It’s on: Khan v Bailey will be a chance to scrutinise the leading candidates
Four years ago I chaired the first head- to-head debate between the mayoral candidates Sadiq Khan and Zac Goldsmith. It was a dramatic encounter, with the Labour candidate (and current London mayor) laying into his rival for the Tory campaign’s descent “into the gutter.”
Just days before the debate, Goldsmith had launched a stinging attack on Khan’s apparent association with Islamic extremists. It was an ugly, unfair and ultimately self-destructive move by a Tory campaign machine that thought it could win over Londoners with a dog whistle and some good old-fashioned fear.
Khan was furious with the Tory attack, and ultimately played it to his advantage. When I asked each candidate what they admired about the other, Khan said he used to respect Goldsmith but was saddened that his party had captured him and forced him into making ugly, inflammatory attacks.
Goldsmith failed to answer the question. It felt like a turning point in the campaign. It was the first time the two leading candidates had faced each other, and there was a clear winner on the night.
On Monday 16 March, City A.M. will once again host the only head-to-head clash between Khan and the new Tory challenger Shaun Bailey. They haven’t appeared on stage together so far in this campaign, each sending proxies to represent them in the many husting events
that have hosted the full field of other candidates. Their absence from these panels has been heavily criticised by the other parties, as has my decision to host a debate between the two men.
After announcing our debate on Wednesday evening, I have received hundreds of angry messages from Liberal Democrats and Green party members and activists. I’ve been accused of sexism (as if it’s my fault that the two main parties are running male candidates) and of being anti-democratic.
I’ve also been accused of seeking to stitch up the election — as if I had such power. Let me address these complaints here, since I don’t have time to respond to the tweeters. As things stand, and as an imminent poll is expected to confirm, Khan and Bailey are the two leading candidates.
While it’s true that (despite Khan’s insistence) this is not a two- horse race (second preference votes will count for a lot, and actually give Rory Stewart his best chance) the two major party candidates should be scrutinised. And, since they are reluctant to appear alongside the other candidates, I’ve invited them to submit to my questions, to argue with each other and to face questions from the audience and assembled media.
I understand the frustrations of the minor parties (and independent candidate) but make no apologies for providing an opportunity to grill the frontrunners
Get out the Huawei
The government may be used to dealing with arguments of its own making but next week could see the PM face his first legislative defeat as Tory MPs marshal their forces in a bid to block Huawei from the UK’s 5G infrastructure.
Backbench grandees including Iain Duncan Smith and David Davis are said to be closing in on the required number of rebels to win an ammendment to the Telecommunications Infrastructure Bill that would bar “high risk vendors” from the network. Sparks will fly.
The best source of virus advice? My son’s nursery
Each week my son’s nursery in Wimbledon emails us with news of what the kids have been doing, where they’ve been and how they’re getting on.
These updates, complete with photos, are hugely welcome but lately there’s another service provided by the teachers that catches my attention. Regular coronavirus updates are sent, featuring the latest advice and information straight from the health and education departments.
If I had no access to any other source of news, I would be perfectly well served by these conscientious nursery teachers. It’s safe to assume that nurseries, schools, colleges and universities across the country have the same system in place, to say nothing of the information sent to every GP surgery, pharmacy, hospital and care home.
While the government’s ability to respond to the outbreak will be tested in the coming weeks and months, nobody can say that officials haven’t been proactive. The first volley of information from my son’s nursery came at the end of January.
But while at the early stage of an outbreak advice and information is vital, preparing for (and responding to) the deeper consequences is much harder. The Prime Minister reiterated yesterday that while we’re nowhere near the point where the nursery will email me to say that they’re closing, the effect of coronavirus is obvious wherever you look. The City can feel it.
Canary Wharf is rattled with staff being sent home and contingency plans swinging into action. Fear of the virus has also seen the hospitality sector contract with shocking speed. Events are being cancelled, handshakes are banned at some offices and we simply wait to count the full economic cost.
The disease is a killer, and people here will die from it, but without losing sight of the distress and hardship this will cause, some in the City are looking for an upside — and I’m not talking about crass profiteering from the sale of face masks.
Toscafund’s Savvas Savouri released a note yesterday in which he claimed: “The reality is now that the trade deals which were extremely likely to be reached this year between the US & China, and the EU27 & UK have now been made certain by the outbreak of Covid-19.” Small comfort to those suffering now, but let’s hope he ends up being proved right.