The review of the offices now finds the resons for opening them are 'fundamentally sound'
and that 'the GLAs offices do play an important role in promoting
Londons interests, from supporting the capitals businesses and to
enhancing the image of our city around the world.'
I deat with this on my blog on London last November as follows and the comment remains entirely valid:
'Few
things illustrate Boris Johnson's administration's failure to
understand the modern world, and therefore its incompetence, more
completely than the saga of London's offices set up to represent and
promote the city in India and China – the world's most rapidly growing
giant new economies. It is an issue thrown into particularly graphic
light by the current world financial crisis.
'During the Mayoral
election campaign Boris Johnson, and Tory candidates, did everything
possible to present it is as ridiculous for London to maintain offices
to promote the cty abroad – Think London, the city's inward investment
agency, which is funded by the London Development Agency, also has
offices in the US.
'Boris Johnson and Tory candidates frequently
attempted to exploit the most backward looking sentiments regarding
these – often making attacks on them the first point in their campaign
literature.
'Thus for example Richard Tracey, Tory candidate for
Merton and Wandsworth, announced in his election leaflet to electors:
'Local Conservatives are campaigning to remove the extravagances such
as Ken Livingstone's "foreign embassies". Matthew Laban, Tory candidate
in Enfield and Haringey, in his address to constituents, attacked that
‘our money has been spent opening embassies in other countries.
'Boris
Johnson himself took the same position. Taking the Nick Ferarri show on
Wednesday 12th December 2007, Ferarri asked: ‘And would you continue
bureaus in Venezuela, Delhi, Beijing and everywhere else? Yes or no.
Boris Johnson: "No."
'This pledge was strongly attacked by
leaders of Londons businesses, who understood the importance of these
decisive new markets overseas – for example at the Mayoral London
business hustings on 26 March.
'Boris Johnson, worrying about
such business criticism, therefore scrapped his previous pledge to
close the offices and announced to the Evening Standard the same day
that he would ‘review them. Then on 14 April he announced in his
business manifesto today that ‘we fully endorse the representation of
London overseas (p13). In other words a complete U-turn.
'That,
however, as has already point out above, did not stop Tory candidates
across London campaigning against Londons representative offices. There
was, in short, a complete shambles.
'And what is revealed by the
present international financial crisis, of course? That the two
economies in the world which will be most relatively strengthened by
it, because they are continuing to grow most rapidly through the
crisis, are China and India – the places where Boris Johnson pledged to
close down London's representation. A truly brilliant move that would
have been. And of course his administration would never have opened
them in the first place.
'It is said that the difference between
a statesman and a politician is that a statesman leads the country and
a politician follows it. Ken Livingstone will be remembered as a great
Mayor of London because he led the city to face key challenges that
confronted it at the beginning of the 21st century – just as, in a
different way, he redefined politics in London by facing the different
challenges it confronted twenty years previously when he was leader of
the GLC. Boris Johnson's administration, as shown vividly by its
opposition to London's offices abroad, and its use of the most ignorant
sentiments to attack them, has no understanding of the the most
important challenges that face London at the beginning of the 21st
century.'
Reality has hit Johnson's administration over the head
and forced it not to close the offices – except they would never have
set them up in the first place, leaving London unrepresented in the
world's most rapidly growing large markets.'
To make explicit my
interest, as Director of Economic and Business Policy under Ken
Livingstone I was responsible for the policy of openng London's offices
abroad.
The review of the offices now finds the resons for opening them are 'fundamentally sound'
and that 'the GLAs offices do play an important role in promoting
Londons interests, from supporting the capitals businesses and to
enhancing the image of our city around the world.'
I deat with this on my blog on London last November as follows and the comment remains entirely valid:
'Few
things illustrate Boris Johnson's administration's failure to
understand the modern world, and therefore its incompetence, more
completely than the saga of London's offices set up to represent and
promote the city in India and China – the world's most rapidly growing
giant new economies. It is an issue thrown into particularly graphic
light by the current world financial crisis.
'During the Mayoral
election campaign Boris Johnson, and Tory candidates, did everything
possible to present it is as ridiculous for London to maintain offices
to promote the cty abroad – Think London, the city's inward investment
agency, which is funded by the London Development Agency, also has
offices in the US.
'Boris Johnson and Tory candidates frequently
attempted to exploit the most backward looking sentiments regarding
these – often making attacks on them the first point in their campaign
literature.
'Thus for example Richard Tracey, Tory candidate for
Merton and Wandsworth, announced in his election leaflet to electors:
'Local Conservatives are campaigning to remove the extravagances such
as Ken Livingstone's "foreign embassies". Matthew Laban, Tory candidate
in Enfield and Haringey, in his address to constituents, attacked that
‘our money has been spent opening embassies in other countries.
'Boris
Johnson himself took the same position. Taking the Nick Ferarri show on
Wednesday 12th December 2007, Ferarri asked: ‘And would you continue
bureaus in Venezuela, Delhi, Beijing and everywhere else? Yes or no.
Boris Johnson: "No."
'This pledge was strongly attacked by
leaders of Londons businesses, who understood the importance of these
decisive new markets overseas – for example at the Mayoral London
business hustings on 26 March.
'Boris Johnson, worrying about
such business criticism, therefore scrapped his previous pledge to
close the offices and announced to the Evening Standard the same day
that he would ‘review them. Then on 14 April he announced in his
business manifesto today that ‘we fully endorse the representation of
London overseas (p13). In other words a complete U-turn.
'That,
however, as has already point out above, did not stop Tory candidates
across London campaigning against Londons representative offices. There
was, in short, a complete shambles.
'And what is revealed by the
present international financial crisis, of course? That the two
economies in the world which will be most relatively strengthened by
it, because they are continuing to grow most rapidly through the
crisis, are China and India – the places where Boris Johnson pledged to
close down London's representation. A truly brilliant move that would
have been. And of course his administration would never have opened
them in the first place.
'It is said that the difference between
a statesman and a politician is that a statesman leads the country and
a politician follows it. Ken Livingstone will be remembered as a great
Mayor of London because he led the city to face key challenges that
confronted it at the beginning of the 21st century – just as, in a
different way, he redefined politics in London by facing the different
challenges it confronted twenty years previously when he was leader of
the GLC. Boris Johnson's administration, as shown vividly by its
opposition to London's offices abroad, and its use of the most ignorant
sentiments to attack them, has no understanding of the the most
important challenges that face London at the beginning of the 21st
century.'
Reality has hit Johnson's administration over the head
and forced it not to close the offices – except they would never have
set them up in the first place, leaving London unrepresented in the
world's most rapidly growing large markets.'
To make explicit my
interest, as Director of Economic and Business Policy under Ken
Livingstone I was responsible for the policy of openng London's offices
abroad.