Oh dear, I think I'll be in a minority of about one when I write this here.

I realise that Boris is the Spectator's candidate for Mayor, and that he's an all round funny fellow and all that. But...

I can't for the life of me see how anyone could consider he'd make a good Mayor. I made a huge mistake last time round in voting for Ken Livingstone on a single issue, the congestion charge. Steve Norris was against, and I was (and remain) hugely in favour. But I stupidly ignored the more rounded picture - that Livingstone is a first class sh*t, and a man who disgraces the city he represents.

And that's my problem with Boris. It has nothing to do with his personal life, which I think is a red herring. It's that I think he is a buffoon. I simply don't buy this idea that beneath the exterior lies a piercingly sharp interior. I just think what you see is what you get - a teriffic writer, a wonderfully comical speaker, and a figure who shouldn't have even the tiniest real influence on anything of importance.

The idea that Boris Johnson might be the man to represent London on the world stage just embarrasses me. And I have seen no evidence - not just little evidence, but no evidence - that he has any worthwhile contribution to make on public policy issues or that he has any kind of vision for London, let alone the ability to implement it.

Talk about an impossible choice:al-Qaradawi's PR man or a buffoon.