Brian Paddick comes calling

Brian PaddickBrian Paddick came to my house for a fundraising dinner this weekend. What a star! The (would-be) donors were all won over by him. I think it is actually his genuine sincerity and absolute determination to deliver to London. As he says – that is his track record. In the Met he delivered. In both his commands crime dropped more than anywhere else in London.

If he can translate that sort of record of delivering results in a key public service – the police – to transport and so on in London, it would be phenomenal.

That’s really the key to this job: a vision of a safer, greener, happier London – and the track record to deliver and inspire. He is not all talk. He is not prone to political spin. He is doing this because he believes he can really change London for the better. And you know what – I reckon he can too!

P.S. You can sign up for news from Brian’s campaign here.

0 thoughts on “Brian Paddick comes calling

  1. I have never seen such breathless adolescent twaddle. Genuine sincerity, eh Lynne? What other sort of sincerity are you accustomed to? And you obviously did not see Brian on the telly the other night, pitted against Ken and Boris. He came sixth out of three.

  2. I wonder if you really watched the TV debate either Chas. The media reports I saw, including in places like the Evening Standard – no friend of the LibDems – all rated Paddick’s performace very highly.

  3. James, I am offended by your article regarding Doreen Lawrence and her intervention to express her opinions at the initial stages of the Mayoral campaigns. Here is your article:, the motivation of Doreen Lawrence, in my humble opinion, is that she decided to publicly speak out as Boris was actually standing for Mayor of London. Why would she want to speak out when he stood for MP in a city irrelevant to her? Or any other area he has represented. The capital is home to the largest BME communities, it is also home to the largest police service in the UK, and additionally home to the Lawrence family. They therefore take an interest in the affairs of London. I endorse her right to express herself; however, some of the responses to your blog were highly inflammatory. Certain bloggers claiming that Stephen Lawrence was “drug peddler” and another blogger asserting, he was a “gang member” simply shows what kind of person would seem to blog on your website. In fact, he was a very bright student planning to become an architect. I too am a supporter of Boris, but some of his comments are simply irresponsible, hurtful and deeply offensive. In a city in which a significant number of the population hails from BME groups, it is slightly insensitive to then criticise those groups. Additionally, his remarks about my religious beliefs and calling for the ban of the most sacred book in the Islamic religion, the Holy Quran, borders on the realm of some type of bigotry. London is home to a significantly large Muslim population; his antipathy to the Quran will damage the number of votes he receives from Muslims. I myself have spoken to many fellow Muslims; however, all of them have stated that due to his insensitive comments about the Quran, they will not vote for him. So you recognise how damaging comments such as those above could be. During the debate on the religious hatred bill Johnson is recorded as saying “if this bill makes any sense at all it must mean banning the reading in public or in private of a great many passages of Quran it self”. He also wrote in one of his articles “Koran is full of stuff that plainly falls into that category (religious hatred)”. Boris Johnson’s record of hostilities and disdain for the sacred book of Muslims would automatically disqualify him from their support, as you have hit Muslims at the heart of their religion. These comments I would want to hear from those on the far right, such as these people mentioned in this article- You have criticised their religious book. If one were to then make similar offensive or disrespectful comments about black and ethnic minority communities, this would certainly render him unworthy of their support. This is not an attack on Boris, as a supporter of his campaign, I just want this criticising certain groups. In terms of Ken Livingstone, I publicly protested my annoyance at Mr Livingstone’s decision to furnish Sheikh Yusuf Al Qaradawi at City Hall, as the expense of public taxpayers throughout London. His views are not compatible with enhancing community cohesion, nor is it compatible with promoting dialogue between different faith communities in London. His views on homosexuality, Israeli Jews and other groups, is disgraceful and he should never had received this kind of red carpet treatment from the Mayor. In a press statement by City Hall, Ken claimed ‘AsMayor of London, I have a responsibility to support the rights of all of London’s diverse communities and to maintain a dialogue with their political and religious leaders, irrespective of the fact that there will always be different views on many issues.’ You do indeed Mr Livingstone. However, did you not say that you wanted to silence Irvine and Nick Griffin during a visit to Oxford Student Union? It seems freedom of speech is acceptable when it is decided Mr Livingstone what is appropriate and proportionate. Of course, we all find Nick Griffin and David Irvine’s views highly objective, but the point I am making is that how could one furnish Qaradawi who views are similar to that of Nick Griffin in terms of homosexuality? Now perhaps Ken would explain why he believes the objectionable views of Qaradawi deserve a platform, whilst other objectionable views deserve silencing by him? I am glad that the Conservative party strongly condemned Qaradawi with Cllr Brian Coleman hounding the Mayor of London in regards to this matter. Additionally, two Tory MPs withdraw their membership of the Oxford Union. Now who is more forward thinking and tolerant? James, you further criticise the McPherson Inquiry into the death of Stephen Lawrence. In fact, if you actually knew the changes that have occurred internally, you would be surprised by the positive work achieved post-Lawrence inquiry. For instance, Miriam Rich, of the Met’s Jewish Police Association, asserted that such changes have certainly provided considerable support and assistance to Jewish officers in providing a network for support and advice to Jewish police personnel. Additionally, if you knew anything about the Met, you will recognise there are nearly a dozen police associations, representing a wide range of BME and faith groups. Furthermore, we are seeing radical changes in every aspect of policing in London, with greater representation of BME officers and police officers trained in diversity and cultural backgrounds. Tony Blair said: “We should confront as a nation honestly the racism that still exists within our society. We should find within ourselves the will to overcome it.” It would take more than new laws, the Prime Minister said. There had to be changes in attitudes across society to achieve “a new more tolerant and more inclusive Britain”. And as Kashmira Singh Maan explained to the Morris Inquiry a couple of years ago, “All I want to do is basically have lots and lots more minority officers in the police service to change the attitude. That is one of the reasons why I joined. I do not believe in standing on the sidelines, I believe in joining the police service and making a difference, and I want more and more officers to come and join us. “To conclude, I believe the Lawrence Inquiry has enabled the police to change internal attitudes, challenge racism and encourage more people from BME communities to join. Look at the top of the Met today, we had a senior openly gay officer, we had Tarique Ghaffur, presently an Assistant Commissioner. We had other senior BME and LGBT officers in high positions. However, I have not seen this culture in other places, in the NHS, Civil Service, or other public spheres? Why not? It is clear that Lawrence Inquiry has put the Met in a position of been more modernised than most British establishments, even the British Government. When will we have an ethnic minority Minister who actually has influence? How many Asian women do we have in Parliament? How many openly Lesbian women do we have in Parliament? How many women do we have in Parliament? The police in London are probably the most modernised institution in the capital.

  4. Clarification- I was meant to say “I just want this criticising certain groups to stop”, which I mistakenly failed to put in. A typing mistake.

  5. Griffin and David Irvine’s views highly objectiveAnother typing mistake- meant to say objectionable

  6. Mash- some interesting points raised! I agree that Doreen Lawrence ought to be allowed to speak out- after all this is her city. This will be a very interesting election indeed!

  7. Thank you. I’m ecstatic to know that there are people whom subscribe to my above comments. It is vitally important we objectively challenge, question and assess each candidate on the basis of their views, policies an ideas. If we simply ignore their views, we may regret voting for them in future.ThanksMash

  8. Lynne, if ever there was one, this election is a two-horse race. A recent poll put Livingstone on 45% and Johnson on 44%. Livingstone is a menace – he has succeeded in uniting Conservative and Liberals alike in wanting to oust him. Lib Dem voters, desperate for change in the City, should consider giving their second preference votes to Boris (you will, of course, still be able to put the Lib Dems first). In return, Conservatives might want to consider giving Brian their second votes. Together we can beat Livingstone. How does that sound?

  9. Agreed. This is a two horse race, however, it is vital that we try our utmost to remove Ken! Encourage people who traditionally have never voted, to actually go out and vote….. Brilliant! I would never vote Ken, not only due to his blunder with Sheikh Qaradawi, of the Muslim Brotherhood, but also his many disasters in office. First, Boris, then Brian Paddick- then an unknown candidate then Livingstone 🙂

  10. I agree with every word you say Mash. Well put!!!!Perhaps Lynne could explain what her take on this topic is, and perhaps respond to all the bloggers for this comment!!!!

  11. I think Brian will make a far better Mayor for London than Boris – or Ken. So yes – he will be getting my vote! Boris can do the charming, funny, bumbling role very well – but we’re electing a Mayor for London to run a multi-million organisation, which is a rather different job!

  12. How refreshing to hear Mash’s numerous contributions to this discussion. He seems to be the only one that is honest, precise and never glosses over his comments with political propaganda. There are, of course, points I disagree with him, but generally speaking, he seems to speak a lot of sense. Why he describes himself “Mash Tory” is beyond me? Are you a Tory or something? On a separate note, why has this “James Cleverly” not responded to Mash’s assertions. I think he deserves one.

  13. Who is this Mash? Has anyone met him before? Seen some of his articles in the local journal, and his many comments on this blog. There was an article some weeks ago in the journal, he deserted the Lib Dems in Haringey to join the Conservatives. Can anyone verify whether this is true? Thanks

  14. Thank you for your messages. To address all your questions, I’ll begin by stating the obvious, James Cleverly should answer my questions and views above. I am a Tory. And additionally, I must thank you for your kind words. I joined the Conservative Party, after publicly leaving the Haringey Liberal Democrat. Moreover, another Lib Dem councillor also departed to become a Labour councillor on Haringey Council. It is quite apparent, there was something about the Lib Dems in Haringey that forced us to leave. Who is this Mash? Has anyone met him before? I’ll leave that to others to answer. If you have any further questions, please to not hesitate to let me know. ThanksMash aka Mash Tory

  15. So, Lynne, I take it that you won’t be using your second preference vote? This is strange because, as I understand it, Lib Dems are supportive of PR and, in particular, the STV…