Will it be Boris Johnson v Alan Johnson in 2012?

Former Labour cabinet minister “urged to run” for London mayor.

Once seen as the popular choice to replace Gordon Brown as leader of the Labour Party, Alan Johnson was quick to rule himself out of the job last week and back his former cabinet colleague David Miliband.

Now it seems Johnson may soon be in the running for another leadership position -- that of London mayor. According to the London Evening Standard's Paul Waugh, "Johnson is being urged by pals to run against Boris Johnson". The next mayoral elections are in 2012 and Waugh notes:

Allies of the former home secretary would love to see a "Johnson v Johnson" contest and believe their man is the type of big figure needed to knock out Boris.

A skilled media performer, AJ's easy charm and quick wit would ensure a mouth-watering clash with Bojo. But he also has impeccable Londoner credentials.

Born and bred in Notting Hill when it was an impoverished collection of tenements rather than the Cameroonian haven it is today, he was brought up by his teenage sister after his mother died. He then became a London postie -- and can still remember the streets he pounded across the city -- before rising to become leader of the postal workers' union and then an MP.

It's a tempting prospect for any would-be Labour candidate. Not only would you oversee a £3bn budget and inherit the Olympics, you would also become (bar a premature collapse of the Lib-Con coalition) the most powerful Labour politician in the land.

So will it be BoJo versus AJ in two years' time? It's an intriguing prospect.

Follow the New Statesman team on Facebook.

Jon Bernstein, former deputy editor of New Statesman, is a digital strategist and editor. He tweets @Jon_Bernstein. 

Getty Images.
Show Hide image

The problems with ending encryption to fight terrorism

Forcing tech firms to create a "backdoor" to access messages would be a gift to cyber-hackers.

The UK has endured its worst terrorist atrocity since 7 July 2005 and the threat level has been raised to "critical" for the first time in a decade. Though election campaigning has been suspended, the debate over potential new powers has already begun.

Today's Sun reports that the Conservatives will seek to force technology companies to hand over encrypted messages to the police and security services. The new Technical Capability Notices were proposed by Amber Rudd following the Westminster terrorist attack and a month-long consultation closed last week. A Tory minister told the Sun: "We will do this as soon as we can after the election, as long as we get back in. The level of threat clearly proves there is no more time to waste now. The social media companies have been laughing in our faces for too long."

Put that way, the plan sounds reasonable (orders would be approved by the home secretary and a senior judge). But there are irrefutable problems. Encryption means tech firms such as WhatsApp and Apple can't simply "hand over" suspect messages - they can't access them at all. The technology is designed precisely so that conversations are genuinely private (unless a suspect's device is obtained or hacked into). Were companies to create an encryption "backdoor", as the government proposes, they would also create new opportunities for criminals and cyberhackers (as in the case of the recent NHS attack).

Ian Levy, the technical director of the National Cyber Security, told the New Statesman's Will Dunn earlier this year: "Nobody in this organisation or our parent organisation will ever ask for a 'back door' in a large-scale encryption system, because it's dumb."

But there is a more profound problem: once created, a technology cannot be uninvented. Should large tech firms end encryption, terrorists will merely turn to other, lesser-known platforms. The only means of barring UK citizens from using the service would be a Chinese-style "great firewall", cutting Britain off from the rest of the internet. In 2015, before entering the cabinet, Brexit Secretary David Davis warned of ending encryption: "Such a move would have had devastating consequences for all financial transactions and online commerce, not to mention the security of all personal data. Its consequences for the City do not bear thinking about."

Labour's manifesto pledged to "provide our security agencies with the resources and the powers they need to protect our country and keep us all safe." But added: "We will also ensure that such powers do not weaken our individual rights or civil liberties". The Liberal Democrats have vowed to "oppose Conservative attempts to undermine encryption."

But with a large Conservative majority inevitable, according to polls, ministers will be confident of winning parliamentary support for the plan. Only a rebellion led by Davis-esque liberals is likely to stop them.

George Eaton is political editor of the New Statesman.

0800 7318496