As previously covered, Lembit Opik has publicly declared his intention to go for the selection. Regular readers of this site will have seen how controversial that is amongst many Liberal Democrat members (along with other commenters on this site). He has some keen fans along with many ardent critics. The number of fans of his Mayor selection bid page on Facebook has moved up only slightly over the last week, to 185 at the time of writing.

Although no-one else has declared they are running for Mayor yet, there are several other names which frequently come up. Chatting to members around London in the last few weeks, many have said how, were it not for the party being in coalition, they would have liked to see Lynne Featherstone or Sarah Teather be the candidate. With both being ministers that is firmly off the agenda.

Susan Kramer’s run for Mayor in 2000 is the candidature remembered the most fondly by most people who have seen all three Lib Dem Mayor campaigns, but it would be a return to her past. Having been an MP in the interim, Susan Kramer would at least have a reason to argue why she might be a more successful Mayor candidate second time round. That would be a challenge too for Brian Paddick, who has a CV well suited for the role of Mayor and a record of taking on tabloid newspapers which are unpopular with Liberal Democrat activists. (He has sued the Mail for libel successfully and is currently one of those involved in taking legal action against the News of the World over phone hacking allegations.) With a distant third place last time, however, he would have to find a convincing answer to the question, “Why do you think you would do much better this time round?”

Leaving aside Guido’s excitement about Tim Campbell, the more interesting and far more likely high profile candidate would be Floella Benjamin. Recently appointed to the House of Lords, she has an impressive track record in educational and charity work aside from the memories of her as one of the country’s most popular children’s TV presenters. Relatively new to prominence in the party, her main challenge would be to persuade many who know of her TV work that she would also make an effective Liberal Democrat candidate. Many of those who have met her at Liberal Democrat events have come away enthused about her ability.

One question all of the actual runners will face as they emerge is, “Are you serious about trying to win?” For many activists, an enthusiastic “yes” to that question will in fact be off-putting, as the party’s chances of gaining seats on the London Assembly are much higher than those of winning the Mayor contest. But would a campaign whose headline figure isn’t upbeat about winning end up doing even worse?

Either way, the smart candidate will position themselves as an effective member of a team of candidates rather than as someone who is just about wanting to win votes in the Mayor contest.

• Tamil Ceasefire protests – estimated total policing cost of £12.8m
• G20 Summit – estimated total policing cost of £7.4m
• Notting Hill Carnival – estimated total policing cost of £6.6m
• Summer Climate Camp – estimated total policing cost of £2.3m

Some of those seem pretty good value for money such as the Notting Hill Carnival, bearing in mind the enjoyment so many people get from the event. Looking at some of the other costs, perhaps in future the police should offer to fund TV advertisements in return for protest not happening: could save money and make for more effective communication of protestors’ message

One extra detail I’d add to what Adam has covered: looking at the GLA’s evaluation report, I’m struck by how many opportunities were missed to promote the event online at very little cost. In particular, publicising events via Facebook comes with no charge and can be an effect way of making a high profile event spread virally. With the Mayor of London’s own high profile social media presence, there could have been a low-cost and likely high impact social media drive to promote the event – if the powers that be had been really committed to a high audience. Instead it looks as if only a modest campaign was run because the level of public participation wasn’t in the end considered that important.

Lembit’s own campaign describes the page as “the main point of contact for those involved in the campaign to win the nomination of the Liberal Democrat Party”.

So far, it has 9 fans on Facebook. How quickly and how far that number grows will give a good clue as to how much support there is for Lembit’s Mayoral bid.

A good first milestone may be to beat the 15 fans of Pink Dog for Mayor

Ouch. Though not so ouch as to have stopped the £2m a year spent on chauffeur-driven cars for senior Met officers who don’t have a security need for one.

(To put these numbers in some context: the annual cost of a police constable is c.£60,000.)

I don’t like the budget but I dislike the economic situation we find ourselves in even more. The Lib Dems have done their utmost to address the fairness issue. In an ideal word I would not choose to put up VAT. But I was convinced, even at the hustings meeting, that the books were much worse than we thought and that whether we had a Tory or a Labour government, VAT was going to go up.

Meanwhile, there’s also speculation about quite what coalition may mean for party conferences. It’s already been the case that MPs from one party sometimes pop up at fringe meetings from the other and we’re likely to see a lot more of that in the autumn. The Independent has also speculated that Cameron and Clegg may address each other party’s conference. From what senior Lib Dems are saying, I’ll happily wager a very large chocolate bar on Cameron not addressing the Liberal Democrat conference in Liverpool.

UPDATE: Chocolate is looking good for Federal Conference Committee’s Jeremy Hargreaves tweets, “Lib Dem conf cttee has decided not to invite Cameron to speak at Conference.”

But with the current tube strikes in mind, it also shows how opening up data can produce unexpected consequences. Because what is one of the standard parts of transport strikes? It’s conflicting claims from unions and management about how widespread the impact of the strike really is. Courtesy of the real time map, next time we hear such conflicting comments we can all look at evidence directly for ourselves.

Transport for London has announced that it’s lifting all restrictions on the commercial use of its data. The move could fuel an explosion in mobile apps that need access to the datasets, making them more attractive to developers who want to charge for their apps.

Currently, TfL offers up a selection of datasets, including live traffic cameras, Oyster card top-up locations, pier and station locations, cycle hire locations, and riverboat timetables. Some new data has been issued, including live tube travel info and departure boards, and the transport giant also plans to release further information on bus stops, routes, and timetables and schedules before 30 June, 2010.

The release of the datasets for commercial use will mean that existing London travel apps will get extra functionality, and more complex apps will begin to spring up. More importantly, developers will be able to get paid for their work, so the quality of the apps is likely to rise.

It’s a smart move because it means the emphasis on working out how to make best use of the data shifts from TfL to the wider commercial sector. That means people can experiment (and fail) in a way that is much harder when politicians, media (and yes, bloggers) are looking over your shoulder waiting to shout “Waste of public money!” if an idea doesn’t pan out. It also means that Transport for London can concentrate on what it is (or should be) good at – running transport services, whilst letting those who are good at developing data services and marrying up different commercial ideas can do what they’re good at.

Often one drawback in such situations is that private provision can either mean that data is no longer free at the point of use, reducing its use, or that people end up paying more (as there are profit margins to cover). However, in this case that’s unlikely to be a problem as there is already a strong eco-systems of civic-minded service providers who take and resuse data in a not-for-profit way. That, and competition in the private sector with data being equally available to all, will keep in check any such problems.

Lib Dem London Assembly member Caroline Pidgeon has welcomed the move:

This decision has my total backing. By lifting restrictions on such useful information we can now unleash the huge talent and imagination that exists amongst London’s huge number of web developers. This decision will now allow innovation and exciting developments to take place in the provision of travel information. Releasing data really does help to release people.

UPDATE: For details of TfL’s new terms and conditions see the TfL website.