The history of London’s mayoralty is one marked by political intrigue, personal rivalries, and a significant evolution of local governance. The first mayor of London was elected during a tumultuous time in British politics, specifically in 2000, but the groundwork for this pivotal role was laid years earlier. With the rise of regional leaders like Andy Burnham in Greater Manchester and Ben Houchen in the Tees Valley, London’s direct mayoral election emerged as a notable development in the landscape of British politics.
The election that installed London’s inaugural mayor was not without drama. Allegations of political betrayal and manipulation created a backdrop for a contest that culminated in one candidate facing prison time. This chaotic scenario unfolded against the backdrop of Tony Blair’s New Labour government, which came to power in 1997 with ambitions to implement a radical approach to local governance, including the introduction of elected mayors across major cities. This interest in decentralization was revolutionary, as it aimed to give local populations a stronger voice in governance through prominent and dynamic leaders.
In May 1998, a referendum was held to gauge public opinion about creating a Greater London Authority with a directly elected mayor. The turnout was relatively low at 34%, but the decisive outcome demonstrated overwhelming support, with 72% of those who participated favoring the proposal. This marked a significant shift in London’s governance from a fragmented borough system to a centralized authority, establishing a mechanism for direct electoral democracy in the capital.
The obvious candidate for the new position was Ken Livingstone, a former leftist leader of the Greater London Council (GLC) who had a reputation for challenging the political status quo, notably clashing with the Thatcher administration in the 1980s. However, his relationship with the Labour Party had soured over time, especially with the rise of Tony Blair, who represented a more centrist approach to politics. Livingstone’s history of defiance meant that the party was eager to rally behind a different candidate.
Attempts to find someone to oppose Livingstone led to the selection of Frank Dobson, a prominent Labour figure and the party’s first health secretary, who was focused on consolidating the party’s power in London. Despite Dobson’s well-known status, his campaign lacked the charisma and public appeal that Livingstone had cultivated. Interestingly, the Labour Party’s election process was not straightforward, encapsulated in internal strife over who would represent them in the elections, raising accusations of manipulation from Livingstone’s supporters.
In an unexpected twist, the Conservative Party selected Jeffrey Archer as their candidate, a decision ultimately complicated by Archer’s withdrawal following perjury allegations related to a libel case, which landed him in prison while he retained his noble title. The torch was then passed to Steve Norris, who embodied a very different style of Tory politics, advocating for liberal social issues while maintaining a keen interest in public transportation.
As the election campaign unfolded, Livingstone’s independent run was a significant factor—he had initially promised not to run as an independent candidate. However, the political maneuvering within Labour and the public’s desire for change led him to break his promise and enter the race as an independent, a decision that would ultimately bear fruit.
When the election took place in May 2000, a dramatic shift was realized. Livingstone emerged victorious, defeating Norris decisively with 39% of the first preference votes. The results were a strong rebuke to the Labour established under Blair, which had expected its chosen candidate Dobson to lead. This result indicated not only a change in the political landscape of London but also highlighted the disconnect between the party leadership and the electorate’s desire for a leader capable of representing their interests directly and effectively.
Ultimately, Ken Livingstone’s tenure as London’s first mayor set the stage for the future of local governance. His election was indicative of the changing political dynamics in the UK and illustrated a shift towards more personalized, local forms of power, which continue to shape the political framework in the capital. The story of this election remains relevant today as various factions within politics continue to grapple with the challenges and opportunities of devolved governance.
