Labour London Assembly Member Murad Qureshi said

The latest Transport for London (TfL) figures show:

• Station closures are up on the District line by a staggering 1250%
• Delays are up by 300% on the Jubilee line
• The were fewer trains in service on every Underground line across the network in November / December than a year earlier
• There were more delays towards the end of last year on the Central, District, Jubilee and Victoria lines than in the same period the year before

Murad added: "It’s all very well refurbishing the stations & installing shiny new trains, but unless & until the signals are sorted out we’ll never get a reliable Tube service in West London."

Ends.

Notes

Murad Qureshi is a London-wide Assembly Member and is Vice Chair of the Assembly’s Environment Committee.

TFL publishes monthly Tube figures online. They are available at: 

www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/modesoftransport/londonunderground/1592.aspx:

Answers to Mayor’s Questions 23 February 2011

http://mqt.london.gov.uk/mqt/public/question.do?http://mqt.london.gov.uk/mqt/public/question.do?

For further information please contact Alison Marcroft on 020 7983 4363

At this weeks Audit Committee of the London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority, otherwise referred to as LFEPA, we were given an update on the expenses for all its members and officers.  Not surprisingly again it was the Chairman’s expenses that stood out the most, rolling in at £2,763.61 for this  financial year to date.  As his expenses once again stand out as by far the highest, what is also eye catching is that he appears to be the only user of a cab firm based in Barnet called GLH and which operates a standard minumum charge so even short journeys cost London taxpayers more than other firms.  I joked with a fellow Assembly Member who lives in the South East of town, that he and I were  highly unlikely to use them given they are based in Barnet.  This probably cuts across the board for all other members.  So, it seems that the Chairman may in effect be enjoying the benefit of his own private cab service, all at the public expense of Londoners.

The Mayor of London was quick to lap up the publicity surrounding the recent launch of the Chinese Business Association (CBA) set up by the London Chamber of Commerce and Industry (LCCI) with his “backing”.  The Mayor promised to do all he can “to ensure this city retained its competitive edge…” yet, ironically, he is now busy closing down his office in Shanghai! This illustrates well the short-sightedness of public expenditure cuts in the UK in response to the fragile world economy, coming also on the back of the closure of its Indian offices last year.

The last Mayor had set-up his stall globally by promoting London to the emerging economies in Brazil, Russia, India and China, in recognition of their growing economic stature. Now, with the proposed closures and particularly with the dramatic move towards Asia in the world economy, London will undoubtedly be the loser.  Without a local presence in these powerful emerging markets, we will miss out on opportunities to do business, for example by promoting tourism and study in our capital as well as direct foreign investment, which has seen a rapid growth in the last two decades.  Surely, whilst China is booming, London should be looking to “lasso” the rampaging tiger and secure some traction for the capital.

 The launch of the CBA was precipitated by the growing influence of China.  Research by the LCCI, revealed that about 400 Chinese-owned companies operated in London and the South East.  At the launch, the Mayor made reference to the increased investment we’d seen from China in recent years with the opening of new offices in the heart of the City and the promise of telecoms and technology companies arriving too.  So why withdraw from a city which promises so much and which has so much potential?  It seems that the Mayor may be relying on the newly established CBA to forge links between its members and “business opportunities London has to offer”. But isn’t the Mayor missing an obvious trick here?  What about the business opportunities in China?  It is of course welcome and reassuring that the CBA will look out for opportunities in the UK market but equally, isn’t just as likely (if not more so), that a UK presence in China would be just as well placed to look out for new opportunities in the Chinese market? 

 The soon to be defunct London Development Agency (LDA) which is the Mayor’s agency responsible for driving London’s sustainable economic growth currently operates 2 overseas offices in Beijing and Shanghai and employs 3 members of staff in these cities.   Following a review, the LDA has commenced a close-down of its operations in Shanghai.  The total budget for the LDA’s overseas offices in 2010/11 is £250,000. In 2011/12 the planning budget is £100,000, making a total saving of closing these offices £150,000.  Surely, this would have been a relatively small price to pay for keeping a front row seat in some of the major economic capitals of the world?  For example, without the Mayor’s representation in China over recent years, we would have lost at least 7 direct inward investment leads and 4 trade missions including the opportunity to promote London in at least 28 key events since November 2009. Not forgetting his expenditure of almost £2million at the Shanghai Expo last year to promote London as the world’s best city in which to invest, study and visit.

 The Mayor set up a review of the GLA’s overseas offices in 2008 and it reported its findings in January of the following year. Headed by the Mayor’s then deputy Ian Clement, the review concluded that there was no case for closing these offices finding that “the rationale for London to have offices in key emerging markets is fundamentally sound” and that they “do play an important role in promoting London’s interest, from supporting the capital’s businesses to enhancing the image of our city around the world.”

 In a submission to the GLA review, the London Chamber of Commerce stated;

 “Closing the offices in India and China as part of a cost-cutting exercise would be short-sighted and send entirely the wrong signals to potential investors and importers in two of London’s most important potential markets. The GLA may save £1 million, but it is London’s firms that may ultimately end up paying a much higher price. If the mayor is not out there promoting London, someone else will be promoting New York, Paris and Sydney instead.”

 Past warnings of this clarity make uncomfortable reading while it’s recently emerged that only 7 per cent of UK exports go to China, India and Brazil. These are the economies seen as the locomotive of global growth. Developing economies like China’s have grown in global importance due to their having escaped the worst consequences of the recession. It also illustrated the foresight of the previous Mayor’s, Ken Livingstone regime which established these hubs based upon an economic health warning that without them, we would suffer lost opportunities.

 Last year, David Cameron famously said that “we do more trade with Ireland than with China, Brazil, India and Russia combined” In contrast, last week, he announced that the UK is “open for business” This is a juxtaposition which will be made worse by the Mayor’s shortsighted doggedness to castrate his offices abroad which have, based upon his own figures paid for themselves many times over in terms of the business and employment prospects they have generated.  China is the second largest economy in the world, why then would the Mayor not want to help drive the London economy by retaining a direct presence in Shanghai itself, its financial and commerical capital?  For me, the sign on this London Mayor’s shop window is not a big clear “Open” for business, but more akin to, “Out for lunch, back soon or perhaps when it’s a bit too late……”.

Local London Assembly member, Murad Qureshi has accused Mayor of London Boris Johnson of making misleading claims about police numbers. 

Outlining his budget proposals two weeks ago the Mayor said, "we�re able to deploy another 500-odd frontline officers and actually increase the number of warranted officers at a time of huge budget cuts across the country" (BBC Radio 4, World at One, 10 February).

But official police figures show that under Boris Johnson the number of officers will have fallen from a high of 33,258 in February 2010 to 32,510 in 2012 – a cut of 748.

And in January the Metropolitan Police Authority (MPA) predicted officer numbers falling to 31,800 after 2012 – over 1,000 fewer than the number forecast (32,918) before Boris Johnson was elected in 2008 and almost 1,500 fewer than the 2010 peak.

Local London Assembly member Murad said: "Only Boris Johnson could claim police numbers are going up when he’s actually cutting them. The spin is clear to see from the Met’s own figures.

"The fact is this mayor inherited a budget from his predecessor which paid for 1,000 extra officers. But under Boris Johnson and this government numbers will go down and the progress we have made in West Central tackling crime and reducing the fear of crime could well now be reversed."

Boris Johnson’s �13.6 billion budget was approved at a London Assembly meeting on Wednesday 23 February at City Hall.

Ends

Notes

Murad Qureshi is a London wide Labour Assembly member and a former councillor in Westminster

Full agenda papers for the meeting.

The budget setting process is set out in Schedule 6 of the GLA Act 1999 (as amended). The meeting can also be viewed via webcast.

A press release from the Mayor’s office on 10 February claimed London could be "the only force in the country to increase numbers of uniformed police officers". Figures from the MPA show numbers will have fallen by the 2012 election.

Police officer figures above have been taken from MPA committee papers, the MPA’s 2008 business plan and 2011 MPA budget papers.

Crossrail development @ Tottenham Court Road, from Centre Point

At today’s Budget Meeting at City Hall, we discussed new funding mechanisms for infrastructure investment and in particular assessing the potential of the Community Infrastructure Levy(CIL) and Tax Increment Financing(TIF). Yes it was that stimulating!

Nonetheless is was of  interest in respect to Crossrail funding as it has a CIL charging schedule which would raise £ 300 million of the funding required between 2012/19.  My fellow Assembly Members(AM) were naturally concerned with how the various contributions will fall on their various local authorities and what benefit would be derived for their residents.

After a recent visit site of Crossrail at Tottenham Court Road, l could not but think that not enough has been done to extract the added value along the Crossrail line in central London. This was particularly apparent from the vantage of Centre point.  W e also well know that suddenly developments like the “Cucumber” have emerged in locations like Paddington when previously we haven’t known of such spectacular schemes on very tight sites in a location which hadn’t previously generated that much interest.

This could of course either reduce or add to the CIF charge required elsewhere and add to the community benefit more locally but that would of course need a more interventing Mayor which we sadly don’t have at the moment.

Arab Revolutionaries during Murad's recent trip to Tunisia - unwittingly helping out the Mayor of London

As long as the turmoil continues in the Middle East, the Mayor of London will reap the benefits and the Arab revolutionaries continue to unwittingly help the Mayor out in his last year before the Mayoral contest in May 2012.

The biggest losers continue to be the poor travelling public who under the current administration look set to continue paying through the nose for a service bursting at the seams.

The headline of the latest column of the Mayor of London in the Daily Telegraph screams out to us his objections to the alternative vote (AV), suggesting its all a huge fraud. Well given he acknowledges he’s elected as Mayor via AV, and using his same arguments it must imply he himself is a fraud as well!

What it does clearly imply is he is not interested in the second preference votes in the forthcoming contest in 2012. That will be news to Lynton Crosby and co who during the London Tory Party conference this past Saturday discussed Election Strategy for 2012 and how the Tories can obtain Lib Dem second preference! If  Mr Johnson thinks he win that contest without at least courting Londoners second preferences, then he’s clearly in cloud cuckoo land.  

I say, if it’s good enough to elect a Mayor of London why not use it to elect our members of the parliament in London and the rest of the country.

Finally, the Mayor clearly doesn’t know how he gets elected. The supplementary vote (SV) in the London Mayoral contest gives you a second vote and not a ranking of all candidates which is the Alternative Vote (AV), though its still a variant of AV.

In Tunisia, it was heartening to see people lose their fear of the police state that controlled their life’s for far to long.  All of course triggered by the self-immolation of Muhammad Bonazizi in Siddi Bouzi, in response to being bullied by officials and lack of work for himself as a fruit seller. So far most of the protestations have been secular in nature, though many have attempted to paint it all religiously. The crowds who are still up against the military, were largely good-natured, nationalistic and hopeful.  Not surprising really as it was there own liberation that was primary in their minds rather then levelling any hatred against other states or people.  On my last night in Tunis, the Kasbah rocked to the news that another regime was about it fall amongst the Arab regimes when it heard that Gadaffi was on the run shouting out “ three down, more to go”

We should not forget that these have been secular dictatorships committing many of these political and human rights abuses, which Arabs have risen against, long before they aligned themselves with the war on terror. At a very emotional rally of Liberte Equite in Tunis, we saw many of the families who have had members of their family disappear over the years still grieving for them. We also heard instances of mindless abuse. One of the worst cases of abuses we came across was with a blind gentlemen called Fathi Messaoudi and his family who himself had been chased out the country and his family harassed throughout his absense. Unfortunately there is clear evidence that the British authorities did not help the situation when he came to our shores.

Yet while the dictators have fallen, the dictatorships are still largely intact.  Take for example, Egypt. Whilst Mubarak may not be on the scene, it’s the military council that has taken over with a new president Omar Sulieman with a dubious past, who are charged with running presidential election in the near future and negotiating with the opposition.  The situation though in Tunisia is better, with an amnesty for political prisoners; freedom to assembly and form political groupings yet we still have a void that needs to be filled, as constitutional changes are also being considered.  Many of the political parties are still bewildered at the pace that things have changed and have yet to put their stalls out to the electorate, though this has not stop more then 35 political parties setting up.

A meeting of the Arab league today will look terribly bare now without three autocratic leaders in their long held seats gone. And with the distinct possibility of more following them, adding to the emptiness. So far we have only had Arab republics fall and not yet any Arab monarchies. They fellow Arabs encouragingly shouted in the Kasbah, its “over to you now in Bahrain”, as Tunisian proudly lead the way after beginning it all across the Arab world. For myself, it was good to see at first hand the Arab awakening.

Interestingly the Economist this week has commented on some new and emerging communities in London that l have certainly noticed in my neighbourhood, the French and Arabs.

The former have not been picked up by the public authorities though clearly exist as EU citizens can move into the UK without registering with the authorities.  While the latter were certainly around at the time of the last Census in 2001 but were not picked up at all. This is not surprising as many of them will have been fleeing police states in the Middle East, where it would be considered very suspicious to give such details to a public authority even though it was something like the Office for National Statistics (ONS). This was a particular problem in boroughs like the City of Westminster in London, which in large part explained the under reporting of the numbers through the Census in 2001 going by other indicators. 

Lets just hope such under reporting does not occur with these emerging diaspora communities as well as any others coming through in this years Census. Otherwise London will go without critical resources for all its residents and not just the new ones.

At the last GLA elections in 2008, all the Mayoral candidates and major political grouping were against the expansion of Heathrow airport with a third runway ( that includes the Labour group going against their Party Policy nationally ). With the Mayors launch last month of the first part of his report for a new airport for London, arguing for new capacity, it will be very different in the next GLA elections in 2012.

 Within a matter of days after his report launched, we have the City of London Corporation releasing their own report suggesting that you could expand Heathrow by changing the landing practises at the airport by stopping the need to have landings and take-off alternated from either of the two runway but have both happening on the same runway. This could overnight increase flights movements by almost another 50,000 annually.  In the meantime, we had a HACAN commissioned report by Delft called a “Ban on night flights at Heathrow airport”  valuing the price of a decent nights sleep for all Londoners particularly around the noise contours surrounding Heathrow at £ 860 million annually, illustrating well the benefits of not having nights flights into the airport.

So it is clear that the report has opened up old debates and that many may of thought had been closed down around Heathrow.  On top of this the Mayor supported the expansion of the only other active commercial airport in Greater London, City airport from 80,000 flights to 120,000 since being in office within his planning powers. He of course denies this, though correspondence exists to illustrate this well.

The second part of his report will indicate where this second hub for London should be, including still considering the Thames Estuary site.  This when the first part of the report established his case for another 564,000 annual air traffic movements and that this growth could be accommodated within the overall challenge of reducing transports contribution to climate change and more localised environmental impacts! In the meantime, leading lights in the aviation field, have suggested this strategy could threaten jobs in and around Heathrow. 

At the session at Progressive London during the morning of the 19^th called “ Grounded – the future alternatives to airport expansion “  we brought leading activists and groups like HACAN, NoTRAG and Fighttheflights on this issue to hopefully establish both a position and a strategy which grounds the Mayors expansion plans across London.