Skip to main contentSkip to navigationSkip to navigation
Former London Mayor, and “Vote Leave” campaigner, Boris Johnson is pictured with a pint of beer giving a thumbs up ahead of meeting with members of the public and supporters in Piercebridge, near Darlington, north-east England on June 22, 2016, as he continues to campaign for a Brexit ahead of the June 23 EU referendum. Wednesday is the last day of campaigning for Britain’s referendum on whether or not to stay in the EU, a momentous decision with far-reaching implications for Britain and Europe. / AFP PHOTO / SCOTT HEPPELLSCOTT HEPPELL/AFP/Getty Images
‘Those who have seen Johnson up close in power worry about his suitability for high office. This is not a party political point.’ Photograph: Scott Heppell/AFP/Getty Images
‘Those who have seen Johnson up close in power worry about his suitability for high office. This is not a party political point.’ Photograph: Scott Heppell/AFP/Getty Images

I worked with Boris Johnson as mayor. He’s not fit to lead

This article is more than 4 years old

As leader of Camden council, I saw at first hand how damaging his lack of attention to detail was

Sarah Hayward was leader of the London Borough of Camden between 2012 and 2017

Conservatives shouldn’t view Boris Johnson’s time as mayor of London as a road map to winning in a hostile electoral environment. Instead it is a cautionary tale for how he might lead the country. I was leader of Camden council for all of Johnson’s second term and have seen up close how he behaves with executive power. It would be easy to dismiss me as a Labour stalwart taking potshots at the likely next Conservative prime minister, but Tory MPs could do worse than talk to those among their ranks who have worked closely with him. It is notable how few of them back his leadership bid.

London’s borough leaders have many different relationships with the mayor, which means they get to see them close up, in a variety of ways. The most important aspect of Johnson’s working style is his lack of attention to detail. In every setting, from one-to-one meetings to big set pieces, such as the annual London government dinner, he would be ill-prepared. This comes across as disinterest or worse. But this isn’t a problem of his manner or working style. Those who worked as his closest advisers in City Hall are quite open about the fact that Johnson would lose interest if a policy briefing took more than a few minutes, five maximum. In some settings this really doesn’t matter, and every politician is ill-prepared from time to time. But Johnson is the only one I’ve met for whom it’s a modus operandi.

This lack of attention feeds through to how he governs. In 2014-15 the London budget was actually signed by his chief of staff, Eddie Lister, and had a handwritten note attached saying “shown to the mayor and approved”. Only Johnson knows for sure, but I doubt I’m the only one who sees that note and questions the degree of attention the mayor actually gave to the capital’s budget. No wonder Lister was frequently referred to by Johnson detractors and supporters alike as the real mayor of London.

Work frequently isn’t followed through. I saw this at first hand sitting on the London Health Board, which Johnson chaired. In 2014 a report, complete with a foreword written by Johnson, showed the costs to London of poor mental health in the capital – £26bn per year. The report was left on the shelf. Embarrassingly for Johnson, New York’s city government did think London’s research was useful, and developed a citywide approach to improving mental health. It wasn’t until Sadiq Khan took up the reins at City Hall that the poor mental health of Londoners was taken seriously.

In practical terms it’s not clear that Johnson is the one-nation Tory he is now claiming to be. His recent proposals to raise the higher rate tax band – giving a massive tax cut to people earning way above average salaries – was presaged in his approach in London. In housing, Johnson was determined to deliver as little as possible for those on more modest incomes. In Camden and Islington, a large former Royal Mail site was given planning permission with just 14% of units at affordable rents when economic analysis showed the site could support 50%. This isn’t just housing for the poorest but also the intermediate housing that London’s economy desperately needs. But Johnson was happy to give planning permission for housing only accessible to those on six-figure salaries and above.

In order to get away with this Johnson also used his planning powers to try to define “affordable” in London as 80% of the market price for housing. This was well beyond the reach of people leaving home for the first time and, in places such as Camden, beyond even relatively settled middle management in both the public and private sectors. This led to a catastrophic loss of trust from voters about what was affordable and to this day, when you talk to Londoners about affordable housing, they normally ask: “Affordable for whom?” Tories may not be that sympathetic to this complaint, but maybe they should ask Labour about how incredibly harmful policy ambiguity can be in the long term. Certainly, in London this attack on Johnson writes itself.

Who leads the Tories is a matter for the party’s MPs and members. Who leads the country should concern us all. Those who have seen Johnson up close in power worry about his suitability for high office. This is not a party political point: while I would fundamentally disagree with Sajid Javid, or Jeremy Hunt, or Rory Stewart, I can see the case for them leading the country. The challenges, first of Brexit and then of the huge domestic conundrums we face – housing, adult social care, post-Brexit industrial and trade policy – all require attention to detail, hard work and tough choices. The Boris Johnson I and many of those around him have seen has shown no evidence that he is capable of that.

Sarah Hayward was Labour leader of Camden council, London, from 2012 to 2017

Most viewed

Most viewed