Governing London, by Ben Pimlott and Nirmala Rao

Is Comrade Ken really such a capital fellow?

Is Ken Livingstone finally going to come good as London's first elected mayor? Governing London is a helpful guidebook for anyone puzzled about the answer. Professor Ben Pimlott and Nirmala Rao judiciously scrutinise how we ended up with such a mayor. They tease out the history of London government and how the Livingstone regime has performed so far.

It's two years since he was elected; next year the campaign for the 2004 election will start, so this is his make-or-break time. Pimlott and Rao say that the jury is still out, but their research indicates what the answer could be. The question comes in two halves. First, what exactly is the job? Second, what is Mr Livingstone doing with the powers the Government gave him?

Make no mistake: the mayoralty is a remarkably feeble office. All power, and most money, comes to Mr Livingstone by government licence. On the great Tube battle, everyone now knows how the cookie crumbled. This defeat was a defining moment for Mr Livingstone. Yet this outcome was clearly embodied in the 1999 Government of London Act. The last person Tony Blair and Gordon Brown were likely to yield to was Ken Livingstone. So his entire election programme was a clever conjuring trick. He could never deliver on what he said was his most important issue.

London devolution differs wildly from Scottish and Welsh devolution. The civil servants at the Scottish and Welsh offices had a direct interest in getting real power devolved. For Whitehall officials drafting the London Act, their interests were exactly opposite. The upshot is muddle.

But it's a muddle Ken Livingstone appears to enjoy. Pimlott and Rao note how he's trying to extend his influence into areas where his direct powers are marginal. Meanwhile, on strategic planning – supposedly one main purpose of the Greater London Authority – he acts as if the capital were his personal backyard.

It's almost certain to end in tears. The individual boroughs were much strengthened under Mr Livingstone's former stamping ground, the GLC. They became even more powerful after the GLC was abolished and are not going to let Mr Livingstone override them. Housing policy and congestion charging are the likeliest duelling grounds.

Despite his leftist past, Ken Livingstone has become more obsessed with City of London interests. He thinks the main point about London is its supposed "world city" role, even though research indicates that much of what is most vigorous about London is national, not international.

But he has discovered that to be in charge of a well-funded authority, with nebulous powers, is a wonderful springboard for publicity. Unfortunately for this experiment in government, the person who does a job first will strongly define how it is seen ever after. Reading between the lines of Pimlott and Rao, I suspect they may be as pessimistic about the outcome as I am.

Paul Barker