Tired of life: where’s the love for London?

Spare me another TV programme about Devon and Cornwall. And if not Devon and Cornwall, the Lake District or the Yorkshire Dales. And the Norfolk Broads and canal boats.

Farmers, urbanites who’ve moved there, fishing trawlers, artisan crafts and shops, breweries, beekeepers… the list of apparently fascinating subjects is endless. I swear to God, at the sight of one more rare breed farm I will scream.

Where, in this utterly boring, self-congratulating, nice to look at (but they never show the rain), confection of schmaltz, is London? Our capital, centre of the nation’s culture and history, remains forlorn and unloved. The high-ups who run the BBC these days would do anything other than show London on our screens. It’s all regional now. The mandatory news vox pop is not a vox pop, apparently, if it’s in our and Europe’s biggest city, one of the few genuine world cities.

London does not have a voice, no longer has a presence at any top table. Take this summer. This, of all years, should be the one where Britons are encouraged to holiday in London, to take in the famous sights without, for once, the lines of foreign tourists. The museums, galleries, theatres, parks, iconic bars, restaurants and stores – they’re all open. But where are the people? All in the West Country, cheek by jowl in Padstow or some such over-hyped destination.

This should have been a golden opportunity for London to sell its wares. Yet there is precious little sign of a nationwide, concerted promotional campaign, either paid-for or free (as I say, you could be forgiven for supposing the whole of the UK has a hankering for “traditional West Country” clotted cream teas, pasties and cider). It’s as if London has become a dirty word in some circles, somewhere that must not be mentioned, to be avoided.

The greatest metropolis in the country, one of the greatest on the planet, is landed with a mayor who displays little evidence of loving it. All you see of Sadiq Khan these days is when he appears on a nightly local news bulletin, looking doleful, alongside a stretch of police “crime scene” tape, the site of yet another stabbing, or when he is unveiling a housing or social scheme. Does he beam and exude positivity and enthuse about the brilliance of his patch? Will he ever.

Khan does not push London. He appears disconnected, disinterested, even opposed to its commercial heart. The City of London, one of the two leading financial hubs on the entire planet, is despairing at the lack of a Brexit deal on financial services. But you don’t hear Khan championing and prodding, not constantly and not in a manner that feels convincing.

Contrast him with Andy Burnham in Greater Manchester or Andy Street in the West Midlands. They, and other elected mayors, speak relentlessly about business and investment. In Manchester last week, I was struck by the buzz and dynamism of the place, the signs everywhere extolling its virtues. Everything smacked of “can do”.

Manchester has always had that vibe versus its regional rivals. It’s an entrepreneurial town, a local magnet for merchants and wheeler-dealers, glass permanently half-full. But then, so has London, albeit on a much grander, truly national and international scale. Yet, London seems handicapped by a mayoral authority that cannot even make up its mind if it wants commuters to use its own public transport system or not. It wants them to use the Tube; no, it would prefer if they would cycle or walk. This seems to be high on the Khan list of priorities, far above persuading businesses to base themselves in London, to provide jobs and generate wealth.

London finds itself subjected to a troika of apathy and antipathy. Along with the BBC and Mayor, the third leg is the government. Boris Johnson does not want to know. The Olympics, Boris’s mayoralty, they seem far away now. The reason there was no settlement for banking and finance in the Brexit agreement is that the Prime Minister and his negotiating team left it out. This, despite the City being a shining success of recent decades, one part of the British economy that has powered ahead and left the rest of Europe floundering. The EU, naturally, would like some of what we’re having – so Amsterdam, Frankfurt, Paris, they’re all desperate to grab what they can of our booming capital markets and corporate advisory industries.

Johnson, though, won the election on the back of “levelling up”, persuading the Midlands and North that he would do his best to get them on a par with the South. London and its financial district, they’re anathema. As is anywhere in the South-East. Johnson’s announcements and his camera-catching high-vis jackets and lab coats are reserved for addresses distant from London, regarded through Tory eyes as predominantly Labour.

His administration is all about moving civil servants out of London, pumping billions into projects that conform to his agenda. The capital is left to languish, to level down.

When a bridge across the Thames was closed to all traffic, including pedestrians, Johnson did not seem to bother. Hammersmith was in London – worse, in West London. Khan did not put himself out either. Imagine if the crossing had been in Lancashire or Yorkshire or Burnham’s Manchester. The noise would have been deafening; the bridge would be repaired and reopened, or a temporary replacement built, double-quick. Instead, it’s taken nearly a year for pedestrians and cyclists to be allowed to return, with no date at all for when motor vehicles can again use Hammersmith Bridge.

Khan and Johnson will make excuses, they’re good at that. But the fact is, if they cared enough, they would have made sure the bridge was functioning as soon as possible, and certainly not in almost 12 months and albeit still with restrictions.

No, looking at the BBC, Mayor and Prime Minister, and their attitude towards Britain’s pre-eminent city, the words of another Johnson spring to mind. It can’t be coincidence perhaps that in so much of what they do they give the impression of being tired of life.