I think Maggie Thatcher was possibly the most damaging Prime Minister in my lifetime. Weird how we look back on it with rose tinted spectacles. I remember the first 3 years she was in power, then the cuts, the jobless, the strikes, the riots, the rise of banking and the destruction to manufacture, the greed is good era. Community seemed to suffer, jobs for life came to an end, many lost pension entitlements when business was privatised, cartels came about from privatised businesses, tax went up (VAT rose from 8% to 15%, government spending went up (sounds incredible doesn't it?) although tax was reduced for the most well off. We lurched from one recession to another under her iron hand. If it wasn't for the fact that we went to war I doubt she would have won another election after 1980. Interests rates went sky high, many lost the houses they had been encouraged to buy after selling off housing stock at rock bottom prices. At least she sorted the unions out as they were far too powerful initially, but even then she went too far. She supported Pinochet, a brutal dictator and thought Mandela was a terrorist. She was against society saying 'There was "no such thing as society, there are individual men and women and there are families."' She manipulated press reports coming back from the Falklands (something I never knew about until years later) and abolished the GLC because she didn't like the democratically elected people running it.
Ken wasted his time as mayor. He did make a difference to London but I feel that power went to his head a bit. Boris stands up for London against his party. In effect, whoever is in power as head of a team of advisors and public servants will be hard pressed to mess things up as there are a lot of good ideas out there. All politicians want less crime, more work, more vibrancy, my stuff going on, lower costs, less waste. it's just a case of picking someone you believe will build a team to deliver it. Having worked with City Hall I'd say Boris is quite good at that.