A tale of two mayors: The 'King of the North' has exposed Sadiq Khan's failure in London

One headed to the House of Commons to be sworn in under rapturous applause from his party, ready for an apparent coronation as the nation’s Prime Minister, whilst the other quietly took a car to London’s inconspicuous City Hall, to return to his desk signing off press releases.

Throughout their political careers, Sadiq Khan and Andy Burnham have always travelled within the same orbit. However, one now shines brighter than ever while the other appears to be careering towards political oblivion. It seems important to address what happened.

Andy Burnham and Sadiq Khan have much in common: both were MPs elected in the Blair era, both were Ministers of State, both left Parliament to become Mayors of the cities they were born and raised in at similar times, and both have carved out political legacies in their respective cities that will far outlive their careers.

But where in Manchester Andy Burnham has become known as the King of the North, here in London, a dislike for Sadiq Khan appears to unite Londoners more than any other political issue - barring potholes. That is not just anecdotal hearsay; at the General Election in 2024, half a million more people voted Labour than had voted for Sadiq at the Mayoral election just six weeks earlier, a 50% increase. To put that in perspective, Susan Hall, as the Conservative Mayoral candidate, achieved 200,000 more votes (on a turnout that was 20% lower) than the Conservative Party did six weeks later. Labour won the London mayoralty in spite of Sadiq Khan, not because of him.

Fast forward to the Gorton and Denton by-election and, in contrast to the sentiment towards Khan, the leader of the triumphant Green Party, Zack Polanski, admitted they would not have won the seat if Burnham had stood.

One of the striking differences is personality. Burnham has cultivated a perception of unwavering loyalty to the region, a clear love for the city and passion in spades. In London, it is something that, love or hate them, people recognised in both Ken Livingstone and Boris Johnson. Sadiq Khan seems mostly miserable that no one has offered him a better job and resentful that he has to answer questions about what he is doing for London.

The other factor is the public infrastructure legacy of the Mayoralty. In London, Ken will be most remembered for the Oyster Card and Boris for the eponymous bikes, which still bear this nickname today. Sadiq is stuck with the legacy of the punitive ULEZ and moving City Hall to the worst-connected part of zone 3. Even ardent supporters will surely concede his impact isn’t quite as iconic or unifying. Conversely, in Manchester, Burnham will be remembered for the Bee Network, which brought transport under public ownership with a distinct and popular design.

It is also hard not to notice the difference in regeneration between the two cities and the policy agenda that has driven it. Burnham has focused on being aggressively open for business, whereas Khan has focused on being aggressively open to virtue signalling. Focusing money and time on campaigns such as ‘London is Open’– ironically, at a time when development was stalling, and thousands of pubs and clubs were closing.

Sadiq Khan appointed ‘yes, men’ or women – such as Amy Lame (his do-nothing ‘Night Czar’ on £130,000 a year) – who were never even competent in their own roles, never mind in a position to challenge and advise him. Conversely, Andy Burnham was appointing highly regarded people like Sacha Lord to similar roles who were on top of their game and would always speak up.

Housing levels in London have collapsed, with one of the key factors being unachievable affordable housing targets – 50% of nothing is nothing. Burnham did not impose such blanket targets on developers, which made development more viable and, therefore, his region has grown.

Perhaps the most glaring difference between the two is Burnham’s willingness to listen and be challenged. It is this ability to listen that has consequently led to him being listened to. Andy Burnham became a guiding voice within the Labour Party, whereas Khan was ushered away like a problem child. Even having his endorsement was seen more as a curse than a blessing. I am told that in both the recent General and Local Elections, the strong message to him from most Labour Associations was ‘please stay away’.

And so, it is the tale of these two mayors, and the tale of how they have run their two cities, that informed who the Labour Party turned to as its next leader and Prime Minister, with the future of the nation in his hands. To quote Dickens’ infamous opening, “It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, and an age of foolishness”.

____________________

Emma Best is a Conservative London Assembly Member.

LBC Opinion provides a platform for diverse opinions on current affairs and matters of public interest.

The views expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official LBC position.

To contact us email opinion@lbc.co.uk