Sian Berry

40 comments from readers

stander
19 March 2008 at 18:08

I have previously always voted Green but after having discussed green issues with your london assembly conspiritors I was shocked at how far the Green movement has gone from ecology issues to left wing socialism. Perhaps you can explain to me how the £25 congestion charge is part of your "fair London", it is gesture green politics and will have no impact on CO2s or your anti-urban 4x4 campaign (X5s and Lexus hybrids fall outside). I am tempted to vote 1. Boris, and 2. BNP (boris definately, BNP tempted even though I am asian!) ps. I think its time for me to get an urban SUV - pps. its called a backlash and I fear you will see a lot of this, before anyone is too shocked suggest you read http://newsbusters.org/node/11640

Allen
19 March 2008 at 19:10

Sian Berry on Boris Johnson:

> He hates that we celebrate each other’s heritage; he hates that we are trying to pass on a healthy environment to our children; he hates that we look after our most vulnerable neighbours; and most of all he hates that we all expect to share in our city’s financial success.<

I fear Sian really believes this stuff, indicating that she lives in a fantasy world of goodies and baddies, sufficient reason to ignore her advice, even if voting against Ken wasn't a good enough reason in itself.

Jonty Stang
19 March 2008 at 22:56

I will now vote for neither of you - you have lost my second preference. Your tacit endorsement of this creep who consorts with homophobes and anti-semites makes you unsuitable for a position of power Sian. I think you're a good person, but you deserve to suffer at the ballots for this.

Vote Paddick.

Culpepper
20 March 2008 at 00:46

Sian knocked on my north london door two years ago and was impressive. She won my vote, even though her 'emissions' policy is out-to-lunch (how does she or ken know how many miles I drive??)

Here's the sticking point: Ken wants to build Kengrad. enormous high rise buildings that will devastate the Lonon skyline for centuries.He's an ecolpgical philistine.

Does Sian? I suspect not. So why is she backing Ken?

epitomy
20 March 2008 at 10:18

If you agree that its "time for CLIMATE change", back Boris.

Negative comments against Sian for supporting Ken make it clear that these bloggers have no idea how important it is to keep out Johnson - he supports Bush and opposes Kyoto - he is the British equivalent of Bush when it comes to the war and environment. They both bumble along but are backed up by hard right interests and policies that London would find intolerable.

The fact that the joker is even within earshot of city hall is an insult to Londoners, but testimony to an election that is seemingly going to be decided by the pro-tory media rather than the interests of Londoners. Seeing as london has been leading internationally on this issue thanks to Ken, the installation of Boris Johnson will drive the agenda on climate change backwards faster than a toff in a Chelsea tracter!

Oh and Sian, dont be bothered by Jonty Stang - this blogger may make out like your article has influenced his decision but if you look on this site there are many comments hostile to Livingstone - look objective but be subversive - such tactics have clearly been learnt at the feet of those great masters Martin "not so" Bright and the Evening Boris.....

Now - a question to those rabidly cheerleading for Boris WHY are you supporting him? What will make him a good mayor? please stay on topic too ie the environment - most answers seem to revolve around the right to drive a 4X4 - interesting take on the environment but one that definitely put you in the minority in London

Derek Bennett
20 March 2008 at 12:02

The one to vote for is Gerrard Batten of the UK Independence Party. Scrap the unfair and costly Congestion charges, no sham green policies, and a good, honest, and straight forward Londoner for Mayor who not only cares for London, but the rest of the UK too.

Cybertiger
20 March 2008 at 16:06

@epitomy

.... "keep out Johnson - he supports Bush and opposes Kyoto - he is the British equivalent of Bush when it comes to the war and environment ..."

Boris may be a clever clown but he's obviously a big Tory fart. Farts are smelly warriors and fearsomely combustible. Farts are poisonous. Farts contain methane. Farts change the climatic environment for the worse. If I had a vote, I wouldn't vote for farts.

123andrea
20 March 2008 at 16:34

Am I the only person disgusted to see comments on the New Statesman site calling for a BNP or UKIP vote? What on earth is the matter with you people? Go back to the Daily Mail where you belong!

Congratulations Sian for a very constructive decision. People attacking Livingstone on a left site like this should wake up, because if you don't vote for him, you'll get a reactionary Tory nasty. Is that what you want?

Dixon
20 March 2008 at 17:19

I see that the best the New Statesman/New Labour/Old Socialist commentators here can do is go for personal attacks against Boris. I agree with Stander, having seen Ms Berry voicing her opinions on a number of TV programmes recently she seems to have morphed into a fascist. In my experience of living in Britain during the last 50 years socialists, socialism and Old/New Labour come closer to fascism than anything right of centre in British politics, however much they may delude themselves. Why are you people so desperate to turn this country into a replica of East Germany circa 1960? Time to move on chaps!

greenladywell
20 March 2008 at 17:42

Sorry Dixon, I must have nodded off and missed those 50 years of socialism in Britain - when did they happen?! Sian is no fascist - that's just unnecessary nonsense you're spouting.

Dixon
20 March 2008 at 19:18

Typical lefty/green response: "I don't agree with you so that means you are spouting nonsense". With you lot it's not just different opinions it's good vs bad. You are socialists so you are good and always right. We are "Tories" so we are "nasty" and always wrong. If you could ban us completely you would - and put us in camps to re-educate us. That, my dear, is fascism.

And if you missed the socialism you really must have been asleep.

MichaelMcNab
20 March 2008 at 20:19

Couldn't agree more, Dixon. But which bit *exactly* was most socialist - they bit where they privatised everything, or the bit where they sent in soldiers to smash the unions?

Actually, now I think about those pesky 'facts', I'm not sure I agree at all. It looks a lot like there have been 50 years of advance for corporate conservatism and you're pretending it's socialist because you think that will persuade people that far-right extremists like yourself are actually just lovely, commonsense centrists.

The truth of the matter is that centrist, liberal social democracy is our way of life. It's as British as bulldogs and yet people like you come along waving flags (or, in your case, invoking the spectre of 'fascism') and claiming that it's in some way patriotic to destroy our society and replace it with that of Chile circa 1981.

And by the way, I think there are a fair few people who fought to save us from fascism who might be a little insulted that you think it's okay to use that label to describe someone hurting your feelings a bit by saying 'nonsense'.

biffa
20 March 2008 at 20:58

As far as I am concerned the quicker ken Livingstone is ousted the better. The man is completely useless. He has not done one good thing for people that I know.

I would like Boris to get in, but frankly I would be happy with anyone other than Ken Livingstone.

Frankly, I live in the countryside in Bromley. I don't even know what my area is even doing being under the control of London anyway. I have no access at all to public transport and that is all that the candidates seem to be going on about all of the time.

The whole thing just seems to be a waste of taxpayers hard earned cash.

harold53
20 March 2008 at 21:45

I think Sian Berry has actually moved politics in Britain forward, albeit at a very threatening moment. Forgrt all the Standard hype and the comments we see posted that Ken's done nothing for us stuff. It's not true, but there are in a city such as London people out there who think that a good city is based on no social committment, if you've money do what you like and who cares if other people have good housing, public transport and a clean environment.

Red-Green alliances have worked in other cities in Europe and I think Sian Berry is very courageous to make this step.

There is a common programme of the Green Party and much on the left and an alliance to advance those ideas is very commendable.

People may have disagreed with Ken, but they weren't needlessly worse off because of it. (Congestion charge payers do have a choice not to use their cars, for example).

Under Boris, hundreds of thousands of people are going to be worse off whatever they try to do.

Traditional Labour voters - not the Tories who gatecrash this blog - wake up! Boris is a Thatcherite through and through.

SunnyH
20 March 2008 at 22:43

From a green perspective, I agree it makes sense. Its politically brave of you to do so Sian. I'm voting for you as first pref anyway.

Scapin
21 March 2008 at 07:54

This is simply bad and wrong. One of the most attractive things about the Green Party is their separation from the traditional parties - furthermore, as has been stated by their spokesman on a number of occasions, they are trying to transcend labels of right and left behind the banner of ecological concern.

Ken Livingstone has been in power for a long time; it's unhealthy for democracy to perpetuate this. It goes against Green ideas on maintaining the health of democracy. It's sad really, that the Green movement is surrendering to politics as usual.

rwilsher
21 March 2008 at 11:01

What is all this "And despite all Ken Livingstone’s faults...?" Does he have any saving graces?!?!

The only person Ken has ever helped is himself.

If he had really been the successful political operator he likes himself to be painted as, he would never have allowed the Thatcher Government to so easily dismantle the GLC.

The problem then, as now, was Ken's laziness.

In 1984 there was a superabundance of arguments that could have been deployed to unite Londoners behind a serious campaign to keep the UK capital's overarching governing body, but Ken never understood that, or if he did he never bothered to mention any of them to people that mattered - the voters!

He did not and still does not have the significant political skill, knowledge, imagination and energy to fulfil the duties wrapped up in a significant office like that of London's mayor.

Please don't be fooled into following Sian Berry’s suggestion of giving any votes to Ken, whether directly or in second preferences.

And for Berry to be suggesting this so early in the campaign, I can only assume that she was very low on ideas as the deadline that newsstatesman.com had given her approached.

Pathetic.

Derek Bennett
21 March 2008 at 14:47

123andrea obviously does not like people voicing their opinions on this site that do not agree with her left wing views, but she still lives in a democracy - just, where her leftie pals in Government have still not managed - quite, to destroy free speach.

So, anyone who wants to support freedom and democracy, which includes the freedom to drive in London be you poor or rich (soon thanks to the Greenies and the Lefties the only people who will be able to do so will be the rich) then the only option will be to vote for Gerrard Batten of the UK Independence Party. To see why you should vote for him go to: www.batten4londonmayor.com

Redgreen
21 March 2008 at 16:11

The most sensible move from Ms berry - Vote Sian number 1because she's the best candidate, and vote Ken number two to keep the disasterous Boris Johnstone out

stander
21 March 2008 at 16:54

Red - is the right colour! For Sian is not green - she has been a green party member for only 5 years, she made her political career as founder for alliance against urban suvs. she is active in the "Green Left" faction of the party - so is sian green or is she red?? and what are real motives for going green??

Also those quoting "Boris against Kyoto" - Kyoto is a flawed treaty, it has cost western economies in excess of 100billions for CO2 improvements that could have been achieved with less than a few billion, I dont mind as I work for one of the companies that has benefited, but I can admit how flawed kyoto is. Its only benefit was as a political expression of unity across nations - but from a practical perspective it is ridiculously expensive. i am sure it will improve with Kyoto2 but the real climate change probem is excessive alarmism - blind following without sufficient intellectual debate and research - excessive spin as its just a PR exercise - and ineffective, expensive implementation that just destroys uk economy.

lilybordello
23 March 2008 at 13:22

Ticking the Boris box on the 1 May, as first or second preference, would sound the bell for climate disaster and completely reverse the successes achieved on tackling climate change in Livingstone's time as Mayor. The Ken/ Thom Yorke interview in today's Observer is a perfect example of Ken's comittment to the environment...can you imagine the same interview being conducted with Boris? Yorke - Do you oppose the third runway at Heathrow? Johnson - Yes, but we still need to build one somewhere else in London...next, Yorke - what do you think of the Kyoto Protocol, Johnson - Bush was right to screw it up...

Not necessarily the interview fitting a climate change special...but Boris seems happy to shout about his 'environment' credentials, despite not knowing what contraction and convergence is and thinking nuclear power is the answer (do you think he's heard of decentralised energy?...a question for the next Mayoral hustings I think). With Boris as Mayor London's status as a leader in the fight against climate change would be seriously undermined, we would turn into a laughing stock. Sian is right to urge her supporters to vote for Ken as their second preference, as a Green, what other choice do they have? Oh yes, someone who likens climate change activists to members of a cult...

richiecallis
23 March 2008 at 18:41

It was once said when America sneezes the rest of the world catches a cold. The US seems to be facing an inevitable recession, that and the implications of the credit crunch crisis are creating dangerous waters for all the world's economies including our own. The significance of this to the environment is huge because in difficult times politicians typically prioritise short term issues, neglecting those that will not bring tangible and appreciable benefits to those who keep them in their jobs. It is for this reason that we must be particularly concerned by the prospect of Boris Johnson as Mayor. Boris has maintained an appeal with his flamboyant, populist aproach to politics. Contrast this with Ken Livingstone who has consistently made difficult, often unpopular decisions on the basis that it was the right thing for London and also importantly the responsible thing for London to do given its position in the wider world. The need to tackle climate change is one we need to address now despite the temptation to delay until the economy is in calmer waters. The Green's decsion to align themselves with Ken is one Londoners should note, it is a reflection of the fact that they understand in the difficult times ahead we will need a Mayor who is unafraid to make strong decisions on the basis of what truly is best for the people of London rather than what is best for his own popularity.

angela
24 March 2008 at 10:33

Dear Sian,

When I read your article, i was absolutely furious.

I am very keen to support green issues and had decided to make you my second choice after Boris Johnson in the voting.

I am not going to do that now, and there is no way in a million years I would ever vote for you on ANYTHING after your article.

Please don't include the views of Londoners in your very unkind and inaccurate views. I cannot even begin to refute the total lies that you have printed in your article - they are so wildy untrue and nasty, that all you have succeeded in doing is seriously damaging yourself as a potential candidate and you have also damaged the Green party, if they agree with these wild and erroneous statements.

You have let yourself down Sian by sinking to this level and no way would i ever regard you as a serious contender for ANYTHING. I also now have serious concerns about the Green Party, an organisation I formerly regarded with respect.

ingo
25 March 2008 at 12:32

The Green Party, taken over by centralists who are no different to any other party anymore, needs to reflect what is important in politics today. Rejection of green basic principles of decentralising power is now Green Party policy. For example, take the Greens support for the polluting Olympics. Should they not have proposed to share the efforst with France, who had all the infrastructure in place? No they are agreeing with the concreting approach of all other parties.

I could not possibly support Ken Livingstons mal administration, his unaccountability or his drunken personal outbursts.

I don't agree with Boris Stance on our US relationship either and would advise a coalition with the Lib Dems, not just in London, but nationally and on a ten point programme approved before a general election, a proper alternative to the two party system she is currently sucking up to.

What ever happens, I urge all Londoners to vote, because we do want a large mandate for whoever is elected, not elect someone with a slender majority and with only 30% of Londoners bothering.

Sian is a relatively new Green Party politicians and I wish her well with her future endeavours, despite her allegiance to those who want to centralise the party and make it more mallable. Ingo

Elboe
26 March 2008 at 14:01

I thought the idea of 'goodies' and 'baddies' was the preserve of George Bush.

Elboe
26 March 2008 at 14:04

> What ever happens, I urge all Londoners to vote, because we do want a large mandate for whoever is elected, not elect someone with a slender majority and with only 30% of Londoners bothering.

This is like saying we should all agree that we should go on a journey regardless of the destination because it is the travelling that is important.

soundjat keita
27 March 2008 at 17:21

1) London is now the world's most expensive city, according to UBS Bank. And you expect people on social security to be grateful to you billionaire pals.

2) Boris doesn't share your multi-cultural values? Name a green leader who isn't a)white b)South-East based c) (except yourself) under 40. The Greens just don't reflect modern Britain.

soundjat keita
27 March 2008 at 17:38

3) Metronet cost £2 billion. Plus there's the blatant corruption & Kenny's contempt for anyone not a) a billionaire b) on the far left. Especially his attitude towards Jewish Londoners.

Btw, just been over to Derek Wall's blog. Nothing there about you.

Problem?

guido
27 March 2008 at 19:44

The Red-Green alliance won't stop the Boris Bus (non-bendy, Blue).

greenladywell
29 March 2008 at 02:16

Angela - a second preference vote for Sian is little more than a gesture, it's the first preference votes and the assembly list votes we need, so to be honest we're not going to be crying over a few lost second preference mayoral votes from Tories.

Ingo - who are these 'centralists' you believe have taken over the Green Party? We had a referendum about whether to have a leader and the overwhelming majority supported it, not some tiny clique who then organised a coup. And please don't resort to arguments based on how many years people have served in the party as a basis to judge them as candidates, green politics isn't about time-serving. As for doing a deal with the Lib Dems, have you been following some of the policies Paddick has been proposing lately? He's coming across as closer to the Tories than either Labour or the Greens.

Decentralising power is still at the heart of Green Party policy.

Greens in London opposed the bid for the Olympics, but once it was a done deal, took the pragmatic approach of trying to make it the greenest Olympics ever. It won't be green by Green Party standards, but it will be greener than it would have been if elected Greens had just stood on the sidelines and taken an oppositional stance, rather than keep battling away and pushing for improvements as Jenny and Darren have done.

lmwalter
30 March 2008 at 16:18

Well done Sian. A brave decision, and the right decision. It was a politically wise move, London works better with Ken, than with Boris. It was a realistic choice by the London Greens (it was a democratic decision by London Party members), and one which should be defended, and not scrutanised.

dave
30 March 2008 at 17:12

Unless parties which are nominally a lighter shade of red stop ripping out each others' throats, we will have the same situation in the lead up to the Mayoral elections as in the race to the white house where the battle between the two democratic candidates has become so intense, it threatens to allow the Republic in through the back door.

Like wise, the is a real danger Boris Johnston could get in unless similar parties cut their differences.

Livingstone has done loads for London ( where has that person above been?). He is Londoners only hope of tackling Co2 emissions.

He has also refused an incineration plant - planned in the east of london - an incredibly environmentally damaging scheme.

Clearly none of Livingstone's critics have ever been on public transport or they would be singing about the revolutionary Oyster card system he introduced which has cut queuing plus reduced fares.

Of course we all know the other two main candidates would abandon the £25 congestion charge allowing the capital to descend into gridlock as it asphixiates the walking public.

the only people opposed to it are the 4x4 owners themselves - which is understandable - who rather selfishly feel they have the right to waste and pollute to save their image.

In fact, regrettably, no one is stopping them from using the 4x4, just asking that they pay a modest fee to offset the extra Co2 they produce with all its harmful manifestations - more asthma treatment; increased flood defences -the costs of global warming.

If they don't want to pay the charge, don't drive a 4x4: it's as simple as that.

nick
03 April 2008 at 17:10

Boris is a out of toch tosser, Ken is the lesser of two evils, Paddick is tothe right of the libdems nationally and is difficult to distinguish from Boris.

Sian is 100% right

Vote 1 Berry

2 Livingstone

Proud to Be a Watermelon! (Green on the outside red in the middle)

Colonel Blimp
03 April 2008 at 17:14

I'm with you nick old boy. That's a pair of melons!

nick
04 April 2008 at 13:42

Fnarr Fnarr!

ingo
04 April 2008 at 16:18

Greenladywell, you are mistaken to say the least and dishonest when it comes to the Green Party policies. Decentralisation has been kicked out, thats its still in the books is because they have not changed it yet, but they will have to, because the two notions are incompatible and Schumacher is turning in his grave. Small is not beautifull anymore, according to the Greens is centrally lead politics.

It was not by the 48% who bothered to vote for this wrecking motion, presented by the same old characters for 17 years ad nauseum, but by those who did not vote at all, probably the last 3500 members who joined them from the socialist groups, who had no culture of voting but accepted leadership perse. It was a coup and those who are so eagerly vying to become leaders today, some already in office, are mostly part of it. Exception is jenny Jones.

Why does the Green party, even if the melon theory is somehwat true, LoL, stand against those it has campaigned with in the Stop the War coalition.

The Green Party's membership is not representative of a multicultural society, indeed it is white and middle class, still, because nobody can be bothered to change this fact, so why should multicultural London vote for them?

I do not think that Sian has the brevity or green credentials to be a leader. still they have not managed to prepare for coalition politics at national level. Their hatred of the Lib Dems, so childish and so damaging for the future, is preventing a third way in Britain, a coalition choice for voters between the Lib Dems and Greens. Red Green coalitions are done everywhere, but the reds in Britain are not as green as the Lib Dems, talking of cutting your feet off.

As for threatening Londoners with Boris, via all the nasty assumptions made in the article, ie. vote for the lesser evil, whilst being eaten by Kens mismanagement for breakfast, relying on verbal hand outs at the Mayors monthly rebutals, is frankly pathetic.

grow up Green Party you have just thrown away your roots and your spine, what little made you special in the whole political landscape, and for what? now you have to find nourishment by becoming a sucker to other parties. ingo

Robert.Cunningham
07 April 2008 at 16:33

"And the truth is that what Boris Johnson likes is not what you or I like. He doesn’t share Londoners’ values; in fact in many ways he seems to hate them."

Rather blunt and childish, don't you think Sian?

Surely you're not bitter because you're so far behind in the polls?

"Boris Johnson, in contrast, would come with a built-in Tory majority, enabling him to do anything he likes over the heads of a powerless opposition in the Assembly."

a) It's already the case that 66% of the London Assembly has to vote against the mayor to stop a proposal going through.

Ken's been using this system to override the London Assembly for years.

And it was Labour who introduced this system anyway.

b) A Green-Labour coalition in the GLA is currently equal to the number of Conservatives in it. So it would hardly be any more dictatorial under Boris than it has been under Ken.

And anyway, the GLA is being re-elected on May 1 as well, so who knows who'll have a majority after that.

c) And anyway, both the London Assembly and the Mayor are elected. So whoever is in the GLA or the position of Mayor is supposed to represent the views of the majority of Londoners.

So if Boris becomes Mayor, with a Conservative majority in the GLA, it should be what most Londoners want.

So stop making stupid comments, Sian.

greenladywell
07 April 2008 at 18:12

Dear me Ingo, you are clearly still very bitter about the leadership vote. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree and you can go and join the Lib Dems if you think they're so great (with their new leader).

Douglas Johnson
12 April 2008 at 17:38

@ Ingo:

“Greenladywell, you are mistaken to say the least and dishonest when it comes to the Green Party policies. Decentralisation has been kicked out, thats its still in the books is because they have not changed it yet, but they will have to, because the two notions are incompatible and Schumacher is turning in his grave. Small is not beautifull anymore, according to the Greens is centrally lead politics.”

You, on the other hand, seem simply ignorant of Green Party policies. Let’s take a look at the manifesto for the London elections, shall we? It pledges to devolve a range of tax-raising powers to local authorities, including business rates. Combine that with the commitment to push for more powers to be devolved from Central Government to the GLA, and to foster strong local economies, and it’s difficult to see the ultra-centralists you’re so upset about. Perhaps we’re reading different books?

“Why does the Green party, even if the melon theory is somehwat true, LoL, stand against those it has campaigned with in the Stop the War coalition.”

Unless I’m much mistaken, the Stop the War coalition was and is a single issue group. Its members convened for one reason; to oppose the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and any similar military action. There was never any claim that they agreed on anything else – so why shouldn’t they run against each other? There’s nothing the Mayor of London could do about it anyway.

“The Green Party's membership is not representative of a multicultural society, indeed it is white and middle class, still, because nobody can be bothered to change this fact, so why should multicultural London vote for them?”

Politics isn’t about skin-colour or race; it’s about ideas. It’s simply not rational to vote for someone because they share the same background as yourself. Consider what would happen if the entirety of white London, despite loathing his policies, decided to vote for Richard Barnbrook, because he was white. Would that be desirable? Of course not – nor would it be representative of Londoners’ views on policy. And yet, it seems justifiable with your logic that groups should vote by background and race.

Multicultural London should vote on the basis of ideas, not cultural background.

“I do not think that Sian has the brevity or green credentials to be a leader. still they have not managed to prepare for coalition politics at national level.”

Only a moment ago you were railing against the centralisation of power that national politics surely implies. Parliament is not, to my knowledge, small.

If you pick a position, stick to it, won’t you?

“Their hatred of the Lib Dems, so childish and so damaging for the future, is preventing a third way in Britain, a coalition choice for voters between the Lib Dems and Greens. Red Green coalitions are done everywhere, but the reds in Britain are not as green as the Lib Dems, talking of cutting your feet off”

It couldn’t be the substantive policy difference between the LibDems and Greens that prevent coalitions, could it? It may have escaped your notice, but they’re different parties with different policies – particularly on social justice.

“As for threatening Londoners with Boris, via all the nasty assumptions made in the article”

Which, of course, you’d care to systematically refute?

“ie. vote for the lesser evil, whilst being eaten by Kens mismanagement for breakfast, relying on verbal hand outs at the Mayors monthly rebutals, is frankly pathetic.”

You’d prefer the Greater Evil?

“grow up Green Party you have just thrown away your roots and your spine, what little made you special in the whole political landscape, and for what?”

I’d try to refute that, but I can’t find a rational point to engage with. Would you care to explain how the Greens have uprooted (Hah. Treehuggers no more, clever…) themselves?

Nick
14 April 2008 at 12:42

Ingo, you really don't know what you are talking about!

As a green Socialist I actually voted "Against" On the leadership ballot, as did al arge proportion of Green Left members, but as a democrat I can live with the fact we lost!

In Bristol where I now live we sometimes work with the Lib Dems (saving a cycle path) and sometime against (trying to stop them privatising home care)

I'm sure its the same in London.

The fact is in London is that the Lib Dems have been, populist, opportunist and totaly devoid of principle, whereas a flawed Livingstone has at least done a few decent things (under pressure from Darren and Jenny Jones)