”) from the budgets of the Met Police and Transport for London.

There is a real choice here. On the one hand, we have a Mayor who has stood up for progressive politics in London and stood up to right-wing opposition. On the other hand, we have a Tory candidate who wants to carry on where Margaret Thatcher left off.

The battle against the British National Party is also going to be tough. The electoral system means that the BNP only needs 5 per cent of the vote to win a seat on the London Assembly. This would be a complete disaster for the London we love, and we can avert it by ensuring that turnout is high enough to shut the BNP out. There are no safe seats and marginal seats – every vote matters on May 1.

It’s time to get stuck in on the ground to defend the gains we have made under Ken. You can go to www.kenlivingstone.com to donate either time or money.

Communities such as the London constituency I represent are in the frontline of the battles we are fighting on poverty, pay and so many issues – and we need the occupant of City Hall to be on our side. Let’s keep Ken in there and keep the BNP out.

Jon Cruddas is Labour MP for Dagenham