By Timothy Anderson, timothyanderson2005@gmail.com
It would be hard the dispute to assertion that Ken Livingstone’s passion for London is genuine. Beginning the early morning Q and A session with a few minutes of London cheerleading which could have left even the most cynical of hardened London-critics with a momentary warm, fuzzy feeling for the city, Ken Livingstone’s message – that is, the purpose behind his visit to China - rang out loud and clear. London is open for international business from all corners of the world and Chinese companies thinking of moving to the west would be wise to choose London over rival cities like Paris and New York.
The agenda of the day included discussion of the appointment of a new representative for the Mayor of London in Shanghai (tagged with the responsibility of promoting greater trade, education, culture and tourism between the two cities), the upcoming London 2012 Olympics, not to mention to Mr. Livingstone’s own record and performance as mayor. In typical Livingstone style, the platitudes and bite-size sound bites often favoured by politicians on similar foreign junkets were largely left out.
Mr. Livingstone’s reputation generally precedes him wherever he goes. Known for offering up direct and biting answers to the question lobbed his way - answers often infused with colourful, off-the-cuff and dart-like commentary - and a stubborn refusal to become an on-message cheerleader for the Labour party, this morning was no different.
Take the issue of transportation.
The man who has spent much of his two terms as London mayor battling transportation issues on various fronts professed to be in awe at the Chinese capacity for planning and construction – noting that construction of Shanghai’s metro network in it’s entirety will be completed in the time it takes to plan and build a single line in London.
In touting his own record improving transportation in London, Mr. Livingstone emphasised bringing in experienced people from the private sector to create contracts with meaningful incentives and penalties was key. For example, whether buses were full and ran on time was not factored into previous contracts awarded to the private operators of London’s buses.
“You can’t have civil servants negotiating with the some of the biggest companies in the world,” explained Mr, Livingstone, sardonically noting the civil servant approach is typically, “if I bend over this table, is there anything you would like to do?”
When asked about the much-debated issue of sliding A-level results across the UK, and whether this may be a barrier to foreign direct investment into the country from places like China, Mr. Livingstone deftly steered his talk back onto the issue of transportation.
“When I took over office, the number one complaint of business in London was traffic”, noted Mr. Livingstone. On this basis, transportation became top priority, ahead of education.
Mr. Livingstone nonetheless acknowledged that there exists a skills shortage across all sectors of the London economy. His standard response to problem issues (“give control to me”) seems to be happening in this case, with the mayor’s office to be handed control of the Skills Council by the end of the year. He also noted that in percentage terms the number of jobs in London demanding a university degree, some 38% of jobs, continues to increase - a positive sign.
In answer to a question regarding whether high set-up costs in London were limiting market access of Chinese companies to the city, Mr. Livingstone suggested the pattern of investment for companies coming to the UK is to place their headquarters where core functions are carried out in London, while production functions (and typically 90% of employees) locate elsewhere in the UK - where costs are lower. With the gap in financial investment between London and its European rivals Paris and Frankfurt continues to widen in London’s favour, this approach seems to be working for London.
Unsurprisingly, the upcoming London 2012 Olympics figured prominently in Mr. Livingstone’s banter, as he continued to bask in the afterglow of London’s victory. One could sense a palpable relief from Mr. Livingstone’s as his spoke of the wave of infrastructure and land re-development in London being unleashed in the wake of this victory. That said, Mr. Livingstone suggested there would be a marked difference in the approach Beijing and London take as host cities.
While Beijing will spend $3 billion more on the games than London, with the aim that every single facility be state of the art (an approach readily endorsed by the IOC), the London Olympic buildings will rely exclusively on proven technology and techniques. Mr. Livingstone emphatically noted that anybody known for demanding state-of-the-art designs and technologies would not be allowed near the planning process.
It was those continual off-the-cuff comments that kept the mood of the session generally light. Seizing an opportunity to take a jab at arguably his fiercest group of critics – the UK media – Mr. Livingstone caustically noted there were certain UK newspapers that rather wished he simply, “crawled under a rock and allowed someone more measured, cultured and useless to come forward in his place.”
Ah, but they’ll surely miss him when he’s gone, whenever that might be.
This article appeared in the June 2006 issue of ‘The Beat’, the monthly magazine of The British Chamber of Commerce in Shanghai.
